Wynton Marsalis on the importance of aggressive inspiration in education ...

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

Or you could, you know, read. I raised a substantive point about tying quality healthcare to one's employer is not in my view a good idea. Instead you choose to nitpick a minor point I made and make some crack about communism despite my also writing that socialist policies don't imply Marxism. You might also have noticed that I mentioned 'junior' doctors, who don't drive around in BMWs. In the UK, doctors typically train in the NHS and then may take on private work once they are experienced and specialise. Often these same consultants work for the NHS too. I took my degree at a university that also happens to be one of the UK's leading medical schools, so I've met a few doctors in my time. Lol.

Fair enough. But they have to strike? And the strike is against the government?

In the USA of course, I went to a doc about 12 years ago who had attached a sign up on the glass about not taking any more patients with so and so coverage. I thought what is that all about? Then realized oooooooh, it was Obamacare. His reasons? - (1) not enough pay, (2) too much bureaucratic paperwork for his staff. (lower revenue, higher expense).

My "family medicine/general practioner" doctor's office doesn't accept Medicare or Medicare supplemental etc. So if you're old - cash only! I can imagine that their reasons are the same as the above mentioned doc.

So they don't have to strike - they can just say - I ain't playin'.

[ruger9]

I don't get it. Time and again James has tried to discuss these issues in good faith, and you keep resorting to this kind of bullshit.

I too have provided many points of debate , "in good faith." You apparently chose not to see them.

Aren't you the guy who used to be a lawyer?

Stop insulting me.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

If some places have socialized medicine and they like it, that's all fine by me!

But other than Medicare and Medicaid, Americans have shown an aversion to it. A lot of people don't trust big government, and/or government being in many parts of their lives. Still, health care is expensive, especially if one wants great doctors and state-of-the-art medicine. There are no easy answers.

Back to Wynton and jazz music.

[ruger9]

If some places have socialized medicine and they like it, that's all fine by me!

But other than Medicare and Medicaid, Americans have shown an aversion to it. A lot of people don't trust big government, and/or government being in many parts of their lives. Still, health care is expensive, especially if one wants great doctors and state-of-the-art medicine. There are no easy answers.

Back to Wynton and jazz music.

100%. My aversion to it is based on results (here in America): the Vet is a mess. And if our govt isn't capable of running the Vet well (which is a MUCH smaller system than the entire country would be), they certainly can't be trusted to run a nationwide socialized medicine system.

I'll be for socialized medicine in the US under 1 condition:

1) the Congress is required by law to use the exact same system (they always exclude themselves from the masses requirements, and have a"gold-plated" healthcare plan for themselves)

-OR-

2) Every American gets the same (gold-plated) healthcare plan Congress gets.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

100%. My aversion to it is based on results (here in America): the Vet is a mess. And if our govt isn't capable of running the Vet well (which is a MUCH smaller system than the entire country would be), they certainly can't be trusted to run a nationwide socialized medicine system.

I'll be for socialized medicine in the US under 1 condition:

1) the Congress is required by law to use the exact same system (they always exclude themselves from the masses requirements, and have a"gold-plated" healthcare plan for themselves)

-OR-

2) Every American gets the same (gold-plated) healthcare plan Congress gets.

The problem is lack of competition. Competition keeps people on their toes. That results in either excellent service, or failure. You know - a smile. "Yes sir", "no ma'am", speed, etc. Why are restaurants in big citiies better? Because they HAVE to be.

But with government? The (taxpayers) check is in the mail. They have no competition. Been to the DMV lately? How about a USPS post office vs. UPS or FedEx? I hear the place where one gets signed up for Social Security sucks too. Like a third world country, is what I've heard. With government "services" they order you around like you're a piece of meat.

So the motto? "Stay hungry". "Compete or die". But the government doesn't have to do that. That's why big government sucks.

[James W]

The problem is lack of competition. Competition keeps people on their toes. That results in either excellent service, or failure. You know - a smile. "Yes sir", "no ma'am", speed, etc. Why are restaurants in big citiies better? Because they HAVE to be.

But with government? The (taxpayers) check is in the mail. They have no competition. Been to the DMV lately? How about a USPS post office vs. UPS or FedEx? I hear the place where one gets signed up for Social Security sucks too. Like a third world country, is what I've heard. With government "services" they order you around like you're a piece of meat.

So the motto? "Stay hungry". "Compete or die". But the government doesn't have to do that. That's why big government sucks.

Depends what you mean by big government, but there's no doubt the American health system is inferior to other comparable countries. I wonder if you have any experience or knowledge of the health care systems in countries with so-called big government?

Read this: US Has Highest Infant, Maternal Mortality Rates Despite the Most Health Care Spending (ajmc.com)

P.S I am not implying that other systems are perfect.

[RLetson]

Why are restaurants in big citiies better? Because they HAVE to be.

