patrick.net

LeonDurham says

lol--more trolling. Pretty sure the guy at the DMV wouldn't be leading the US health care system.

No one said they'd be leading the US health care system but they would be the type who would be running it administratively.

Long lines, queuing. Sound familiar?

Goran_K says

No one said they'd be leading the US health care system but they would be the type who would be running it administratively.

Long lines, queuing. Sound familiar?

No, not really. The DMV is a state run facility and in my state, the wait times are very short.

And any decisions about how many Drs to hire would be made pretty far up the food chain.

Goran_K says

Cherry picking. The entire civilized world outside the US has national healthcare and most of it is better quality than the US for 1/2 the price.

LeonDurham says

The DMV is a state run facility and in my state, the wait times are very short.

Which state is that tatupu, illinois? "Short wait times" and DMV aren't things that usually go together.

Heraclitusstudent says

Cherry picking.

Cherry picking? Canada is often brought up as a "successful" nationalized system.

The entire civilized world outside the US has national healthcare and most of it is better quality than the US for 1/2 the price.

Better for who? I can see a specialist today. Can you do that in Canada, the UK, or France?

Goran_K says

Which state is that tatupu, illinois? "Short wait times" and DMV aren't things that usually go together.

I believe that's against the rules.

LeonDurham says

I believe that's against the rules.

What's against the rules?

Goran_K says

What's against the rules?

This post:

Goran_K says

Which state is that tatupu, illinois?

Yep--it got me back on to moderation approval only. lol

I could be wrong, but are you guys referencing the doxxing part of the moderation policy when you say breaking the rules? This one's up to Pat, but I'm of the opinion that if you give out your state in previous comments, then it's fair game to mention. It's nearly impossible to actually dox someone just based on the state unless they use their real name as a public username. I understood it more as a question/comment about IL since I believe it has been brought up in the past as being the commenters place of residence.

As to IL DMV's, you really don't even need to go to one anymore. Vehicle registration is all through email/online. Even the every 4 years or so driver license renewal is not bad (I think you only have to go in for vision issues or if you've had past violations). Just did mine last summer, took 10 minutes strictly for the eye test and a new photo (fuck that was a bad photo). At least in IL the bad rap on DMV operations has kind of gone away (fuck, not sure how IL did it considering all the other issues).

I'm not in IL anyway.

LeonDurham says

I'm not in IL anyway.

Ok. I have no clue. I've been MIA the last month or so. Is it because he mentioned Tatupu? It was phrased as a question to a past active user (that I assume he believes is you) but I didn't see anything wrong with it. That's why I was asking about the doxxing part. Trying to get clear on what rule was broken.

FYI, congrats on not being in IL. When the next recession comes at some point, IL is going to be a blood bath. Although the DMV's are good by me now.

LeonDurham says

I'm pretty sure there is a relation between IMR and $$. You think that might have something to do with it??

Insofar as the lack of money results in unhealthy lifestyle decisions, then sure. Your claim is it's the healthcare system though rather than lifestyle decisions.

Are you admitting the healthcare system is a minor factor in actual population health?

WookieMan says

IL DMV's

ironically, the DMV's in Chicago are amazing. Far better than anything I've experienced in texas

CBOEtrader says

Are you admitting the healthcare system is a minor factor in actual population health?

Again-please don't put words in my mouth. That's very trollish.

No-I'm saying that access and quality of healthcare in poor areas is much, much worse than in rich areas.

LeonDurham says

And your employer doesn't pay for anything. They are taking money that they would have paid you in salary and instead pay it as "benefits" on your health care. It's all YOUR money.

Ha, ha,ha... No, if companies did not have to contribute to employees' healthcare, they's find something else to do with that money - invest in the business, return to shareholders, buy back stock, offer bonuses for all senior management, etc., but they would not give that money to employees, except in George Bailey's world.

LeonDurham says

Study after study after study all agree that the US spends 1.5-2X what every other country does. So, it's pretty clear that costs can come down. How much do you pay for health coverage every year? No matter if you're healthy or not.

So let's try to model an equation.

To make your argument work,

Increase in personal taxes to pay for socialized medicine must be less than personal cost of healthcare plan subsidized by your employer plus decrease in medication cost plus decrease in cost of accessing healthcare providers including doctors, hospitals, etc.

Data point: 2016 Employer Health Benefits Survey. Annual premiums for employer-sponsored family health coverage reached $18,142 this year, up 3 percent from last year, with workers on average paying $5,277 towards the cost of their coverage. http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/health-insurance-premiums.aspx

Assumption: you are healthy, see a doctor only once a year for annual physical, and take only generic drugs. Your plan includes a $4,000 deductible. Under socialized medicine, this drops to zero.

Assumption: You make $200,000 per year and pay $42,000 in federal taxes. You also paid $2,900 in Medicare taxes for a total bill of $51,900.

Assumption: Under socialized medicine, you are paying $65,000 in federal plus Medicare taxes, a difference of $23,000. But under socialized medicine, you saved $5,277 plus $4,000 or $9,277. So you are worse off under socialized medicine, and are paying $13,723 more.

Under these assumptions, why would you be in favor of socialized medicine?

You can play with the numbers, but if you are healthy, and have decent employer provided healthcare coverage, take generics, it is possible that you are doing better than you would do under socialized medicine, in spite of the average savings due to lower costs.

MisterLefty says

You can play with the numbers, but if you are healthy, and have decent employer provided healthcare coverage, take generics, it is possible that you are doing better than you would do under socialized medicine, in spite of the average savings due to lower costs.

This is not just theory, it's a legitimate fact.

Socialized healthcare is usually supported by people who do not understand the basic concept of scarcity.

https://michaelsavage.com/?p=19137

Goran_K says

This is not just theory, it's a legitimate fact.

Socialized healthcare is usually supported by people who do not understand the basic concept of scarcity.

That is absolutely not true. Not a fact.

Scarcity exists in all health care systems. In all markets.

Tenpoundbass says

https://michaelsavage.com/?p=19137

Hilarious!

MisterLefty says

Ha, ha,ha... No, if companies did not have to contribute to employees' healthcare, they's find something else to do with that money - invest in the business, return to shareholders, buy back stock, offer bonuses for all senior management, etc., but they would not give that money to employees, except in George Bailey's world.

No, they would have to in order to keep their employees. Labor is a free market and salary + benefits is set by the market. If your companiy reduce benefits, then salaries would have to go up to maintain the same equilibrium on the supply/demand curve.


MisterLefty says

Assumption: Under socialized medicine, you are paying $65,000 in federal plus Medicare taxes, a difference of $23,000. But under socialized medicine, you saved $5,277 plus $4,000 or $9,277. So you are worse off under socialized medicine, and are paying $13,723 more.

Those are poor assumptions. You absolutely ARE paying for all of your healthcare, whether your company sends the check directly or you send it. So, Change the $5277 to $18142.

Where did you come up with the $23000 extra with single payer too? Why would it be MORE than what we're paying now? Every other system pays much LESS--usually around 1/2 of what we pay.

MisterLefty says

You can play with the numbers, but if you are healthy, and have decent employer provided healthcare coverage, take generics, it is possible that you are doing better than you would do under socialized medicine, in spite of the average savings due to lower costs.

Nobody knows until the numbers come out, but if the argument is that unless EVERYONE saves money don't do it, that's a really ridiculous argument. It could save the country trillions. And eliminate massive amounts of waste.

LeonDurham says

Scarcity exists in all health care systems. In all markets.

Yes, scarcity exist in every market, but socialism is one of the WORST ways to distribute supply to demand.

LeonDurham says

No-I'm saying that access and quality of healthcare in poor areas is much, much worse than in rich areas.

Wrong. The poorest people on medicaid go to the ER for the common cold. They have the most accessible care available to anyone. A mother on medicaid could do prenatal anytime she wants. Sometimes they simply choose not to go, sure. However the facts are that the personal health decisions of the mother (drugs, doritos for dinner, etc...) are the reason why their newborns have problems. This has nothing to do w our healthcare system. Any doctor will tell you the same.

Your poor choice of words forces me to make assumptions. If you dont like it, be more precise.

CBOEtrader says

Wrong.

Don't be ridiculous. It's not wrong.

Here's an article for you to read:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-health-care-system-is-leaving-the-southern-black-belt-behind/

"Southern states have health outcomes that are among the worst in the U.S. overall, and they have some of the largest in-state health disparities, according to County Health Rankings, an annual report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin. Transportation options are limited, and health care worker shortages are routine. In Alabama, Black Belt counties have fewer primary care physicians, dentists and mental health providers per resident than other counties. They also tend to have the highest rates of uninsured people. Poverty rates, which are associated with limited access to care, are also high."

CBOEtrader says

Your poor choice of words forces me to make assumptions. If you dont like it, be more precise.

My word choice was precise and accurate. I'm afraid your opinions are just wrong.

LeonDurham says

"Southern states have health outcomes that are among the worst in the U.S. overall

Uh, there are some other factors to consider here which you may be missing.

Goran_K says

Uh, there are some other factors to consider here which you may be missing.

Nope--not missing. Obesity definitely plays a part.

Goran_K says

Without definition of Obese and an explaination on how they came to that conclusion. What was the sample group?
The sickest of America that absolutely has to use the expensive Obamacare probably are also the 16 year straight SNAP recipients and have free healthcare so it's no skin off their ass to take their fat ass down to the Doctor's office to get checked out. Otherwise I'm only seeing 3 in 100 that I would consider obese. Spite what Liberals, the healtscam industry and Crossfit companies through out America would have you believe. Not every 30 year old male should look like an anemic Soy Boy Skelator.

