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.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2848)	11/13/2007 11:14:11 AM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 42652

For whatever reasons, 15 percent of our people (approximately 47 million) do not have access (whether it is their own fault or not) to the best health care system in the world. I don't think you have to be an economist or a genius to conclude that that has to have a very negative impact on longevity. Almost exactly, I would just change a word. The insured individual's "health care" may be the best but the collective "system" isn't the best. Thus the lower longevity numbers.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2848)	11/13/2007 5:49:10 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

How is it then that we measure so poorly on longevity? The US has a higher rate for fatal accidents, a higher rate for homicides, and we are on the average fatter. Remove the very obese, accident victims, and murder victims, and we do the best on life expectancy. But then its been pointed out that we have a lower than average suicide rate. Factor that in with the other factors, and we probably merely do above average rather than the best (at the very least Japan would clearly do better than the US, even if not as much better as you would think from just looking at the raw data). Then one wonders what other factors should be considered, including ones that are hard to measure (for example how does different genetics affect each nations average life expectancy), or hard to even tell that they are important factors. Adjusting for all the quantifiable factors as well as I can it looks like the US does pretty well, but perhaps longevity shouldn't be used by either side in the argument.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2848)	11/13/2007 6:06:00 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

For whatever reasons, 15 percent of our people (approximately 47 million) do not have access (whether it is their own fault or not) to the best health care system in the world. 15% aren't currently covered by insurance, but many of them are either people who qualify for government provided insurance but are healthy and haven't bothered to sign up yet, or people who are easily wealthy enough to afford insurance and just decide not to buy it. Both groups would have to be subtracted out from any calculation of people who don't have access to our health care system. (And of course everyone has some access to the system, but I can understand why you don't consider being able to use emergency rooms as "access to the best health care system in the world.)