Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Bilbo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2008-10-26 11:13am

Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Bilbo »

I did not know socialized medicine meant telling the elderly (basically the ones not rich enough to avoid using Medicare) that they should accept dying based on a financial cost-effective computation.

Is this the great equalizing that socialized medicine has bragged to us about for years? Is this where medicine is going? Where we slow down medical research because it costs too much? What will this do to a society where the government decide the elderly poor are not worth it financially? Right now our nation has an average life expectancy. I am sure that if you broke it down that number varies some between the rich and the poor. How much more disparate will those numbers be under a system like this?

This article and the provisions it quotes suggests that the worst fear of socialized medicine may be true. Instead of universal healthcare bringing everyone up to the same level of care, we are going to push everyone down to an arbitrary and cost effective lower level of care.

Yes this is an opinion piece but the piece quotes line for line examples from the Stimulus Bill and from Daschle's book where some of these items appear to have been lifted with no change.

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey


Commentary by Betsy McCaughey



Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Republican Senators are questioning whether President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill contains the right mix of tax breaks and cash infusions to jump-start the economy.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.”

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

New Penalties

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions

If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

More Scrutiny Needed

On Friday, President Obama called it “inexcusable and irresponsible” for senators to delay passing the stimulus bill. In truth, this bill needs more scrutiny.

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.
I KILL YOU!!!
Bilbo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2008-10-26 11:13am

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Bilbo »

I would also like to point out that while Daschle created this program I am sure he never sees himself using it. He will either use his wealth to get himself better care, or being a member of Congress will give you better care, or Congress will just vote themself a special program like they have in place of Social Secuity (special Congress only Pension Plan that is vastly superior to Social Security).
I KILL YOU!!!
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Darth Wong »

ALL medicine is grappling with the issue of skyrocketing terminal care, you idiot. This guy honestly thinks that the enormously expensive final three months of a person's life is a "growth industry" under a privatized health care system? Does he think that corporations have some kind of magic wand that they use in order to transform liabilities into assets?

Every single customer of every single insurance company is a liability the moment he goes into a long-term care ward. This is a problem that all health-care systems have to deal with, regardless of whether they are socialized or privatized. Corporations do not have any magic way of turning liabilities into assets. That's why, instead of attempting to ration medical expenses, they simply find an excuse to dump you from coverage. That's why the elderly are so adamant about medicare, because they know it's the only health-care system that will even try to be there for them, rationed or not.

You exhibit typical critical thinking skills for a right-winger, which is to say: none at all.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Bilbo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2008-10-26 11:13am

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Bilbo »

Darth Wong wrote:ALL medicine is grappling with the issue of skyrocketing terminal care, you idiot. This guy honestly thinks that the enormously expensive final three months of a person's life is a "growth industry" under a privatized health care system? Does he think that corporations have some kind of magic wand that they use in order to transform liabilities into assets?

Every single customer of every single insurance company is a liability the moment he goes into a long-term care ward. This is a problem that all health-care systems have to deal with, regardless of whether they are socialized or privatized. Corporations do not have any magic way of turning liabilities into assets. That's why, instead of attempting to ration medical expenses, they simply find an excuse to dump you from coverage. That's why the elderly are so adamant about medicare, because they know it's the only health-care system that will even try to be there for them, rationed or not.

You exhibit typical critical thinking skills for a right-winger, which is to say: none at all.
Really? So having to lose an eye before they give you treatment to save the other eye is an expensive 3 months to live scenario? I see you convenienty chose to furthest possible extreme for your example. Sure 3 months doesnt look to be a very long period of time but what about 6 months? What about 9 months? Or even a full year? How young does someone have to be to deserve the costs to add a full year to their life?

What about the break in society this will create? Leftists whine their asses off every day that there is a huge disparity in the lives of the rich versus the poor and yet this system could widen that gap. Imagine Donald Trump living a decade longer than you because he can personally afford every possible treatment out there while you can only get what the managers of the government feel is cost-effective?

Do you want society to live like that? Sounds like the beginning of the ultimate capitalist medical system. The well off live as long as possible while the poor only live as long as cost effective.

