LGP Political Discussion Thread

[Hockeynut!]

As far as health care, I don't know about anyone else, but I would not want to go to a hospital in one of these social utopia's in Europe if I needed care.

I'm really curious about your disdain for European health care.

The average life expectancy in the US is 78.2 years, 38th in the world. Behind Denmark, Luxembourg, Ireland, France, Finland, Germany, UK, Belgium, Greece, The Netherlands, Austria, Norway, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland and others.

The infant mortality rate in the US is 33rd in the world, behind almost all of those countries.

The under 5 years of age mortality rate of the US is also 33rd, behind almost all of those countries.

The US has a higher death rate from cancer than the Finland, Sweden, France and Norway.

The US has a higher death rate from heart disease than France, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Greece, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Denmark and Germany.

I could look up more things, but I think it's pretty clear that the health care in the US isn't wildly superior to health care in Europe. I'm not saying our health care system sucks, because it doesn't. But I'm not sure where people get the idea that Europe is a festering pile is death and disease.

[doublem]

Question to you all rugged individualist in this thread? Why have so many countries passed the great U.S. of A in health care and education? Why is that? And why don't they have these arguments in those countries, these outdated 19th century debates? Why haven't they collapsed into poor gutter nations or become babies to the State or unproductive workers. Yet, in the land of the free home of the brave, Americans work longer hours and pay the most and have the least covered.

Enough with the ad hominems.

Broken window fallacy: http://mises.org/daily/3804

Edit to add: http://www.freetheworld.com/

Because something hasn't collapsed does not mean that it will not. And comparing European countries to the American Empire is nonsense.

Regardless, my argument is not based upon efficiency; it's based upon morality.



On Regulation: http://mises.org/daily/3766

Yea, I really don't care about the broken window fallacy. It's a meaningless argument. Anyone can dream up "what if" scenarios. One moment you are arguing about sound money and the next its about morality. Leave the morality at church but it doesn't surprise me that someone that always tries to take the moral high ground ignores his own possible moral failures and the subsequent flaws and unintended consequences.

[Guinness]

I'm really curious about your disdain for European health care.

Ignoring the issue of morality for a moment, isn't it a bit disingenuous to make comparisons between the American Empire and European countries? Most, if not all, of those countries do not have a remotely similar economic situation... and I'm not suggesting that ours is superior - quite the contrary, actually. None of those countries bear the devastating economic consequences of a modern empire.

I'm all for ending the empire, as I think you all know. I'm not in favor of following the European model, both because that model will lead them sooner or later to the economic circumstances we now find ourselves in, and because of the morality of the issue (which, as I said, I would ignore for this post. ).

There isn't a state on the planet that isn't operating with a fiat currency, that I'm aware of.

[Guinness]

Yea, I really don't care about the broken window fallacy. It's a meaningless argument. Anyone can dream up "what if" scenarios. One moment you are arguing about sound money and the next its about morality. Leave the morality at church but it doesn't surprise me that someone that always tries to take the moral high ground ignores his own possible moral failures and the subsequent flaws and unintended consequences.

You obviously don't care about - or even understand - the broken window fallacy. It is far from meaningless. Way to ignore the rest of the post.

Edit to add: I suppose what you don't like about the broken window fallacy is that it suggests that the decision making process should be out of your (and your selected betters) hands.

What in the world are you rambling about? What moral failures should I be cognizant of?

You of all people warning of unintended consequences is laughable.

[Hockeynut!]

I'm really curious about your disdain for European health care.

Ignoring the issue of morality for a moment, isn't it a bit disingenuous to make comparisons between the American Empire and European countries? Most, if not all, of those countries do not have a remotely similar economic situation... and I'm not suggesting that ours is superior - quite the contrary, actually.

The poster I was responding to was comparing the US to Europe. I simply followed in suit. I'm not discussing finances or economics, simply the quality of health care. The poster I responded to insinuated that the health care system (I'm not talking about cost, I'm talking about quality) in Europe was far inferior to the US. I can find absolutely no evidence of that fact.

I understand people opposing health insurance reform on an economic level, but I don't understand opposition on a quality level. I really don't think anyone could honestly say that the health care quality in most European countries or, say, Japan, is inferior to the US. Most reports indicate the exact opposite.

[Guinness]

I'm not discussing finances or economics, simply the quality of health care.

Are those issues separable?

[Hockeynut!]

I think they are. But if you think they must be tied together, we can look at countries like France or Japan. They spend far less money per patient than the US yet they have superior quality than the US. Why can our system not be changed and modeled after other countries who are doing it better and doing it for less money?

[doublem]

Yea, I really don't care about the broken window fallacy. It's a meaningless argument. Anyone can dream up "what if" scenarios. One moment you are arguing about sound money and the next its about morality. Leave the morality at church but it doesn't surprise me that someone that always tries to take the moral high ground ignores his own possible moral failures and the subsequent flaws and unintended consequences.

