• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Health Rankings: Of 17 Nations, U.S. Is Dead Last

Re: We're Number......LAST

Oh, I understand that you cannot answer the question...

The question made no sense, since you don't understand the terminology. Use google. It will help you look not as bad as you usually do.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Deaths from all causes does not equate with how well a nation's health system is run.

American healthcare workers receive more education than any others in the world (from what I see). Healthcare is expensive, but the quality and innovation is higher in America.

But it's rationed by income with the rich getting the lion's share resulting in bad PUBLIC health outcomes. And PUBLIC health is the criterion, not the fact that medical miracles are available to some billionaire.

That's our model and it's failed.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

The question made no sense, since you don't understand the terminology. Use google. It will help you look not as bad as you usually do.

The question makes perfect sense in relation to what you posted. If you feel I misunderstood, explain your reasoning...
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

But it's rationed by income with the rich getting the lion's share resulting in bad PUBLIC health outcomes. And PUBLIC health is the criterion, not the fact that medical miracles are available to some billionaire.

That's our model and it's failed.

Any solid proof? From what I see those on Medicaid get the best care. The middle class or rich guy on their insurance plan will have to pay $50-$300 for an expensive medication while the Medicaid individual pays $0 and has no insurance premiums or bills. I know many in the middle class that refused care because of the cost.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

The question makes perfect sense in relation to what you posted. If you feel I misunderstood, explain your reasoning...

Look up pay for service versus capitation or the european model (which isn't pay for service). Then report back in.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Any solid proof? From what I see those on Medicaid get the best care. The middle class or rich guy on their insurance plan will have to pay $50-$300 for an expensive medication while the Medicaid individual pays $0 and has no insurance premiums or bills. I know many in the middle class that refused care because of the cost.

Yeah, the problem is only a portion of our population is on Medicare. We need it for everybody -- i.e. the European model.

So if you're not rich or 65 years old, you're in trouble. That's why our system is the most expensive in the world but with execrable health outcomes. If that isn't proof, I don't know what is.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Look up pay for service versus capitation or the european model (which isn't pay for service). Then report back in.

Someone always ends up paying, which is the point. I'm sorry you're having difficulty with this concept...
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Any solid proof? From what I see those on Medicaid get the best care. The middle class or rich guy on their insurance plan will have to pay $50-$300 for an expensive medication while the Medicaid individual pays $0 and has no insurance premiums or bills. I know many in the middle class that refused care because of the cost.

Digsbe, I thought you were for universal health care? That was one of the things I respected about you the most!
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

The question made no sense, since you don't understand the terminology. Use google. It will help you look not as bad as you usually do.


Hey Alabama Paul............

Just logged in and saw this.........

Don't you ever tire of embarrassing people with the facts?
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Hey Alabama Paul............

Just logged in and saw this.........

Don't you ever tire of embarrassing people with the facts?

Good evening Way. The trolls on this site are a bit more interesting (for the moment)...
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Good evening Way. The trolls on this site are a bit more interesting (for the moment)...

I agree.

They still all use these bogus studies though to try and make ridiculous points....
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Yeah, and some of them even know what fee-for-service means. Others maybe not so much.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Someone always ends up paying, which is the point. I'm sorry you're having difficulty with this concept...

Whoosh, right over your head.
 

Of those 17 countries . . . so in the world-rankings we're, what, like 17 out of 196 . . . maybe dropping into the 20's or so? I don't know - they only cherry picked 17 . . . and from the skewed view of slim and simplified statistics which don't cover the deeper aspects one would have to examine, no less.

But never mind some common sense, here - never mind that.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Well, let's see?








So they are endless, but you can't provide links to them?

How many co workers do you have setting up internet sites so links can be provided? Someone needs to grow up.:roll::roll:
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Yeah, reading your posts create a problem: cognitive dissonance as you make one couterfactual claim after the next. In public health metrics our system is failing. It's failing for known economic reasons. Your bizarrely unfactual posts simply won't change that, but they will prove you're a conserative.

Failing for those too stupid to look out for themselves, I agree.
 
Of those 17 countries . . . so in the world-rankings we're, what, like 17 out of 196 . . . maybe dropping into the 20's or so? I don't know - they only cherry picked 17 . . . and from the skewed view of slim and simplified statistics which don't cover the deeper aspects one would have to examine, no less.

But never mind some common sense, here - never mind that.

It wouldn't be a proper comparison to compare us with less wealthy and industrialized countries. Better to compare apples to apples.
 
Of those 17 countries . . . so in the world-rankings we're, what, like 17 out of 196 . . . maybe dropping into the 20's or so? I don't know - they only cherry picked 17 . . . and from the skewed view of slim and simplified statistics which don't cover the deeper aspects one would have to examine, no less.

But never mind some common sense, here - never mind that.

Advanced economies. Comparing us to Somalia is a bit unfair. But with the help of the GOP, we may reach Somalia status soon.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Failing for those too stupid to look out for themselves, I agree.

I accept your surrender and the fact that you are too incurious to look up the meaning of pay-for-service in the health care context.
 
Advanced economies. Comparing us to Somalia is a bit unfair. But with the help of the GOP, we may reach Somalia status soon.

So - only those 17 countries are on par with us, economically?

It's a crap shot of a 'case' - and you know it . . . and is only seen in full light when you don't cherry pick who else you discuss - unless, of course you're not wanting to learn and instead you're wanting to jump to conclusions and make certain countries just look bad.

Last but not least - the Democratic party has had it's hand in so much over the last decades and look - we still have these 'numbers' to cherish, here . . . so that argument goes nowhere as well.
 
So - only those 17 countries are on par with us, economically?

It's a crap shot of a 'case' - and you know it . . . and is only seen in full light when you don't cherry pick who else you discuss - unless, of course you're not wanting to learn and instead you're wanting to jump to conclusions and make certain countries just look bad.

Last but not least - the Democratic party has had it's hand in so much over the last decades and look - we still have these 'numbers' to cherish, here . . . so that argument goes nowhere as well.

The study tries to compare apples with apples. Why does that offend you? Would you rather compare the US with Cuba? Wait, Cuba does quite well in a comparison of health outcomes with the US. Go figure.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

I accept your surrender and the fact that you are too incurious to look up the meaning of pay-for-service in the health care context.

Surrender, get real, a maker-me, will never surrender to a taker- you
 
Back
Top Bottom