Or are you going to balance the system by enforcing these cost effective rules across the board and not allow anyone (even those that can personally afford it) to get treatments outside those determined proper by some federal board?
I KILL YOU!!!
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Darth Wong »

Bilbo wrote:Really? So having to lose an eye before they give you treatment to save the other eye is an expensive 3 months to live scenario? I see you convenienty chose to furthest possible extreme for your example.
Single anecdotes do not a valid argument make. They are employed for pure emotional impact when we're talking about systems which process a hundred million people.

The general argument here is that elderly care (particularly the extraordinarily expensive "heroic efforts" that are often applied to wealth patients in their final months) will suffer in the coming decades due to the demographic shift, you idiot. And the moron who wrote the article thinks that this will represent a "growth industry" for privatized medicine but a liability for socialized medicine, as if corporations can somehow perform magic and turn liabilities into assets.

Get this straight, dumb-shit: charging for health-care is a growth industry, but supplying it is not. And while it may give assholes like you an opportunity to climb on your soapbox, it's true: heroic care for terminal elderly patients is an incredible waste of money. Look at your fucking country, which has by FAR the highest infant mortality rate among first world countries and does nothing about it, while spending huge amounts of money to slightly extend the lives of wealthy old men.
Or are you going to balance the system by enforcing these cost effective rules across the board and not allow anyone (even those that can personally afford it) to get treatments outside those determined proper by some federal board?
Ideally? Yes. There is a finite amount of care that we can afford to give people as a society. When you allow the rich and powerful to get care that is unavailable to the rest of us, then you reduce their incentive to make sure that health care is well-funded, and they have the influence to make sure it either happens or doesn't.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Bilbo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2008-10-26 11:13am

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Bilbo »

Darth Wong wrote: Ideally? Yes. There is a finite amount of care that we can afford to give people as a society. When you allow the rich and powerful to get care that is unavailable to the rest of us, then you reduce their incentive to make sure that health care is well-funded, and they have the influence to make sure it either happens or doesn't.
Telling other people how to spend their money again huh. Thanks for pointing out how much of a waste it is to point out facts to you Wong. Go back to your wonderful little communist world.
I KILL YOU!!!
Bilbo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2008-10-26 11:13am

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Bilbo »

Darth Wong wrote:
Bilbo wrote:Really? So having to lose an eye before they give you treatment to save the other eye is an expensive 3 months to live scenario? I see you convenienty chose to furthest possible extreme for your example.
Single anecdotes do not a valid argument make. They are employed for pure emotional impact when we're talking about systems which process a hundred million people.
You are so full of shit. My example is a single anecdote but your jumping to the most extreme 3 months to live scenario is a valid arguement? How nice of you to have your bullshit cake and eat it too.
I KILL YOU!!!
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7956
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by ray245 »

The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.
The problem is, the cost of medicines and health cares do impact the general public as well. If you are going to let people spend more in regards to health care in a privatized health-care industry, they cannot spend money elsewhere. Also, even if a national health system is adopted, the demand for labour will be there.

We cannot look at the health-care industry as a isolated industry.
Telling other people how to spend their money again huh. Thanks for pointing out how much of a waste it is to point out facts to you Wong. Go back to your wonderful little communist world.
The hell? Are you serious? Every government would implement measures to ensure people directed their spending to achieve the best possible result and benefits. Are you saying that the government should not take care of its people as a whole?

Before you start your communist rant again, I would love to see Stas Bush attacking your arguments.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12269
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Surlethe »

So recognizing and incorporating into decision-making the fact that health care is subject to diminishing returns on investment is now condemning the poor to die under a goddamned socialist system? Did I miss the memo?

Edit: Jesus, that's a long sentence. Slowing down for clarity.
Last edited by Surlethe on 2009-02-10 10:31am, edited 1 time in total.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Darth Wong »

Bilbo wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:
Bilbo wrote:Really? So having to lose an eye before they give you treatment to save the other eye is an expensive 3 months to live scenario? I see you convenienty chose to furthest possible extreme for your example.
Single anecdotes do not a valid argument make. They are employed for pure emotional impact when we're talking about systems which process a hundred million people.
You are so full of shit. My example is a single anecdote but your jumping to the most extreme 3 months to live scenario is a valid arguement? How nice of you to have your bullshit cake and eat it too.
That's not an "extreme scenario", you goddamned idiot. EVERYONE who doesn't die suddenly will go into a hospital and start burning through money.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industrie ... osts_x.htm