You obviously don't care about - or even understand - the broken window fallacy. It is far from meaningless. Way to ignore the rest of the post.

Edit to add: I suppose what you don't like about the broken window fallacy is that it suggests that the decision making process should be out of your (and your selected betters) hands.

What in the world are you rambling about? What moral failures should I be cognizant of?

You of all people warning of unintended consequences is laughable.

Because you look at morality and say "theft is immoral but have no problem with 46 million American that don't have insurance which will result in the in sickness or death. If you find theft to be immoral okay, but what about bankruptcy and death of citizens in your country? And no charity doesn't count. Where is the moral outrage from the moral crusader? But yes, what about the quality of care? Why has the U.S. been passed up by the rest of the world?

[shafnutz05]

"This is a happy day. (Senate Republican Leader) Mitch McConnell said on the floor that we're going to go home and hear our constituents rail against this bill. I don't believe that. I believe that the negativity that Leader McConnell and others have continually displayed on the floor has peaked, and now when people learn what's actually in the bill—and all the good it does—it is going to become more and more popular because it is good for America, good for the American people, and a true symbol of what we can do if we all pull together," said Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer.

On the floor before the vote, Majority Leader Harry Reid said, "We're going to hear an earful, but it's going to be an earful of wonderment and happiness that people waited for for a long time."

The complete lack of any basis in reality from these jackasses in the Senate is beyond me. Liberals hate this healthcare bill, conservatives hate this healthcare bill, moderates don't want this healthcare bill........every single poll in the country shows that 2/3rds of the country wants to throw this thing in the dumpster. I truly believe Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are in the early stages of Alzheimer's, because if they think for one second they are going to be greeted with adulation from the adoring masses, they are out of their flipping minds. For those two to get up there and basically imply that we are just a bunch of stupid, helpless cattle that don't know what's good for us? It's getting closer and closer to revolution time...our government is no longer accountable to anyone.

Thanks for ruining America's Christmas, Harry!

But seriously, Merry Christmas everyone...

[Geezer]

"This is a happy day. (Senate Republican Leader) Mitch McConnell said on the floor that we're going to go home and hear our constituents rail against this bill. I don't believe that. I believe that the negativity that Leader McConnell and others have continually displayed on the floor has peaked, and now when people learn what's actually in the bill—and all the good it does—it is going to become more and more popular because it is good for America, good for the American people, and a true symbol of what we can do if we all pull together," said Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer.

On the floor before the vote, Majority Leader Harry Reid said, "We're going to hear an earful, but it's going to be an earful of wonderment and happiness that people waited for for a long time."

The complete lack of any basis in reality from these jackasses in the Senate is beyond me. Liberals hate this healthcare bill, conservatives hate this healthcare bill, moderates don't want this healthcare bill........every single poll in the country shows that 2/3rds of the country wants to throw this thing in the dumpster. I truly believe Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are in the early stages of Alzheimer's, because if they think for one second they are going to be greeted with adulation from the adoring masses, they are out of their flipping minds. For those two to get up there and basically imply that we are just a bunch of stupid, helpless cattle that don't know what's good for us? It's getting closer and closer to revolution time...our government is no longer accountable to anyone.

Thanks for ruining America's Christmas, Harry!

But seriously, Merry Christmas everyone...

The more that middle America learns about this heath power grab to redistribute wealth ,the more they will hate it. The gimme crowd and the big government lefties naturally lave it and will love it more as the feds can micromanage our country.

[Gaucho]

Question to you all rugged individualist in this thread? Why have so many countries passed the great U.S. of A in health care and education? Why is that? And why don't they have these arguments in those countries, these outdated 19th century debates? Why haven't they collapsed into poor gutter nations or become babies to the State or unproductive workers.

Someone hasnt been to Europe.

As far as education is concerned, would that not be something run by our govt? which I am assuming is exactly where some would like to see the direction of health care go? If we are behind on education, whose fault is that? As far as health care, I don't know about anyone else, but I would not want to go to a hospital in one of these social utopia's in Europe if I needed care. Sure I may have to spend some of the fruits of my own labor, but I would want the best possible care. That extra 10-15% recovery rate verses death means a big deal.

What countries are you talking about, if I may ask?

[Guinness]

Because you look at morality and say "theft is immoral but have no problem with 46 million American that don't have insurance which will result in the in sickness or death. If you find theft to be immoral okay, but what about bankruptcy and death of citizens in your country? And no charity doesn't count. Where is the moral outrage from the moral crusader? But yes, what about the quality of care? Why has the U.S. been passed up by the rest of the world?