Just a note from someone who used to teach rhetoric and argumentation: see "Are you still beating your wife?"

If big-city restaurants are actually better (insert relevant metric here), there might be other, um, competing factors, such as population demographics and economic environment. . . .

[ruger9]

Depends what you mean by big government, but there's no doubt the American health system is inferior to other comparable countries. I wonder if you have any experience or knowledge of the health care systems in countries with so-called big government?
.

What do you consider the "other comparable countries"? And HOW exactly are you coming to the conclusion that they are comparable? Serious questions: lots of metrics to consider...

For example, looking at population, while the UK, US, and India might all be considered "comparable countries" in some ways, their populations are very different. And frankly, I think population plays a HUGE roll in all of this: the larger a population, the less quality EVERYTHING seems to get (including healthcare), simply because smaller systems are easier to run (altho that certainly doesn't account for the US Vet system being so poor).

[James W]

What do you consider the "other comparable countries"? And HOW exactly are you coming to the conclusion that they are comparable? Serious questions: lots of metrics to consider...

For example, looking at population, while the UK, US, and India might all be considered "comparable countries" in some ways, their populations are very different. And frankly, I think population plays a HUGE roll in all of this: the larger a population, the less quality EVERYTHING seems to get (including healthcare), simply because smaller systems are easier to run (altho that certainly doesn't account for the US Vet system being so poor).

If you had actually read the article I keep linking to, you would see that the comparable countries are comparable on the basis of being high income. The reasons - which again, you can read in the article that I have linked to more than a few times now - for the USA's poor health care aren't simply because it's a big country, they are, and I quote -

'The authors cited 3 reasons for the disparities that make the United States an outlier compared with other high-income countries: unaffordable coverage, high costs, and limited access to effective primary care to better prevent and manage chronic health conditions.'

[m_d]

Many doctors - those under the spell of big pharma and/or big government - are best avoided anyway.

[m_d]

What do you consider the "other comparable countries"? And HOW exactly are you coming to the conclusion that they are comparable? Serious questions: lots of metrics to consider...

For example, looking at population, while the UK, US, and India might all be considered "comparable countries" in some ways, their populations are very different. And frankly, I think population plays a HUGE roll in all of this: the larger a population, the less quality EVERYTHING seems to get (including healthcare), simply because smaller systems are easier to run (altho that certainly doesn't account for the US Vet system being so poor).

Some parts of India do have higher life expectancy that parts of the US and other Western nations, using mostly ayurveda medicine: go figure.

[ruger9]

Some parts of India do have higher life expectancy that parts of the US and other Western nations, using mostly ayurveda medicine: go figure.

Eastern medicine has alot to offer for sure. But there's no $MONEY$ in it, so few are interested, and certainly not those looking to become billionaires.

India is still seriously divided tho, with the class system. People say America is a land of the "haves and have-nots"... they should take a look at India sometime. I'm sure the life expectancy of those in the lower classes is not great.

[ruger9]

If you had actually read the article I keep linking to, you would see that the comparable countries are comparable on the basis of being high income. The reasons - which again, you can read in the article that I have linked to more than a few times now - for the USA's poor health care aren't simply because it's a big country, they are, and I quote -

'The authors cited 3 reasons for the disparities that make the United States an outlier compared with other high-income countries: unaffordable coverage, high costs, and limited access to effective primary care to better prevent and manage chronic health conditions.'

I didn't ask you what the article WE read said. I asked you what YOU thought made countries "comparable", and by what metric.

So, the US is ranked 6th in the world, while the UK (NHS) is ranked 4th. Instead of telling Americans that "we should go to socialized medicine", why don't you tell us why the NHS is only 4th and not 1st, since it's so wonderful? (yes yes... we know... the "evil torries" are funding it less....) But less spending does not equate with less quality, since the US spends more than the UK does per person, yet we are STILL ranked lower than you. So if spending isn't the answer to better healthcare, what is?

You act as if socializing the system will automatically make it better. I can assure you it is FAR more complicated than that. As I have said, that is exactly what our vet healthcare system is, and it stinks. Explain that one. A SMALL, socialized (totally free) healthcare system for a SMALL PERCENTAGE of our population, and it's even worse than our regular healthcare system for everyone else. I assure you the answers do not lie in socialism/marxism.

[m_d]

Eastern medicine has alot to offer for sure. But there's no $MONEY$ in it, so few are interested, and certainly not those looking to become billionaires.

India is still seriously divided tho, with the class system. People say America is a land of the "haves and have-nots"... they should take a look at India sometime. I'm sure the life expectancy of those in the lower classes is not great.

As far as living there I'm too old for such adventures but it should be a pretty interesting place to live right now. I just thought those stats were ironic given the arrogance of the current know-it-all Western medical establishment.

[Stuff]

the "evil torries" are funding it less....)

