SI
SI
discoversearch

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: TimF who wrote (6819)5/22/2009 9:53:22 AM
From: Alastair McIntosh  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 42652
 
I've never seen any reply to the points raised in that post.

You must not have looked for alternate views because they certainly exist. Or maybe you skipped over them because you disagreed with them. I think you demonstrate my earlier point. We tend to seek out and read sites that confirm our own biases.

The other side just takes the study, looks at the poor ranking for the US, and then says "see US health care is bad, we should go to a single payer systems


The ranking of the U.S. is irrelevant and not mentioned in the articles I have read supporting the WHO report.

Here is one such commentary. (You have to register to read it.)

thelancet.com

I have read your post and am uncertain as to why you consider the WHO biased. I can only infer that it is for ideological reasons.



To: TimF who wrote (6819)5/22/2009 12:00:50 PM
From: Lane31 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
I've never seen any reply to the points raised in that post.
And you still haven't. I'd just love to have someone explain how literacy is a function of the quality of the delivery of medical services, for example, let alone a measure of it.