More than one quarter of total Medicare expenses go to patients in their last year, fucktard. This is not an "extreme" scenario: it is an overwhelmingly common one, which is only going to become a bigger problem in future decades. Your astounding stupidity is the only reason you honestly think your particular anecdote represents a valid generalization while my argument is too "extreme" to be relevant.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Darth Wong »

Bilbo wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Ideally? Yes. There is a finite amount of care that we can afford to give people as a society. When you allow the rich and powerful to get care that is unavailable to the rest of us, then you reduce their incentive to make sure that health care is well-funded, and they have the influence to make sure it either happens or doesn't.
Telling other people how to spend their money again huh. Thanks for pointing out how much of a waste it is to point out facts to you Wong. Go back to your wonderful little communist world.
In other words, you just label me as "communist" when you can't refute the point. As I said, you're living up to all the stereotypes about right-wingers. You don't label for rhetorical effect: you do it because you don't have an answer to the point.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Broomstick »

And, ironically, my family just did battle with a doctor who wanted to inflict all sorts of "heroic" measures on my dying mother...

Bilbo, part of the problem in the US (I'm not speaking for other nations) is an inability to accept that death happens. My mother is no longer eating, so some of the docs want to install a feeding tube. Now, that's not a major procedure, but there are costs and risks associated with it and, you know what? It won't make a goddamn bit of difference for my mother, as even if you force food into her, her digestive system is no longer absorbing nutrients. While such things do benefit some patients, in her case it will not. It will not prolong her life. It sure as hell won't make her more comfortable. At best, it's a "feel good" procedure for people other than the patient who can't bear the thought of "granny" starving to death. But, as my sister with the MD put it, she's not dying because she's not eating - she's not eating because she is dying. Doing CPR on my mother, intubating her, or yes, force feeding her is a waste of resources. Yet such things are routinely done on elderly in her state. That's wrong, and it should stop, and yes, we'd save some money.

Now, if my dad were lying a hospital bed unable to eat it would be an entirely different story as he is a relatively healthy person (even if old) and could well live and independent and pain-free life for another decade or two. Treating my dad for an illness or injury actually might make a difference.

Truth is, keeping my mom comfortable is really the only moral option. We will not hasten her death, but neither will we delay it. Every time a new issue arises we hold a family conference on whether or not, and how, it should be addressed, and when a treatment should be halted.

Now, that said, I would have to argue against arbitrary age limits (my dad is older than my mom, but MUCH healthier and with a significant life expectancy even now) or bullshit like "you have to go blind in one eye before we treat your macular degeneration". That's just plain bad medicine. Funny - Bilbo you mentioned that people protested that last one and it was changed. On the other hand, it matters fuck all if you protest to a private insurer.

But yes, society needs to come to grips with the idea that much of what is done to old people in their last months of life is useless to harmful. More money spent /= better care. More procedures done /= better care.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
Karza
Jedi Knight
Posts: 562
Joined: 2004-07-07 09:02am
Location: Turku, Finland

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Karza »

Over here we have socialized healthcare which quite capably takes care of every last citizen, but that doesn't mean there wouldn't be private hospitals where those with the necessary dough can get their extra-special super duper care. Hell, the socialized system will actually pay a part of your bill if you go to a private care provider.

Funny thing is, I don't recall ever hearing of a case where our national system flat out denied some treatment as being wasteful, and even if they occasionally did, so what? If the person has the means, he can get that treatment from a private clinic anyway. If he doesn't, well, sucks to be him but he wouldn't be any better off in a US-like system. Probably much worse, in fact.
"Death before dishonour" they say, but how much dishonour are we talking about exactly? I mean, I can handle a lot. I could fellate a smurf if the alternative was death.
- Dylan Moran
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Broomstick »

Surlethe wrote:So recognizing and incorporating into decision-making the fact that health care is subject to diminishing returns on investment is now condemning the poor to die under a goddamned socialist system? Did I miss the memo?
I believe that's what Bilbo said. Of course, if he had his way we would condemn the rich to spend their last months being subjected to intrusive, painful, and ultimately useless procedures that not only isolate them from their loved ones (due to medical personnel tossing out family while procedures are done) but also impoverish their heirs. While there is a certain aspect of schadenfreude involved, it's no way to run a medical system. Typical some is good so more must be better thinking.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12269
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Surlethe »