Charity doesn't count now, does it? Salvation can only come from the State. You are well programmed, my friend. A perfect little minion of Big Brother. Congratulations.

You've managed to ignore the points I've made between this post of yours and the last you made, including the numerous questions I've posed to you. Why on earth should I answer now questions I've already answered when you will not do me the same respect?

I'd be willing to wager here and now that I give more in BOTH charity and taxes than you, so spare us all your tantrums.


Merry Christmas to you, doublem. This discussion has taken a turbulent turn, but I want you to know that I do mean that sincerely. And Merry Christmas to all here at LGP.

[ExPatriatePen]

Question to you all rugged individualist in this thread? Why have so many countries passed the great U.S. of A in health care and education? Why is that? And why don't they have these arguments in those countries, these outdated 19th century debates? Why haven't they collapsed into poor gutter nations or become babies to the State or unproductive workers.

Someone hasnt been to Europe.

As far as education is concerned, would that not be something run by our govt? which I am assuming is exactly where some would like to see the direction of health care go? If we are behind on education, whose fault is that? As far as health care, I don't know about anyone else, but I would not want to go to a hospital in one of these social utopia's in Europe if I needed care. Sure I may have to spend some of the fruits of my own labor, but I would want the best possible care. That extra 10-15% recovery rate verses death means a big deal.

What countries are you talking about, if I may ask?

The fact that you have to ask tells me that the argument has some basis in reality.

Anyway, I've seen Greek healthcare first hand. I hope I never need emergency care in Greece.

[doublem]

Because you look at morality and say "theft is immoral but have no problem with 46 million American that don't have insurance which will result in the in sickness or death. If you find theft to be immoral okay, but what about bankruptcy and death of citizens in your country? And no charity doesn't count. Where is the moral outrage from the moral crusader? But yes, what about the quality of care? Why has the U.S. been passed up by the rest of the world?

Charity doesn't count now, does it? Salvation can only come from the State. You are well programmed, my friend. A perfect little minion of Big Brother. Congratulations.

You've managed to ignore the points I've made between this post of yours and the last you made, including the numerous questions I've posed to you. Why on earth should I answer now questions I've already answered when you will not do me the same respect?

I'd be willing to wager here and now that I give more in BOTH charity and taxes than you, so spare us all your tantrums.


Merry Christmas to you, doublem. This discussion has taken a turbulent turn, but I want you to know that I do mean that sincerely. And Merry Christmas to all here at LGP.

When charity finds a way to pay for roads, education, heath care etc. etc. okay, but anyways Happy Festivus. Correction: when charity finds a way to pay for the almost 3 trillion decaying road and highway system in this country or a public education system, not that I have any problem with charity, it's a really good thing and it helps a lot, it is just unreasonable to think charitable outpouring would be able to fund massive programs in a country of over 300 million and then people would be companies about why the state didn't do more. Esp. when we have seen when the income tax number drops it really hasn't put a dent in those programs.

[Kicksave]

[Letang Is The Truth]

this is pretty intense. all i have to say is if the US instituted a cost effective center like the NICE in the uk and had p4p for the physicians, things would be alot better. having universal care shouldnt be an option right now until costs are controlled. it is going to be an epic fail for the government. biting off more than they can chew

[doublem]

this is pretty intense. all i have to say is if the US instituted a cost effective center like the NICE in the uk and had p4p for the physicians, things would be alot better. having universal care shouldnt be an option right now until costs are controlled. it is going to be an epic fail for the government. biting off more than they can chew

It's going to be an epic fail. The entire plan from the start was a scam. This is why we have so much anti-government rhetoric in this country becasue they always screw things up and never put any will effort into reform or just don't care.

[Corvidae]

Frogs make all sorts of funny noises.

[Letang Is The Truth]

Frogs make all sorts of funny noises.

bull frogs are the worst!

[Guinness]

When charity finds a way to pay for roads, education, heath care etc. etc. okay, but anyways Happy Festivus. Correction: when charity finds a way to pay for the almost 3 trillion decaying road and highway system in this country or a public education system, not that I have any problem with charity, it's a really good thing and it helps a lot, it is just unreasonable to think charitable outpouring would be able to fund massive programs in a country of over 300 million and then people would be companies about why the state didn't do more. Esp. when we have seen when the income tax number drops it really hasn't put a dent in those programs.

I've not suggested here that charity should pay for roads, health care and education (I do believe in free markets, however). I've stated that I believe charity is moral, while theft is not; a distinction, I unfortunately must add, that you do not (and seemingly cannot) make. I've suggested that more freedom, not less, is a better and moral solution to repair our broken health insurance/medical market. You've responded to this each time with obfuscation, misrepresentations of my position, and by blatantly ignoring it.

