mr6666

Healthcare in America?

487 posts in this topic

We did not have such things. Our healthcare was free and it was worth what it cost.

 

I've received free health care up here since 1968. And the value of it has been immeasurable as far as I'm concerned. Canadians live longer lives than Americans, healthier lives than Americans, happier lives than Americans. Considering we live on the same continent, that's a pretty important distinction.

 

I have nothing to say about Russia or Ukraine or any other of those lagging behind nations - I'll take your word for how bad you say their "socialized medicine" is.

 

But if you think that all nations with socialized medicine, single payer systems and a significant research culture, like Canada and the Scandinavian countries, are worse than in the U.S., you need to start smoking something better.

 

The only reason so many corporations spend money doing research in the U.S. is because they know they'll be able to gouge the system there for maximum (some say obscene) profits after approval.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is typical of soviets/socialists/liberals to detest hard data which contradicts their cherished beliefs. 

Soviets, socialists, and liberals are like apples, oranges and pairs. They don't equate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've received free health care up here since 1968. And the value of it has been immeasurable as far as I'm concerned. 

 

 

Perhaps Canada's healthcare system should address very high level of whimsy in population. It is common for me to see patient files with long history of treatment in Canada and then sudden transfer to United States of America.

 

It must be pure whimsy that person would leave free healthcare of high standard in the middle of their treatment to come to United States of America where they must pay from their own pocket.

 

 

 

a significant research culture, like Canada and the Scandinavian countries, 

 

 

Nearly half of all medical research in world is done in America and 23% of medical research in other Western countries is funded by United States of America's companies. There is in real terms no 'significant research culture' outside United States of America.

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/search/map

http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php

 

I remember well synopsis of medical advancements in one week of perhaps two years ago: University in United States of America had developed new sequencing technique for analysis of gene damage; company in United States of America had developed new method for interpolating data from multiple scans; University in Canada had developed new vitamin-enriched granola bar.

 

 

 

The only reason so many corporations spend money doing research in the U.S. is because they know they'll be able to gouge the system there for maximum (some say obscene) profits after approval.

 

 

I am sorry to say that I have attempted to parse this logic in many different ways but I am unable to find any sense in it. Pharmaceuticals and medical technology are very much International markets. Place of development has no relationship to prices charged in United States of America. 

 

It would be much more profitable for company to develop products in a country with socialized medicine because socialized medicine programs allow prices which recoup investment performed within their country. They could in this way charge far higher prices in that country and then sell also in United States of America at what prices they wish.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soviets, socialists, and liberals are like apples, oranges and pairs. They don't equate.

 

Quality of suit they wear varies. There is no other major differentiating factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be pure whimsy that person would leave free healthcare of hih standard in the middle of their treatment to come to United States of America where they must pay from their own pocket.

The health care arguments are complicated. One hears many stories of Americans who travel to India and Thailand for surgery, because it is more affordable. I have received excellent care under the National Health system whilst visiting the UK, though that system is under duress at the moment. I hear that it works very well for the extremely ill; not as as well as it used to for elective treatment.

 

I've often found the story of the actress Melina Mercouri interesting. She became Minister of Culture in Greece and lobbied to try to get the Elgin Marbles back from the British Museum. Yet when she was extremely ill, she sought treatment in London. Just as she went to England for better treatment, the Elgin Marbles get better treatment there, than they would ever do in Greece.

 

Drug companies, like insurance companies, do not need partisans to argue on their behalf. They are doing very, very well. People buy into the argument that drug prices should be outrageously high to pay for research, in the same deluded way that they argue that corporations must pay lower taxes, to create jobs. There is a difference between honest profit and the pure greed that diminishes society.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quality of suit they wear varies. There is no other major differentiating factor.

 

Some say the same thing about conservatives,  bigots, and racist.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some say the same thing about conservatives,  bigots, and racist.   

Right. The left-wing wants everyone to have health insurance; the right-wing talks about how women's bodies trigger something that prevents pregnancy if raped; disbelieves evolution; and won't accept that climate change is a real problem. That's the difference. Liberals are pretty much where they were in FDR's time. Conservatives are nothing like the conservatives of yesteryear -- they have gone into uncharted, monster raving loony territory.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some say the same thing about conservatives,  bigots, and racist.   