I read an article in the JAMA last summer which was outlining problems with the American health care system. One of the biggest was the diversion of resources to dying people: people are unable to accept that, in many cases, palliative care is better than actual attempts to cure the medical problem. This was also highlighted in an NPR series on health care last summer, too; they interviewed a UK man who was content to die instead of prolonging his life six months with a super-expensive treatment. They contrasted this with the US system, which would try the treatment as a first option.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12269
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Surlethe »

Broomstick wrote:
Surlethe wrote:So recognizing and incorporating into decision-making the fact that health care is subject to diminishing returns on investment is now condemning the poor to die under a goddamned socialist system? Did I miss the memo?
I believe that's what Bilbo said. Of course, if he had his way we would condemn the rich to spend their last months being subjected to intrusive, painful, and ultimately useless procedures that not only isolate them from their loved ones (due to medical personnel tossing out family while procedures are done) but also impoverish their heirs. While there is a certain aspect of schadenfreude involved, it's no way to run a medical system. Typical some is good so more must be better thinking.
Yes - and what you say also illustrates a problem with a free market approach to health care. The market allocates resources based on ability and willingness to pay. That is, it triages medical resources based chiefly on wealth, not on where the marginal benefit of the resources is greater.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
KrauserKrauser
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2633
Joined: 2002-12-15 01:49am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by KrauserKrauser »

Darth Wong wrote:More than one quarter of total Medicare expenses go to patients in their last year.
Isn't the data set skewed to be that way anyway? Most Americans are not dependent on Medicare until either they retire and no longer have coverage from theit employer or cannot afford the premiums of private health care insurance. The elderly would of course be a primary spender of the medicare moneys as they are also the primary users of said money.

A better analysis would be to compare the spending in a completely socialized healthcare system ala Canada versus that of the aggregate US spending. Does the same trend exist in Canada?
VRWC : Justice League : SDN Weight Watchers : BOTM : Former AYVB

Resident Magic the Gathering Guru : Recovering MMORPG Addict
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Darth Wong »

Then again, a socialized health-care system would not be a relevant baseline when talking about how costs would change when transitioning from a privatized system.

In any case, other studies seem to indicate that 1/4 is actually an underestimate, and that it's actually 1/3. While you might assume that elderly people fall back on medicare, it may actually be the case that they burn up their estate money instead.

The following paper gives a figure of 33%, which is higher than the Medicare figure, not lower.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1464043

Here's another article about end-of-life care:

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/arti ... cleid=1949

Apparently, the top 10 percentile of EOL spenders will burn up a half-million dollars in their last year of life. As one doctor in the above article notes, spreading this level of rich-person care to the entire elderly population would cause national health care spending to instantly jump by ten to fifteen times. Bilbo may rant and rave, but there are some practical realities we need to face here, and clear-eyed logical decision-making is required, not rampant emotionalism. We need to think about how to achieve the best medical benefit for the entire nation, not just focus on how to extract cash from dying rich men.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Alan Bolte
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2611
Joined: 2002-07-05 12:17am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Alan Bolte »

Medicare covers anyone over 65, and some younger people with disabilities. American life expectancy is ~74 for men and ~80 for women. It seems reasonable to conclude that less than a tenth of Medicare recipients are in their last year of life.
Any job worth doing with a laser is worth doing with many, many lasers. -Khrima
There's just no arguing with some people once they've made their minds up about something, and I accept that. That's why I kill them. -Othar
Avatar credit
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

Surlethe wrote:I read an article in the JAMA last summer which was outlining problems with the American health care system. One of the biggest was the diversion of resources to dying people: people are unable to accept that, in many cases, palliative care is better than actual attempts to cure the medical problem. This was also highlighted in an NPR series on health care last summer, too; they interviewed a UK man who was content to die instead of prolonging his life six months with a super-expensive treatment. They contrasted this with the US system, which would try the treatment as a first option.
The sad thing is despite this fixation, we don't have anything to show for it: usually the first statistic coming up when people compare our system to the socialized ones is that we produce worse outcomes and lower life expectancies.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
PeZook
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13237
Joined: 2002-07-18 06:08pm
Location: Poland

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by PeZook »

Bilbo wrote: Telling other people how to spend their money again huh. Thanks for pointing out how much of a waste it is to point out facts to you Wong. Go back to your wonderful little communist world.
Why yes, it's inherently evil for the government to tell people how to spend their money. Like when they fine polluting enterprises and prohibit trading slaves?

