Socialized healthcare

  • Thread starter Thread starter COPLAND_3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Medical treatment and private education are outside of the means of a lot of people. Hence the desire to have the government tax business and wealthier citizens to provide those services. Right or wrong, it’s as simple as that.

Comparing food and shelter with healthcare is stupid. Most people can earn enough to afford food and shelter, However many have a hard time affording insurance, and certainly many could not privately educate several children.
Actually home schooling / tutoring and HSAs/MSAs are some examples of what is available within the means of most folks. BUT, the Feds and the state gummints have all sorts of rules restricting those kinds of alternatives.

Government regulations and frivolous lawsuits are driving many doctors out of practice and/or out of some locations.

The private sector WANTS to provide alternatives, but they are essentially forbidden from doing so.

Essentially, the government has caused alternative approaches to fail … and then said, “See, the alternative approaches don’t work.”

Not sure what the right word is for the government’s role in this restricting of people’s choices … not sure … sophistry? hypocrisy? something nasty and pejorative … something like that. But the government’s role in hurting people is pretty well established and the negative reputation of the government for hurting ordinary people is well deserved.

What the people need is the freedom to try alternative approaches.
 
Actually home schooling / tutoring and HSAs/MSAs are some examples of what is available within the means of most folks. BUT, the Feds and the state gummints have all sorts of rules restricting those kinds of alternatives.

Government regulations and frivolous lawsuits are driving many doctors out of practice and/or out of some locations.

The private sector WANTS to provide alternatives, but they are essentially forbidden from doing so.

Essentially, the government has caused alternative approaches to fail … and then said, “See, the alternative approaches don’t work.”

Not sure what the right word is for the government’s role in this restricting of people’s choices … not sure … sophistry? hypocrisy? something nasty and pejorative … something like that. But the government’s role in hurting people is pretty well established and the negative reputation of the government for hurting ordinary people is well deserved.

What the people need is the freedom to try alternative approaches.
I’m with you there buddy. I think we need freedom to choose, and only have the right kind of regulation (i.e. ensure that drug companies can’t sell me “snake oil”)
 
I’m with you there buddy. I think we need freedom to choose, and only have the right kind of regulation (i.e. ensure that drug companies can’t sell me “snake oil”)
Which government agency is going to be in charge of writing the definition of “snake oil”?
 
Which government agency is going to be in charge of writing the definition of “snake oil”?
😃

That’s a good question though. In theory, I’m guessing it would be the FDA.

However, we all know how effective government agencies can be.
 
.

The private sector WANTS to provide alternatives, but they are essentially forbidden from doing so.

.
What the private sector wants is as much profit as possible. The only thing limiting prices is competition. ‘Alternative practices’? How can an parent teach their children chemistry (for eg.) when they a) have a limited knowledge of the subject, cannot teach their child anything b) cannot afford the textbooks and other resources c) no hands on experiments. It seems like homeschooled children are already the bright kind that have a well educated parent (stay at home mum) with plenty of time to spare, ie not applicable to a lot of people.
 
What the private sector wants is as much profit as possible. The only thing limiting prices is competition. ‘Alternative practices’? How can an parent teach their children chemistry (for eg.) when they a) have a limited knowledge of the subject, cannot teach their child anything b) cannot afford the textbooks and other resources c) no hands on experiments. It seems like homeschooled children are already the bright kind that have a well educated parent (stay at home mum) with plenty of time to spare, ie not applicable to a lot of people.
Actually, it’s not much of a trick to design proven courses that basically only require the parent or teacher to provide motivation and discipline. I developed Computer-aided instruction in many fields, and there are some outstanding examples commercially available – the Rosetta Stone ™ series of computer-aided language courses are a good example of what can be done.

It’s a disgrace that we don’t have a comprehensive, national system. But of course, the teachers’ union vigorously opposes it.😦
 
When You Are Face With A Difficut And Complicated Spolitical Situation It Would Seem That One Of The Best Sources To At Least Give You A Hint As To What Tom Do Because They Have Tried It, And Here Are The Results. Find Countries That Are Close Socially, Politically, Economically Etc To Us As Possible. See What They Have Donne About (sociallized), Sinfle Payer Medical And What Do They Consider Being The Relative Good Poits And Bad Points. In This Regard The Countries Of Western Europe Would Seem To Hold The Best Example For Comparison, Albeit Imperfect. Every One Of These Countries(with The Exception Of One) Has What We Refer To As Socialized Medicine. In Every One Of Them Ther Is Universal Public Approval, And Support For The System. In Addition There Healyh Statistics Are Every Bit As Good As Ours, (except When You Consider Care For Those Who Are In The Top 10 Or 20 Opercent Of Income. In All These Perople Statistically Receive The Best. This Is Not Definitive But It Certainly Is Revealing.
 
