Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (83068)	6/28/2000 3:35:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 108807

Now I'm upset! You made my hands sore because I had to applaud your comment so long and hard... Why add another layer of expensive bureaucracy? Because liberals never met a social program that couldn't be solved by someone else's money.

To: Ilaine who wrote (83068)	6/28/2000 3:40:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

What argument is bogus? And who's making it a moral issue? If anything, I'd say it's an economic issue, somehow, the US manages to spend tons more and not have a lot to show for it relative to the rest of the world. The rest of Americans have better health care than any other country in the world. Then how come: The World Health Organisation (WHO) has nevertheless decided to take a stab at doing it. In its World Health Report 2000, published this week, the WHO ranks the health-care systems of 191 countries according to how well they perform on five measures. Among them is overall population health as determined by ?disability-adjusted life expectancy? (DALE), the number of years of good health that an average baby born in a given country in 1999 can expect in his or her lifetime. The study also rates the ?responsiveness? of health-care systems, according to how promptly they provide medical attention, how much choice they offer and how well they respect the confidentiality and autonomy of patients, as well as other ?consumer-oriented? criteria. . . . But there are surprises too. Colombia, which gets low marks for healthy life expectancy and health-care responsiveness, comes top for fairness of financial contribution: its government has worked hard over the past decade to revamp the health-insurance system to try to provide coverage for the country?s poorest. And while America?s health-care system is deemed the most responsive, it does badly when it comes to measures that reflect general population health, coming 24th in the DALE ranking and 54th, alongside Fiji, in how fairly the financial burden of health care is distributed. (http://www.economist.com/editorial/freeforall/current/st7716.html, includes non-responsive link to the WHO report) But we spend the most, anyway, so we're #1 in something. Cheers, Dan.