I usually enjoy these discussions with you, but usually you do a decent job of responding to all of what I post, and what I actually post, instead of what you want to believe I post. I suspect it's because you have no logical answer to these questions and points, but regardless, it has become frustrating to the point that I'm weary of responding to each of your questions and points (without the same respect being returned), only to continue to have it implied that "I don't care about the poor and sick". The notion that only those who support government action really care about other people is absurd, and illogical.

[Guinness]

Debbie Hirst, a woman living in Great Britain, suffered from breast cancer, which had metastasized. As the New York Times explains, the British National Health Service refused to provide her with Avastin, a drug widely available in the USA and Europe, because the government declared it to be too costly. As the NYT explains:

…with her oncologist’s support, she decided last year to try to pay the $120,000 cost herself, while continuing with the rest of her publicly financed treatment.

By December, she had raised $20,000 and was preparing to sell her house to raise more. But then the government, which had tacitly allowed such arrangements before, put its foot down. Mrs. Hirst heard the news from her doctor.

"He looked at me and said: ‘I’m so sorry, Debbie. I’ve had my wrists slapped from the people upstairs, and I can no longer offer you that service,’ " Mrs. Hirst said in an interview.

"I said, ‘Where does that leave me?’ He said, ‘If you pay for Avastin, you’ll have to pay for everything’" – in other words, for all her cancer treatment, far more than she could afford.

Officials said that allowing Mrs. Hirst and others like her to pay for extra drugs to supplement government care would violate the philosophy of the health service by giving richer patients an unfair advantage over poorer ones.

Patients "cannot, in one episode of treatment, be treated on the N.H.S. and then allowed, as part of the same episode and the same treatment, to pay money for more drugs," the health secretary, Alan Johnson, told Parliament.

"That way lies the end of the founding principles of the N.H.S.," Mr. Johnson said.

Indeed, this is a most telling story, and according to the NYT, Hirst was not alone as many other people had similar tales. (Most likely, Krugman would accuse all of them of lying or, worse, wanting to upset those egalitarian principles that will make these sorry events inevitable.)

You've worked hard and taken responsibility for yourself, Mrs. Hirst, but I'm afraid we can't allow that, now. You're just going to have to die, so that the founding principles are not contradicted.

Never mind the fact that the episode itself proves the immorality and unsound logic of the "founding principles".

Please read the REST here, if you intend to comment upon it.

No, this isn't what our brave leaders are passing in Washington these days. This is what we should expect once the single-payer advocates finally get their way.

[ExPatriatePen]

Correction: when charity finds a way to pay for the almost 3 trillion decaying road and highway system in this country ...

Duh... who the heck ever advocated that charity pay for our roads and bridges?

Have you ever heard of toll roads? Ever driven the PA Turnpike or driven across almost every bridge in NYC?

It sure would stop $398 multi-million dollar tax payer funded boondoggles like the Gravina "Bridge to nowhere" up in Alaska.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Geezer]

Correction: when charity finds a way to pay for the almost 3 trillion decaying road and highway system in this country ...

Duh... who the heck ever advocated that charity pay for our roads and bridges?

Have you ever heard of toll roads? Ever driven the PA Turnpike or driven across almost every bridge in NYC?

It sure would stop $398 multi-million dollar tax payer funded boondoggles like the Gravina "Bridge to nowhere" up in Alaska.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If the Big Government effort of the left continues to advance ,the final result is easy to view. California, New York and New Jersey are economic basket cases. These 3 states lead the country in income tax, proprty tax and sales tax but are all broke. California's business losses have been huge and I doubt there are businesses looking to move into the other two. The California model will be nationalized once the liberals are done "levelling the playing field". Socialism dargs eveyone(other than bureaucrats) down to the same misearble, ever-declining level.

[Hockeynut!]

You've worked hard and taken responsibility for yourself, Mrs. Hirst, but I'm afraid we can't allow that, now. You're just going to have to die, so that the founding principles are not contradicted.

Actually Mrs. Hirst was going to die with or without the drug. Bevacizumab doesn't cure cancer, it extends life (for some patients) for a couple months. Many insurance companies in the US refuse to pay for it for that reason. There was a story on this and other life extending drugs and procedures on the world news a month or so ago.

[Guinness]

You've worked hard and taken responsibility for yourself, Mrs. Hirst, but I'm afraid we can't allow that, now. You're just going to have to die, so that the founding principles are not contradicted.

Actually Mrs. Hirst was going to die with or without the drug. Bevacizumab doesn't cure cancer, it extends life (for some patients) for a couple months. Many insurance companies in the US refuse to pay for it for that reason. There was a story on this and other life extending drugs and procedures on the world news a month or so ago.

Whether it cures or extends life isn't the point. It should be up to Mrs. Hirst, not the NHS.

I'm not in favor of our current, over-regulated health insurance system, either.