Actually, it’s not much of a trick to design proven courses that basically only require the parent or teacher to provide motivation and discipline. I developed Computer-aided instruction in many fields, and there are some outstanding examples commercially available – the Rosetta Stone ™ series of computer-aided language courses are a good example of what can be done.

It’s a disgrace that we don’t have a comprehensive, national system. But of course, the teachers’ union vigorously opposes it.😦
So having a teacher around who has a comprehensive knowledge of the subject is actually irrelevant.
 
thid infor about the teachers union opposing it is not NOT NOT true. asnd the information about their supposrt has been so pervasicver it is difficult to believe the writed hasnt seen it somewhere. that wopuld catagorized his response. i was a teacher for 33 years and i do rally know. the only other possibility is that i have been out of teaching for 15 years and perhaps thwey have changed their mind. if so please let me know youe sources.
 
What the private sector wants is as much profit as possible. The only thing limiting prices is competition. ‘Alternative practices’? How can an parent teach their children chemistry (for eg.) when they a) have a limited knowledge of the subject, cannot teach their child anything b) cannot afford the textbooks and other resources c) no hands on experiments. It seems like homeschooled children are already the bright kind that have a well educated parent (stay at home mum) with plenty of time to spare, ie not applicable to a lot of people.
First, go here and read this brief section:

robinsoncurriculum.com/view/rc/s31p1002.htm

Many people went through the public high school system and never had chem lab or physics lab or biology lab. The experiments conducted in high school chem lab can be replicated at home … nothing dangerous or sophisticated. Ditto physics lab. Ditto biology. Ditto geology (aka earth science).

When I was a kid, you could buy home physics and chem lab kits from A.C. Gilbert. Don’t know if that company is still in business. ideafinder.com/history/inventors/gilbert.htm

But you can get catalogs from many suppliers that will sell modestly priced experiments and kits. I get the catalogs in the mail all the time, and I’m not even in the market for this stuff.

I just now checked … did a Google search for science kits. There are tons of places that will sell you science kits for kids.

sciencekits.com/

And here is the best one of all: Edmund Scientific. Their catalog is fantastic … amazing. Get their catalog!!

scientificsonline.com/Default.asp?img=54&cr=1506&bhcd2=1208947388

As far as chemistry is concerned, I posted an outline of my high school chem notes right here on CAF recently. Basically, the notes from Brother Francis were so well organized that anyone could follow along and understand chemistry. No magic. Just good organization. Just follow along.

Dr. Arthur Robinson has a whole bunch of home study materials … just as one example. www.oism.org

and particularly:

robinsoncurriculum.com/

It’s not really that difficult. No college degree necessary; certainly no PhD necessary. Pretty easy stuff, actually.

The notion described above: “What the private sector wants is as much profit as possible. The only thing limiting prices is competition.” presents a false negative.

Many companies deliberately keep their prices reasonable to attract the largest market possible. Not due to competition.

And very often due to altruism.

The private sector excels at providing exactly the desired service or product wanted by the public and at the price they want to pay. And they MUST do it or else go out of business … from lack of volume owing to someone else providing the product or service that they failed to provide.

That is the ESSENCE of free markets.

And it works.

People freely exchange money for services and products.

The problem is that the government sector doesn’t WANT people to choose education freely. So the government sector uses coercion to prevent people from getting the best possible deal.

And coercion can take many forms. Just one form of coercion is by requiring excessive licensing (by, for example, mandating that all teachers must be licensed by the state, regardless of their success at actually imparting knowledge to their students).
 
So having a teacher around who has a comprehensive knowledge of the subject is actually irrelevant.
First of all, public school teachers rarely have " a comprehensive knowledge of the subject." The teacher of physics is not really a rocket scientist. The teacher of health is not really a physician.

Second, in CAI (Computer Assisted Instruction) the teacher really is someone with “a comprehensive knowledge of the subject” – you hire real scientists, physicians, mathematicians, native speakers, and so on as your Subject Matter Experts (SMEs.)

Third, in the development process you prove the lesson teaches. You have a standard going in, and the lesson is not released until you demonstrate bringing a stratified sample of the target audience to the standard.

Now, I have two graduate degrees in Education and many years in this field. What are your credentials?
 
thid infor about the teachers union opposing it is not NOT NOT true. asnd the information about their supposrt has been so pervasicver it is difficult to believe the writed hasnt seen it somewhere. that wopuld catagorized his response. i was a teacher for 33 years and i do rally know. the only other possibility is that i have been out of teaching for 15 years and perhaps thwey have changed their mind. if so please let me know youe sources.
I sincerely hope you weren’t a teacher of English!:eek:
 
extraaordinarily clever response, put in simple math eauation your respose to question 0 =my request for an answer tio the question 10. you lose. i truly do have a very good rason for the mistakes in spelling and syntax i make. i is a liong complicated one involving arthritis in my hads,bent fingers that dont alweays go whare i aimem the, and a certain amount of laziness on my part. do you haveroughtkly the same equated response to why dont you concer=ntrate on the question ibstead of alll the mickey mous stuff you talk about. im truly truly understand that the way i do it, even though it is the best i can, does present problems for the reader. if it really nb others you make like a magician and press a button to make it disappeear. if not please forgive me, i do the best i can with very limited resources. and will try to make up what i lack in teh areas i discussed with logic and a modicum of intelligence.
 