And what do you call someone who posts anti-semetic and anti-Israel posts quite often? some would say that's not much different than the terms you've just used, just as hateful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was that it is silly and frankly immature to artificially group people from different groups as a way of demonizing members of said groups.    This is a tactic used by those that have nothing constructive to say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what do you call someone who posts anti-semetic and anti-Israel posts quite often? some would say that's not much different than the terms you've just used, just as hateful

 

Anti-semetic?     Did you make a spelling error?   Shame on you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drug companies, like insurance companies, do not need partisans to argue on their behalf. 

 

 

Pharmaceutical companies have average profit margin of: 15.95% This is double average profit margin of: 7.84% for all major market sectors. Investment in regional banks at: 22.23%, non-bank financial services at: 34.14% and general real estate at 34.38% would return far greater profits. 

 

I have seen reliable analysis which showed that medicines in United States of America would be approx. 20% of current prices if socialized medicine programs in other countries could not leech and were required to pay fair share of research and development costs. United States of America market may represent only fifteen percent of volume of sales of particular medicine but that fifteen percent must bear 100% of research and development costs.

 

It breaks my heart to see when promising early research is abandoned because investment required to bring drug to market exceeds what could be recouped from United States of America market. It happens very often and many people suffer because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pharmaceutical corporations do it in the U.S. because that's where they have the government and its representatives securely in their pocket. No price interference there, no sir.

 

 

Price which they can charge in United States of America market is irrelevant to country in which development occurred. That is simple fact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pharmaceutical companies have average profit margin of: 15.95% This is double average profit margin of: 7.84% for all major market sectors. Investment in regional banks at: 22.23%, non-bank financial services at: 34.14% and general real estate at 34.38% would return far greater profits. 

 

I have seen reliable analysis which showed that medicines in United States of America would be approx. 20% of current prices if socialized medicine programs in other countries could not leech and were required to pay fair share of research and development costs. United States of America market may represent only fifteen percent of volume of sales of particular medicine but that fifteen percent must bear 100% of research and development costs.

 

It breaks my heart to see when promising early research is abandoned because investment required to bring drug to market exceeds what could be recouped from United States of America market. It happens very often and many people suffer because of it.

 

The sooner the U.S. creates a single payer system and eliminates the grabbing of billions by the unnecessary health insurers, the sooner it and the rest of the world will get on the same page in these matters of health care, medicines and research.

 

Others countries outside the U.S. negotiate pricing with the pharmaceutical companies. U.S. citizens pay more because the U.S. government does not. There are many ways to fund research. Ripping people off doesn't have to be one of them - it just happens to be the American way.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Others countries outside the U.S. negotiate pricing with the pharmaceutical companies. 

 

 

There is no negotiation. They state firmly that price may be direct cost of manufacture plus tiny amount. They refuse to pay cost of research and development performed in other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no negotiation. They state firmly that price may be direct cost of manufacture plus tiny amount. They refuse to pay cost of research and development performed in other countries.

 

Just because we're better at negotiating such terms than the bought-off politicians in the U.S. is no reason for American citizens to be held hostage by such a poorly structured system as what the American healthcare and pharmaceutical corporations insist upon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, Forbes Magazine is not exactly without agenda. The Economist is a moderate/Conservative (in the UK sense) British magazine that tends to present news and statistics accurately, i.e. they do not try to manipulate the market.  Forbes is owned by a man/family with a very definite political agenda, which is reflected in the way it presents news and statistics.

 

Not all drug companies are in the research business. In addition, the frightening spectre of a hedge fund guy buying the copyright to an important medication and raising the price to make a profit is a terrifying reality of the current crazy situation. This man is not interested in using his newly found profits to research new medications -- he wants more money, like all hedge fund managers. A life-saving drug, to him, is no different to a building, or some other commodity that represents an investment, in the case of the drug in question, one that he himself has the power to inflate. That is tragic. 

 

The idea that rich people or corporations pour their profits back into the company, in the form of job creation or, in the case of drug companies, research, is ludicrous and a very thick form of wool that is being pulled over some very gullible eyes.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anti-semetic?     Did you make a spelling error?   Shame on you.  

That will be the day I take a spelling lesson from you. No one in the history of this message board has made more errors in spelling and grammar than you have. I'll just use the excuse you always use, it was a typo LOL

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

........

The only reason so many corporations spend money doing research in the U.S. is because they know they'll be able to gouge the system there for maximum (some say obscene) profits after approval.

