Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

[DemonD]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

Not to bang the drums for capitalistic health care, but how many Intuitive Surgical Davinci surgical robots are there in the netherlands? How many orthopedic specialists in The Netherlands do arthroscopic hip surgeries (which is much more difficult than it sounds)? How many biotech companies are there outside the US versus inside the US because we have more opportunity for drugs to make money here?

I am in no way saying the US healthcare system is perfect, or that it even works. I'm just saying that most US citizens DO have health care, and the vast majority have superior health care over the rest of the world.

The health care argument is an old and tired one: everyone gets socialized medicine vs. the hybrid socialized/capitalistic system that has advanced medicine light years ahead in the past 100 years far above and beyond anything that humankind has ever seen.

btw the cost of a digital media player might not cover the cost of surgery, but what about how much less we pay in gasoline over a lifetime?

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

I am in no way saying the US healthcare system is perfect, or that it even works. I'm just saying that most US citizens DO have health care, and the vast majority have superior health care over the rest of the world.

The last statistic I ran across was 45-48 million Americans do not have health insurance. How anyone can imagine a system as "good" when 45+ million cannot readily access it? For one to claim "the vast majority [of Americans] have superior health care over the rest of the world" is in my opinion a statement of ignorance, a statement influenced by being brainwashed, or the statement of some physician who has his head up his butt. When you go to a doctor and walk out how do you know you got squat compared to what might in fact represent truly superior healthcare?

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

doubt the money i saved on buyng a hard drive and a digital camera in the US vs the netherlands will cover the cost of a hernia operation.

metalman,

You are correct; however, if this country had a consumption tax then perhaps altogether the tax could buy healthcare for everyone not at the level of the most sophisticated technology for every blooming 300,000,000 million of us, but at some better level than currently exists which leaves a lot out in the cold from any routine healthcare.

I just posted on another thread "Re: future tense from the land of oz" that was begun by jk. In it I referenced a statistic "40 percent of discretionary spending is done by the top 20 percent of the consumers." from Meredith Whitney. Hopefully this link will take you to that thread for more reference.http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...=3558#post3558 I imagine that if we had a serious consumption tax the rich who have most of the money, and I imagine spend the most if Ms. Whitney were to be correct, would contribute a lot toward salving the wounds of those outside of receiving healthcare today.

I had a number of close colleagues who practiced my specialty in Groningen, The Netherlands, and there was absolutely nothing second rate about these guys' knowledge or desire necessary to provide as good a care as existed in our field in this country, and almost 15 years later I doubt this has changed.

[PeterM]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

doubt the money i saved on buyng a hard drive and a digital camera in the US vs the netherlands will cover the cost of a hernia operation.

Don't think it is related to health care
I think there is a lot of 'hidden' cost in the US health care system in the frivolous sueing practices. The main beneficiaries being the insurance companies and lawyers, not the health care system.
And then the rediculous paychecks of some health care moguls, with absolute top William McGuire of UnitedHealth Group (unrealized options package valued at $1.6-billion). How many clients does it take to cover just these excec payments, without providing any medical assistance?

I'm all for free markets, but IMHO privatization in health care and energy/water increases cost and reduces infrastructure quality.


But to return to cost of electronics. I do wonder how much more prices can decrease in the US (as this is part of the reason why CPI is so much understated). In EU there appears to be a margin in the system to play the 'low inflation' game if the EC is willing to reduce tarifs.

[jk]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

But to return to cost of electronics. I do wonder how much more prices can decrease in the US (as this is part of the reason why CPI is so much understated). In EU there appears to be a margin in the system to play the 'low inflation' game if the EC is willing to reduce tarifs.

sorry re my remark on health care. i only wanted to point out that the high vat in europe pays for government services and benefits beyond what exists in this country.

it's hard for me to believe that the ec would consider lowering vat's across the board. such a move smacks of "the anglo-saxon model," as the french call it, and basically would undermine the social compact at the heart of the european model.

[EJ]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

sorry re my remark on health care. i only wanted to point out that the high vat in europe pays for government services and benefits beyond what exists in this country.

it's hard for me to believe that the ec would consider lowering vat's across the board. such a move smacks of "the anglo-saxon model," as the french call it, and basically would undermine the social compact at the heart of the european model.

It was a good comment and it launched some thoughtful discussion.

Here's the picture of inflation. It shows that a 300% rise in CPI since 1978 is the average of a 400% reduction in the cost of traded goods, such as TVs, with an 300% to 800% increase in the cost of non-traded goods, such as college tuition and medical care. One way to make college tuition and medical care less expensive and more accessable is to tax consumption. That's how it's done in European countries. It's a societal decision. What do you care more about, cheap TVs for your citizens or healthy and well educated citizens? The chart below helps explain why the US ranks 37th in the WHO's ranking of health systems.

[PeterM]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

Not to bang the drums for capitalistic health care, but how many Intuitive Surgical Davinci surgical robots are there in the netherlands? How many orthopedic specialists in The Netherlands do arthroscopic hip surgeries (which is much more difficult than it sounds)? How many biotech companies are there outside the US versus inside the US because we have more opportunity for drugs to make money here?

I am in no way saying the US healthcare system is perfect, or that it even works. I'm just saying that most US citizens DO have health care, and the vast majority have superior health care over the rest of the world.

The health care argument is an old and tired one: everyone gets socialized medicine vs. the hybrid socialized/capitalistic system that has advanced medicine light years ahead in the past 100 years far above and beyond anything that humankind has ever seen.

Indeed an old discussion, and also a difficult one as it involves ethics and personal aspects where harsh calculations will conflict with emotions and belief systems.
For me a health care system is good when all citizens can afford and will receive the basic treatments neccessary to secure a better quality of life.
One of the difficulties I see in health care is that more can be done to save/prolong life at increasingly exponential costs. At a certain point the funds will be insufficient to cover the total cost of these 'potential' treatments. But what is priority? A basic health care system for all or the world's best high tech treatments for a few?

Sometimes I wonder. E.g. high tech heart transplant surgery with state of the art equipment is done in Thailand .... and 10 miles down the road in the slums people are dying from diarrhea. How many lives can be saved for the same cost?

I think in Holland 9% of the state budget goes to health and people pay a compulsory basic health insurance (abt. 130$ monthly). The VAT is about 25 % of the state income. Don't know how that compares to the US.

It's all about choices... Holland spends most on education/science (18%), social security (18%), debt payments (9%) and less on defence (5%). Fortunately next year Holland will finally have a budget surplus and is (expected) to pay down a small token part of the priciple. But I won't bet on the politicians to remain frugal enough over the year.

[DemonD]

Re: Web 2.0: Some Froth, But No Clear Bubble

Coming from someone who knows a great deal about the health-care industry, the 45-48 million uninsured still get decent, if not very good, health care. Why do you think hospitals lose so much money? It's because they treat the poor and uninsured who have no way of paying - and they eat the cost.

Also there are many many MANY services for the non-insured. Everything from the Shriner's Hospitals which is 100% free (and I'm told that it's easier for Shriner's to treat children who are completely uninsured) to county and state-sponsored free health clinics which are, by their nature, overcrowded and understaffed, but still much better than a Doctor Without Borders under a tent in Africa.

The most difficult situation is people who are UNDER-insured. I see this every day. High deductibles, high co-pays; these people are less likely to get treatment than the uninsured.

Look, I'm going to end my participation in this argument, because there really is NO perfect health care system out there. None. There are pro's and con's to every system; all my point is that the argument of "universal health care is the best health care" is very short-sighted and oversimiplifies much bigger problems. It's a cowboy argument.