Totally evil. And communist, too. Evimmunist!
Image
JULY 20TH 1969 - The day the entire world was looking up

It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- NEIL ARMSTRONG, MISSION COMMANDER, APOLLO 11

Signature dedicated to the greatest achievement of mankind.

MILDLY DERANGED PHYSICIST does not mind BREAKING the SOUND BARRIER, because it is INSURED. - Simon_Jester considering the problems of hypersonic flight for Team L.A.M.E.
User avatar
Joviwan
Jedi Knight
Posts: 580
Joined: 2007-09-09 11:02pm
Location: Orange frapping county, Californeea

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Joviwan »

Oh, but I have an anecdotal story about socialized healthcare! From Canada!

An old man (Friend's grandpa) was kept alive at 4 Celsius, with a machine to beat his heart, and a machine to do his breathing, and a machine to take care of his lower digestive system, while the family debated on what to do because he showed no sign of brain activity. They kept him alive like this for over a week. You know what paid for it? Socialized healthcare.

What point am I trying to make? Fuck if I know, it's an anecdote.
Image
Drooling Iguana: No, John. You are the liberals.
Phantasee: So extortion is cooler and it promotes job creation!
Ford Prefect: Maybe there can be a twist ending where Vlad shows up for the one on one duel, only to discover that Sun Tzu ignored it and burnt all his crops.
User avatar
KrauserKrauser
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2633
Joined: 2002-12-15 01:49am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by KrauserKrauser »

Well given that the costs are arguably the same between private and public healthcare when considering the time frame for medical care, I don't see the argument for or against the socialization of the health care industry in the case of determining treatment by the number of expected years to live. This would already be done naturally due to longer life = faster burning through of retirement funds for healthcare in a private system, so the public system would just internalyze the problems and would need to plan accordingly.

The macular degeneration things was obviously a stupid mistake and in a private system would have been brought to court by the insurance policy owner and the courts would have determined whether or not the coverage and actions were appropriate. They would have been changed either way, at arguably the same speed.
VRWC : Justice League : SDN Weight Watchers : BOTM : Former AYVB

Resident Magic the Gathering Guru : Recovering MMORPG Addict
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

I used to think like this scheissenkroete. As a result I feel particularly obligated to absolutely shred him.
I did not know socialized medicine meant telling the elderly (basically the ones not rich enough to avoid using Medicare) that they should accept dying based on a financial cost-effective computation.
Actually moron, it does not matter who does it, this already happens. An insurance company is actually worse. Why? Because their purpose-built goal is not to maximize healthcare.

A socialized system is given an amount of money and given the directive to "Maximize the number of people you can give the optimum amount of care". It then uses this money to the best of its ability.

An insurance company takes your money and is has the directive to "Minimize the amount of this money you have to pay out in health care costs and keep the rest for yourself and your shareholders"

Do you see a design difference between these systems?

The socialized system is going to be under cost constraints in what it can do, but it fundamentally wants to help as many people as it can. The insurance company will do everything in its power to weasel out of its contractual obligations and it will usually succeed, forcing the elderly patient into bankruptcy to put a few months or years into their life. Months or years that are often nothing but intractible and constant pain, skyrocketing costs, and the horror of their family watching their loved ones waste away. Trying to get people to accept their inevitable death will go a long way to reducing costs. Moreover it will increase life expectancy and quality of life because resources can then be diverted to helping out the people who can actually benefit from the advancements of modern medicine.
Is this the great equalizing that socialized medicine has bragged to us about for years? Is this where medicine is going?
I hope so.
Where we slow down medical research because it costs too much?
That is a load of bullshit. You obviously have no idea how this research is carried out. Most of the costs of actually developing drugs is shouldered by publicly funded universities and is done on the dimes of charitable donations, and state and federal grants. Why do you think there was such a big problem with limiting federal funds to Stem Cell Research fucktard? Because private companies do not fund medical research. The only place a private company comes in is when it comes to buying the rights to the compounds or treatments. It then goes through clinical trials. The majority of the costs are not due to the clinical trials.