 

That I agree with, another thing that is hurting heathcare are people scamming the system. :angry:

 

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/national-medicare-fraud-takedown-results-in-charges-against-243-individuals-for-approximately-712-million-in-false-billing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that this is pointless.

 

I present verifiable facts and quote numbers compiled from government data or independently-certified profit and loss statements.

 

I am met with hyperbole, illogical claims or statements which infer that world should be full of rainbows, lollipops and unicorns and that it is fault solely of conservatives that it is not.

 

 

My last statements concerning this issue:

 

I have forty years experience in healthcare and have worked in or in association with healthcare systems of seven countries. Majority of my duties have been physician support in fields of radiology and oncology. This has exposed me to all significant factors of healthcare. I have seen what works and what does not. 

 

I regularly see oncology patient files which contain long history of treatment in Canada. It is sad to see that so many are near to death because they did not receive proper treatment in timely manner.

 

One significant factor in healthcare costs in United States of America is that socialized medicine programs in other countries leech off work done in United States of America. Money for research and development must come from some source. Public funds carry at all times restrictions and bureaucratic oversight which stifles innovation because of perceived need to avoid waste at any cost. Patients in United States of America must bear full costs of research and development because socialized medicine programs refuse to pay fair share.

 

94.6% of all breakthroughs worldwide in medicine since 1986 have been accomplished through private investment in research. Private investment expects proper return. Any situation which restricts profits restricts investments which restricts research. This is a fact of the world and no amount of simple-minded outrage or namby-pamby "it isn't fair" hand-wringing can change it.
 

A different but significant also factor is that doctors and hospitals in United States of America are held responsible for their actions. Patients under socialized medicine programs have no recourse if they receive substandard treatment or if there is misdiagnosis or if there is complication which could have been avoided if doctors or staff or facilities had met reasonable standards. 

 

Pharmaceutical companies have average profit margin of: 15.95%. Railroads and regional banks have higher profit margins and their profits are more immediate and carry much less risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a nostalgic look back.

 

Remember the good ole days when doctors came to you instead of vice versa? :rolleyes:

 

country-doctor.jpg

 

w-eugene-smith-country-doctor-03.jpg?qua

 

 

The only fear one had going to the hospital was.....

 

20110816-jumboshot.jpg

 

(if there is no back door, I'll make one) ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that this is pointless.

 

I present verifiable facts and quote numbers compiled from government data or independently-certified profit and loss statements.

 

I am met with hyperbole, illogical claims or statements which infer that world should be full of rainbows, lollipops and unicorns and that it is fault solely of conservatives that it is not.

 

 

My last statements concerning this issue:

 

I have forty years experience in healthcare and have worked in or in association with healthcare systems of seven countries. Majority of my duties have been physician support in fields of radiology and oncology. This has exposed me to all significant factors of healthcare. I have seen what works and what does not. 

 

I regularly see oncology patient files which contain long history of treatment in Canada. It is sad to see that so many are near to death because they did not receive proper treatment in timely manner.

 

One significant factor in healthcare costs in United States of America is that socialized medicine programs in other countries leech off work done in United States of America. Money for research and development must come from some source. Public funds carry at all times restrictions and bureaucratic oversight which stifles innovation because of perceived need to avoid waste at any cost. Patients in United States of America must bear full costs of research and development because socialized medicine programs refuse to pay fair share.

 

94.6% of all breakthroughs worldwide in medicine since 1986 have been accomplished through private investment in research. Private investment expects proper return. Any situation which restricts profits restricts investments which restricts research. This is a fact of the world and no amount of simple-minded outrage or namby-pamby "it isn't fair" hand-wringing can change it.
 

A different but significant also factor is that doctors and hospitals in United States of America are held responsible for their actions. Patients under socialized medicine programs have no recourse if they receive substandard treatment or if there is misdiagnosis or if there is complication which could have been avoided if doctors or staff or facilities had met reasonable standards. 

 

Pharmaceutical companies have average profit margin of: 15.95%. Railroads and regional banks have higher profit margins and their profits are more immediate and carry much less risk.

 

You should have realized from the start it was pointless to have a discussion with "Soviets, socialists, and liberals".   :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that this is pointless.

 

I present verifiable facts and quote numbers compiled from government data or independently-certified profit and loss statements.