Second time I've posted here, and I'm not a guitarist so should shut up, but the Tories really are genuinely evil.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

Some parts of India do have higher life expectancy that parts of the US and other Western nations, using mostly ayurveda medicine: go figure.

Go figure the other parts, ya know, just for balance.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

Just a note from someone who used to teach rhetoric and argumentation: see "Are you still beating your wife?"

If big-city restaurants are actually better (insert relevant metric here), there might be other, um, competing factors, such as population demographics and economic environment. . . .

Make a POINT, if you have the stones. You’ve not made one.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

Depends what you mean by big government, but there's no doubt the American health system is inferior to other comparable countries. I wonder if you have any experience or knowledge of the health care systems in countries with so-called big government?

Read this: US Has Highest Infant, Maternal Mortality Rates Despite the Most Health Care Spending (ajmc.com)

P.S I am not implying that other systems are perfect.

Right. Big government in a big country is inevitable - to a point. The question is, can such a country avoid unending government growth and control?

And no disrespect, but if you know economics you know about priorities relative to “guns and butter”. And if you know much about history, the wealth of nations, and current global security, you know that your despised USA is like a bodyguard for the west. When the rest of the west spends more on the military, and less on social programs, perhaps they won’t need the US to protect them.

Have you naughty boys started another world war without inviting us? How uncouth!

When Medvedev threatened to nuke your country out of existence just three short days ago, what gave you confidence that would NOT happen?

[Litterick]

As the man said, read this:

Health care spending, both per person and as a share of GDP, continues to be far higher in the United States than in other high-income countries. Yet the U.S. is the only country that doesn’t have universal health coverage.

The U.S. has the lowest life expectancy at birth, the highest death rates for avoidable or treatable conditions, the highest maternal and infant mortality, and among the highest suicide rates.

The U.S. has the highest rate of people with multiple chronic conditions and an obesity rate nearly twice the OECD average.

Americans see physicians less often than people in most other countries and have among the lowest rate of practicing physicians and hospital beds per 1,000 population.

Screening rates for breast and colorectal cancer and vaccination for flu in the U.S. are among the highest, but COVID-19 vaccination trails many nations.

This is not a problem of big government. The problem is the absence of universal coverage.

[m_d]

Go figure the other parts, ya know, just for balance.

I wasn't attacking the US, no need to be defensive. I'm a Westerner and proud of it. I'm not saying life is better in India. But such nations are coming into their own and I feel happy for them. That might be a blessing in disguise for the West too.

[Tal_175]

I think we can now all guess who JazzJourney4Eva is.

[ruger9]

As the man said, read this:

Health care spending, both per person and as a share of GDP, continues to be far higher in the United States than in other high-income countries. Yet the U.S. is the only country that doesn’t have universal health coverage.

The U.S. has the lowest life expectancy at birth, the highest death rates for avoidable or treatable conditions, the highest maternal and infant mortality, and among the highest suicide rates.

The U.S. has the highest rate of people with multiple chronic conditions and an obesity rate nearly twice the OECD average.

Americans see physicians less often than people in most other countries and have among the lowest rate of practicing physicians and hospital beds per 1,000 population.

Screening rates for breast and colorectal cancer and vaccination for flu in the U.S. are among the highest, but COVID-19 vaccination trails many nations.

This is not a problem of big government. The problem is the absence of universal coverage.

Your conclusion is based on what? The facts you posted? You think Americans are highest in obesity because our healthcare isn't free? Wow... it never ceases to amaze me how some people think they KNOW "THE" answer, and it's so simple, so black and white....

As far as the vax rates, that has nothing to do with universal coverage: covid vaxxes were free here. Many didn't WANT the vax. Again- nothing to do with our not having universal coverage.

And I'll repeat again- someone please explain to me how the "universal coverage" system for our Vets is so terrible, if "universal coverage" fixes everything?

[DawgBone]

the same could be said about the american education system judging from your posts

That wasn't a very nice thing to say.

[RLetson]

Make a POINT, if you have the stones. You’ve not made one.

The point would be that the remark about restaurants is poor support for the benefits of competition, specifically because the example offered ("restaurants in big cities [are] better. . . because they HAVE to be") is flawed in at least two ways: It assumes that big-city restaurants are better, and that the cause is the (presumably) competitive environment of the big city. Assumptions and presumptions are not evidence. (There's also the question of whether competition plays the same role in the restaurant and health-care environments, but that gets abstract and philosophical pretty quickly.)

I am personally wary of monopolies and skeptical of arguments favoring mergers and business-sector consolidations, but I like to build my arguments from solid, specific examples up. I'm also inclined not to sneer at people I disagree with or conduct conversations in a way that in real life would lead to a meeting out in the parking lot.

Stoney enough?

[Christian Miller]

@Rletson As I see it - regardless of one’s attitude toward the public sector - if you don’t support a strong anti-private monopoly position, either you’re on the gravy train or a bit of a mug.