I've had this argument with local idiots so I can better understand what the Left have brainwashed people to think is Obese. Basically if a Male doesn't have the body of Tommy Ramon circa 1975 and if the females don't have the body of Taylor Swift then they are obese.

Goran_K says

Uh, there are some other factors to consider here which you may be missing.

If you normalize for obesity percentages, it won't really change the result. Poor people will still have worse outcomes.

It's hard to believe anyone would argue that point.

Tenpoundbass says

he sickest of America that absolutely has to use the expensive Obamacare probably are also the 16 year straight SNAP recipients and have free healthcare so it's no skin off their ass to take their fat ass down to the Doctor's office to get checked out.

You think people are looking forward to going to the Drs. office?

LeonDurham says

You think people are looking forward to going to the Drs. office?

When it's Free and they get their Opiate fix for free. Hey listen when I arrived here, I was driving the Turnip truck.

LeonDurham says

My word choice was precise and accurate. I'm afraid your opinions are just wrong.

Ok let's explore. My opinion is to agree w the facts that suggest poor health results are a function mostly of poor personal choices rather than an indictment of the healthcare system.

LeonDurham says

Nope--not missing. Obesity definitely plays a part.

So does obesity play a part? Or am I wrong?

Who is right? The Leon who says it's about poor healthcare for those in poverty or the leon who agrees that personal choices are the driver?

Didnt you speak out of both sides of your mouth in the global warming discussion too? Almost like you argue to argue.

LeonDurham says

Poor people will still have worse outcomes

All the more reason to improve your lot in life so you won't be poor.

LeonDurham says

If you normalize for obesity percentages, it won't really change the result. Poor people will still have worse outcomes.

It's hard to believe anyone would argue that point.

No one is arguing that point, we're arguing why the South has the "worst outcomes" according to the article your posted. Poor people in Colorado have better outcomes than the poor people in the South because they aren't as obese as a population. That article fails to point that out completely.

CBOEtrader says

Ok let's explore. My opinion is to agree w the facts that suggest poor health results are a function mostly of poor personal choices rather than an indictment of the healthcare system.

Except those aren't the facts.

CBOEtrader says

So does obesity play a part? Or am I wrong?

Who is right? The Leon who says it's about poor healthcare for those in poverty or the leon who agrees that personal choices are the driver?

Didnt you speak out of both sides of your mouth in the global warming discussion too? Almost like you argue to argue.

Again you try to put words in my mouth. Saying something "plays a part" doesn't mean that it's "the driver" That's disingenuous and trollish. Please stop..

Goran_K says

No one is arguing that point, we're arguing why the South has the "worst outcomes" according to the article your posted. Poor people in Colorado have better outcomes than the South because they aren't 50 pounds overweight.

Uh, you are clearly arguing that point then. If you normalize out obesity, then poor people in Colorado having better outcomes couldn't be because they are overweight. That's pretty much what normalizing means.

Heraclitusstudent says

better quality than the US for 1/2 the price.

Define better quality. People from all over the world come here for the best and newest health technology.

If we dropped the govt intervention prices would drop like a rock.

Goran_K says

LeonDurham says

If you normalize for obesity percentages, it won't really change the result. Poor people will still have worse outcomes.

It's hard to believe anyone would argue that point.

No one is arguing that point, we're arguing why the South has the "worst outcomes" according to the article your posted.

The article he posted proves my point. "8% uninsured" is significantly less than 12% nationwide. The reason more people in that county are insured is because most are on medicaid. Their personal decisions are the cause of their lower life expectancies and higher IMR. There is no serious healthcare professional or doctor who could argue otherwise. The statistics are very clear.

LeonDurham says

Uh, you are clearly arguing that point then. If you normalize out obesity, then poor people in Colorado having better outcomes couldn't be because they are overweight. That's pretty much what normalizing means.

Sure, but then the entire point of "South having worst outcomes" was a complete distraction when your actual point was that "poor" people have the worst outcomes.Everyone knows that.

The truth is poor people tend to have the worst outcomes for everything; health, graduation rates, becoming criminals, etc.

Better not stay poor, which isn't hard in the United States according to the Brookings Institute (left leaning). Just graduate high school, get married before kids, and get a job.

CBOEtrader says

Define better quality. People from all over the world come here for the best and newest health technology.

Source? How many people come here vs. go to European countries?


CBOEtrader says

The article he posted proves my point. "8% uninsured" is significantly less than 12% nationwide. The reason more people in that county are insured is because most are on medicaid. Their personal decisions are the cause of their lower life expectancies and higher IMR. There is no serious healthcare professional or doctor who could argue otherwise. The statistics are very clear.

Uninsured doesn't equal "access to healthcare". I showed you the article describing the shortage of healthcare professionals in many areas of the Deep South.