What will this do to a society where the government decide the elderly poor are not worth it financially?
Make everyone, including the elderly better off. I will be blunt. When my grandfather died, death was preferable to the horrific pain he lived through every day. That is one of the things that gave me a degree of solace. He was no longer suffering.
Right now our nation has an average life expectancy. I am sure that if you broke it down that number varies some between the rich and the poor. How much more disparate will those numbers be under a system like this?
They wouldnt be, you idiot. Because everyone would get the same quality of medical care and medical care will focus more on pro-active solutions than it does now. Under the current system most people cannot even go in for a checkup until someone is wrong, so something that could be nipped in the bud if caught early now causes an acute conditions which costs a metric shit-tonne to treat, and still has a higher mortality rate.
This article and the provisions it quotes suggests that the worst fear of socialized medicine may be true. Instead of universal healthcare bringing everyone up to the same level of care, we are going to push everyone down to an arbitrary and cost effective lower level of care.
Except you fucking moron if you look at how socialized healthcare works in the rest of the world, and how this is modeled after the UK system which is one of the better ones IIRC, their healthcare leads to better patient outcomes across the board.
The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.
The reason our healthcare system produces 17% of he gross GDP is because it systematically denies healthcare and makes a profit. Healthcare is treated as a commodity instead of the human right that it actually is.
Really? So having to lose an eye before they give you treatment to save the other eye is an expensive 3 months to live scenario?
Details of this scenario, Chewtoy. Was it a cost issue (because saving an injured eye is often trivially easy) or was it a case of the availability of corneas?
How young does someone have to be to deserve the costs to add a full year to their life?
Look at it the other way, idiot. What do you do if you have limited funds? You can add 1 year to the life of one person, or 10 years to the life of a hundred. A HUGELY disproportionate amount of money in our system is used to add a year of life to a tiny fraction of our population per annum. Money that could easily go to improving primary care (and thus improve life expectancy) for MILLIONS of people. If you want an argument from marginal utility, I just gave you one. Game, set, match.

What about the break in society this will create? Leftists whine their asses off every day that there is a huge disparity in the lives of the rich versus the poor and yet this system could widen that gap. Imagine Donald Trump living a decade longer than you because he can personally afford every possible treatment out there while you can only get what the managers of the government feel is cost-effective?
How is this any different from the way it is now moron? He can already do that. Moreover, socialized healthcare increases life expectancy when applied. So the disparity will be smaller.
Or are you going to balance the system by enforcing these cost effective rules across the board and not allow anyone (even those that can personally afford it) to get treatments outside those determined proper by some federal board?
I wouldnt mind. Then again I also would mind taxing the living shit out of Donald Trump to better fund the system.
Telling other people how to spend their money again huh.
I am sorry asshat, but you dont get to shift the goalposts and make hackneyed utilitarian arguments in one second, and then when beaten switch to wanking off to private property rights. The two are mutually exclusive propositions.
Thanks for pointing out how much of a waste it is to point out facts to you Wong.
I think you have it the other way around scheissenkroete.
Go back to your wonderful little communist world.
I am sorry, but we dont live in the 50s anymore. You dont get to deflect criticism of your ideas by accusing someone of communism.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28846
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Is this the great benefits of socialized medicine?

Post by Broomstick »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Really? So having to lose an eye before they give you treatment to save the other eye is an expensive 3 months to live scenario?
Details of this scenario, Chewtoy. Was it a cost issue (because saving an injured eye is often trivially easy) or was it a case of the availability of corneas? [/quote]
Just for the sake of clarity - the eye condition referenced was macular degeneration, which is not an eye injury and can not be remedied by cornea transplant. Macular degeneration is a condition of the retina that only recently has been treatable at all. There's a whole shitload of issues around it, and I don't care to hijack the thread with them unless people are interested in the details. Suffice to say that without treatment is does lead to total destruction of the retina eventually. It does not always affect both eyes, but typically it does.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
Post Reply