I think you have been listening to too much right wing talk radio. The problem with heart transplants is donors. Canada is a much smaller total population pool:

cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=media_22sep2004_e

Desite our bigger pool, our aging population makes the disparity in rates pretty small:

americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4588

There are undoubtedly waits for elective procedures, like hip transplants, but, again, it is a tiny population spending a fraction of what we spend, for better measurable outcome (access to care, approppriateness of care, longevity, etc.)

As much as I appreciate the chant “U S A” at the Olympics, there is nothing to back this up. The WHO ranks us 36th, essentially dead last among industrialized nations. The only thing we rank #1 in is expenditures.

Something that never seems to get mentioned on right wing outlets is that we are there, and have been so for decades. Medicare is single payer universal coverage, and basically props up the entire US medical system by taking on the most expensive segment of the population to care for. And it consistantly outperforms the private sector in cost of care and administrative overhead.

Health care is experiencing 10-18% annual inflation. That is unsustainable and a serious impediment to global competitiveness. We already ration care more aggressively than virtually any other industrialized nation, all while spending significantly more of our GDP.
And actually Canada ranked last for the longest wait to see a doctor. And arguing that there is a smaller pool to draw resources from is ridiculous because there should be less people who are also looking for hearts given the smaller population. unless they are the most unlucky people on the planet and have a disproprtionately unhealthy population.

Most ‘rightwing-radio listeners’ would also move away from government supported Medicare to a more privitized system and so there is no hypocracy here.

Going private would force hospitals and health care insurance companies to complete and effectively bring down costs and prices. If hospitals were made to publish costs of procedures and care and individuals were given the freedom to choose insurances and hospitals, they would not have the grossly disproprtionate leaverage to affect our health care costs and would be held accountable not only to private shareholders and governments, but to individuals and thier demands.

You will not hear me singing the praises of the American health care system-I have long known that countries that practice more free market economics have had better systems for awhile.

To get back to the original point-Pope John Paul II wrote often about free market economics and although he cautioned of the materialism that could come as a result he encouraged countries to pursue this avenue to resolve many social injustices.
 
in terms of foreigh attitudes towards their socialiozed health care medical systems i wiould put forthe thwe following especially when wondering wheterer they like their sytem,… ASK THEM. t its not ubiversal but in every country you get approval ratings of 70 % or more. cant hardly argue with that.
 
The notion described above: “What the private sector wants is as much profit as possible. The only thing limiting prices is competition.” presents a false negative.

Many companies deliberately keep their prices reasonable to attract the largest market possible. Not due to competition.

And very often due to altruism.

The private sector excels at providing exactly the desired service or product wanted by the public and at the price they want to pay. And they MUST do it or else go out of business … from lack of volume owing to someone else providing the product or service that they failed to provide.

That is the ESSENCE of free markets.

And it works.
No sale. Business needs to compromise a high commodity price with availability to a large enough market yes, but that is also about reducing the chance of being undercut and losing the market altogethor (as you stated). Not about fairness to the consumer.

Part of what ‘sets’ prices is what consumers are prepared to pay for a service. If there is a free option available, consumers in general will be prepared to pay less. If private is the only way to go, they will have to pay, and prices will go up.

For eg. if public hospitals in Europe were to be closed the cost of insurance would probably go up long term. If all public schools were closed and there was zero funding from government, private tuition fees might just go up.

Competitors get hold of the market and collude to keep prices where they want them. Just look at how petrol companies ‘compete’. Limited number of providers + captive market = collusion and high pricing. Obviously you are going to disagree with this.
 
First of all, public school teachers rarely have " a comprehensive knowledge of the subject." The teacher of physics is not really a rocket scientist. The teacher of health is not really a physician.
to teach the sciences in the last 2 years of secondary school, teachers need a masters degree in the subject (where I’m from)
Second, in CAI (Computer Assisted Instruction) the teacher really is someone with “a comprehensive knowledge of the subject” – you hire real scientists, physicians, mathematicians, native speakers, and so on as your Subject Matter Experts (SMEs.)

Third, in the development process you prove the lesson teaches. You have a standard going in, and the lesson is not released until you demonstrate bringing a stratified sample of the target audience to the standard.
and if a student gets stuck, has trouble understanding something?
Now, I have two graduate degrees in Education and many years in this field. What are your credentials?
Curiosity… I have normal questions anyone would ask…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top