 

I am met with hyperbole, illogical claims or statements which infer that world should be full of rainbows, lollipops and unicorns and that it is fault solely of conservatives that it is not.

 

 

My last statements concerning this issue:

 

I have forty years experience in healthcare and have worked in or in association with healthcare systems of seven countries. Majority of my duties have been physician support in fields of radiology and oncology. This has exposed me to all significant factors of healthcare. I have seen what works and what does not. 

 

I regularly see oncology patient files which contain long history of treatment in Canada. It is sad to see that so many are near to death because they did not receive proper treatment in timely manner.

 

One significant factor in healthcare costs in United States of America is that socialized medicine programs in other countries leech off work done in United States of America. Money for research and development must come from some source. Public funds carry at all times restrictions and bureaucratic oversight which stifles innovation because of perceived need to avoid waste at any cost. Patients in United States of America must bear full costs of research and development because socialized medicine programs refuse to pay fair share.

 

94.6% of all breakthroughs worldwide in medicine since 1986 have been accomplished through private investment in research. Private investment expects proper return. Any situation which restricts profits restricts investments which restricts research. This is a fact of the world and no amount of simple-minded outrage or namby-pamby "it isn't fair" hand-wringing can change it.
 

A different but significant also factor is that doctors and hospitals in United States of America are held responsible for their actions. Patients under socialized medicine programs have no recourse if they receive substandard treatment or if there is misdiagnosis or if there is complication which could have been avoided if doctors or staff or facilities had met reasonable standards. 

 

Pharmaceutical companies have average profit margin of: 15.95%. Railroads and regional banks have higher profit margins and their profits are more immediate and carry much less risk.

 

Apparently my response was unappreciated by someone, so it got deleted.

 

Oh, well. Suffice it to say that I don't swallow everything you try to insist upon and we'll leave it at that.

 

Hope that isn't too namby-pamby, hand wringing it isn't fair, rainbows, lollipops and unicorns (and I think you said something about simple minded but I can't seem to find it anymore - maybe it was my illogical, hyperbolic imagination, ay) a response. Like I said, the real response was disallowed - I think someone complained that was mean to nurses or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equal opportunity on this board. My post this morning was deleted and it was rather tame. Some sensitive souls here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Healthcare is a complicated subject. I think the American system works pretty well. I'm happy with my insurance and also happy that "Obama Care" extends benefits to many who haven't had insurance. I deplore the fact that hedge fund managers can purchase the copyright for drugs and raise the prices. Anyone who thinks those high prices will contribute to useful new research is deluded. I'm also happy that our legal system allows for huge settlements in the cases of malpractice. It may make things more expensive, but it offers recourse and protection.

 

I have also seen Britain's National Health work wonders for many friends and colleagues who live in the UK. Two friends in particular, who had life-threatending diseases, were given the best treatment which extended their lives for years -- decades, in one case. Top of the line treatment -- all for free. 

 

Soviets have been mentioned, and equated with liberals (LOL). When I began my career in the arts, I worked with many Russians and emigres from Eastern Europe -- refugees from the Soviets (we needed their language skills). They thought that they must go to the other extreme politically, and sought refuge in the most cliched right-wing American ideologies. They thought by so doing, we would think them more American. They had the rather misinformed idea that if Soviet Russia represented the worst ideology, right-wing American ideology must be the best. They didn't seem to remember that the brutality of the Tsarist regime drove people to seek something, which unfortunately was not much better (though in fact, awful as it was, the Soviet regime was probably a little better than the Tsarist for more people).  Russia has had a sad history. My degree is in Theology. I had at least one Jesuit professor who was convinced that the problems in Russia had a theological origin, i.e. that the Russian Orthodox theology emphasizes the divinity but not the humanity of Christ, which is manifest in the lack of charity in that unfortunate country, which even now has to feast on Putin's personality driven exploits. (You don't hear of any Syrian refugees storming to get into Russia, which wouldn't let them in anyway).

 

But back to Americans and healthcare. There is no question in my mind that the people who fear expanded health care and controls on drug companies today are the same people who would have feared Medicare, and Social Security, and Women's Suffrage, and so many other issues that the far right have railed against for centuries. Remember -- Mississippi did not ratify the 19th Amendment granting women's suffrage until 1984. Fortunately the Amendment was ratified by enough states in 1920, or women in the South would probably still not have the vote.

 

Get with the program -- progress is on the march. 

Edited by Swithin
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us