[rollei_list] Re: OT: Health Care Costs

  • From: Thor Legvold <tlegvold@xxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:46:48 +0100

Marc,

your 'facts' are skewed, as is the basic premise of your argument.

Too much Fox news, perhaps? (With apologies to Richard).

12% is not the norm in any of the EU countries except perhaps Portugal and Spain in the late 80's (fishing crisis) or Greece (recent economic shenanigans). The government here get's all nervous anytime it goes over 4.5%, and it's routinely around 3% (essentially the residual from people going from one job to another).

If you have a look at the stats, you'll find that there are a few countries who have problems. In general they're either new member states (often ex-soviet) or one's with longstanding economic problems (ref. above).

For the current numbers:

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&language=en&pcode=teilm020&tableSelection=1&plugin=1

In the US you have up to 20% more than a few places (California, Michegan are around 14% statewide, and over 20% in certain areas), and over 10% nationally. Numbers here:

http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+statistics+US#met =unemployment_rate&idim=state:ST060000:ST260000:ST510000&tdim=true

It seems your aversive to being taxed for community projects. Roads, infrastructure, basic education, defense are all things everyone contributes to for the common good. Many places include basic healthcare in that list, as well as higher education (which is also free here - schools aren't stratified along socioeconomic levels as in the US). I guess as long as you're healthy and are covered, other people's health (esp. those who cannot afford basic coverage in an open market for-profit system) is their own problem, not yours. That's an interesting comment on the ethical and moral (as well as social) gestalt in the US, at least the one you represent. "Me first, everyone else can fend for themselves." I wonder how you view military conscription and military duty. Is it a private matter, or is everyone obligated to fight for what their Gummint tells them is "right"?

Am I correct in that you see no conflict in interest for insurance companies on the one hand to maximize profits, yet on the other pay for potentially very expensive treatments, thus cutting into profits? In other words, are they acting in their customers' best interests (those who need treatment), or their shareholders (those who need their bonus & dividends)?

Otherwise, I note that your word choice reflects a certain devaluation of those you don't agree with; "Obama yo' Mamma", "confiscatory taxes" , etc.

The fact is that taxation in most countries on this side of the pond work on a sliding scale - the more you earn, the more tax you pay (due to the fact that you earn more, and can afford more, still leaving you with a larger spendable income). In most countries there is a limit to how high taxes can be, in some there isn't (!). Those who earn little, pay little. This works up to a point. Over a certain level, people with sizable wealth/income work out strategies to avoid paying taxes (just as they do in the US), i.e. registering multiple levels of companies in offshore tax havens, through holding companies and other methods. Most of the richest people routinely show up in the yearly fortune overview with 0 in income and 0 in savings, strangely enough, while living in multimillion Euro homes, with boats, private planes, etc.

Cheers,
Thor

p.s. as an apropos to Michael Moore's sicko, while it seemed to me to be biased and over the top, the facts themselves, as well as the underlying problem he was trying to create a debate around, were correct. I'm told that there were also several outtakes not in the film, one of which covered much of the public scheme in Norway. Apparently is was viewed by the producers/distributors as too far fetched for the American public to believe was true, and cut from the film :-).


On 21. mars. 2010, at 23.49, Marc James Small wrote:

At 06:29 PM 3/21/2010, Gene Johnson wrote:
I think we're talking about 2 different things. The insurance companies' "cost" runs around 30 cents on the dollar, their profits are some fraction of that. This system is a mess. For-profit healthcare has a lot of built-in problems. Single-payer goverment- run plans would have theirs too, I'm sure, but we have the European systems to look at, and compare to, and from what I've been reading, they are often a lot more efficient in terms of care per dollar.


Every European system is a disaster based on confiscatory taxes for the upper middle classes and the wealthy. To accept the European system, you have to be willing to regard 12% unemployment as the norm. In the US, this has averaged around 5% over the past forty years.

You pays your money and you makes your choice. I prefer the full- employment US system, with its relatively low taxation. Hell, I would improve things with the Fair Tax -- check out <http://www.fairtax.org > and READ the proposal.

Marc



msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!

---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list


---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: