Healthcare & rationing

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:13 pm

Marijuana and lung cancer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJmQ16cGBHU

Donald Tashkin was very anti-marijuana earlier in his career so he is reporting against interest. Thus quite credible.

Other studies have shown that marijuana may protect tobacco smokers against lung cancer. Very plausible since marijuana has good anti-tumor properties.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 193338.htm

It really irks me that people repeat government propaganda (lots of government jobs depend on the drug war) without checking it out.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:26 pm

Right wing people are into "law and order", not "everyone for himself".

Ah yes. "Law and order." The cry of fascists everywhere.

Libertarians believe in ordered liberty.

Conservatives are into something else.

We need law and order. Without law and order our nation cannot survive. Elect us and we shall restore law and order.

http://www.conservativeforum.org/authquot.asp?ID=453

Basically there are two types of statists. The leftist do not believe in trusting other citizens economically. Statists of the right do not believe in trusting people to run their own private lives. All believe in the power of the state to get their desired results.

I'm more with George Washington:

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." Geo. Washington

and Thomas Jefferson:

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson

and

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." -- Thomas Jefferson

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:33 pm

They may have found a voice in some of the ("rich people are always right") republicans in the US,

You have been misinformed. The Republicans are supported in the main by small donors. The Democrats are more the party of large donors. Republicans are (generally) the party of small business. Democrats are the party of trial lawyers and big business.

Also the Republicans (in general) favor economic freedom while wishing to restrict personal liberty. I'm working on the second part of that equation.

My hope is to turn the Republicans into the "leave us alone" party.

It amazes me that so many believe that which ain't so.

The Democrats haven't been a Jeffersonian Party since the Civil War which was instigated for the most part by the large land holders (the rich) of the South. Following that war the KKK served as the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party. Their aim was to drive the Republicans out of the South. You can look it up.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:53 pm

I didn't see those, but the MSM is overwhelmingly leftist so most likely they are giving only one side of the story. Generally what you find in these cases is that the insured lied about their medical condition.

People have some strange ideas about what "insurance" is. You can't buy fire insurance when your house is on fire, you can't buy flood insurance when your house is underwater, you can't buy life insurance on your deathbed, and you can't place a bet in Vegas on last week's NFL games, all for the same reason. Yet people expect to health insurance to work differently.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 455_2.html

I think it is you sir that does not understand the point of having an insurance. I pay an insurance company to take a risk that I dont want to take. If they change the conditions so they dont have any risk at all, what they are doing is not a business, it is a fraud.

I guess you missed the part of my post Msimon, where I said that I want to leave out marijuana and just talk about Heroin and Kokain. Especially Heroin, since it has a high chance of getting you addicted after the first time.
I see those heroin addicts every day here. 14 year old girls too. Makes me want to puke!

On the twins discussion (that is simply from wikipedia, there was a more recent study that gave even more extreme numbers, I will try to find it again):
Evidence suggests that family environmental factors may have an effect upon childhood IQ, accounting for up to a quarter of the variance. On the other hand, by late adolescence this correlation disappears, such that adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers.[16]

Moreover, adoption studies indicate that, by adulthood, adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers (IQ correlation near zero), while full siblings show an IQ correlation of 0.6. Twin studies reinforce this pattern: monozygotic (identical) twins raised separately are highly similar in IQ (0.86), more so than dizygotic (fraternal) twins raised together (0.6) and much more than adoptive siblings (~0.0).

Before 1914 heroin was over the counter in most of the USA.

Before 1914 they were probably still doing bloodletting in the USA too.

Libertarians are not anarchists. Libertarians believe in limited government.

From what I have heard you guys would liberalize child molestation "if it is with the consent of the child". Disgusting.

The essential principle of libertarianism is that government's main legitimate function is to secure our liberties.

Liberties that are then dictated by those that have power and are not part of the government. E.g. big corporations, monopolies, insurance companies, etc

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:16 pm

I also want to add that with the more we learn about the human genome, the bigger the chance will get that insurance companies will want a gene test before they insure you (or wont insure you). I see the number of uninsured people in the US go up.

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:18 pm

I think it is you sir that does not understand the point of having an insurance. I pay an insurance company to take a risk that I dont want to take. If they change the conditions so they dont have any risk at all, what they are doing is not a business, it is a fraud.

Of course they have a risk. You're insuring against the risk you'll develop a need for medical care. For God's sake, did you think about that statement at all before you wrote it?

From what I have heard you guys would liberalize child molestation "if it is with the consent of the child". Disgusting.

Children don't have power of consent. I don't know what kind of people you're hanging out with there in Europe, but over here libertarians aren't in favor of pedophilia. Also: WTF?!?!

Liberties that are then dictated by those that have power and are not part of the government. E.g. big corporations, monopolies, insurance companies, etc

No, those are all controlled by the government. Try to pay attention: the gov't's purpose is to secure our liberties, from whoever threatens them.

Before 1914 they were probably still doing bloodletting in the USA too.

We already had the highest living standards and best medical care in the world. 100 years later, not much has changed.

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:21 pm

I also want to add that with the more we learn about the human genome, the bigger the chance will get that insurance companies will want a gene test before they insure you (or wont insure you).

Shrug. Maybe it's more fair to make people with good genes foot the bill for those with poor genes. The government will decide. But let's not pretend all these things don't have costs.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:26 pm

Of course they have a risk. You're insuring against the risk you'll develop a need for medical care. For God's sake, did you think about that statement at all before you wrote it?

Did you really try to understand my sentence? No you did not. I meant that if they are trying everything so they never have to pay (or almost never), then this cant be a fair trade.
I mean this starts with bullshit like "an act of god" (there is no god) and goes on to preexisting conditions and what else.
Sometimes it seems to me that the insured person has a higher risk of the insurance company not paying, than the insurance company has of having to pay. That cant be the point of having insurance. I have an insurance so I dont have to worry. If I still have to worry, it kinda defeats the purpose of insurance.

We already had the highest living standards and best medical care in the world. 100 years later, not much has changed.

Ahahahaha. You dont know yor own history, do you? Compared to Europe, the US was a developing country back then.
It was only after the destruction and suffering of two world wars and a devastating flu outbreak that the US managed to catch up, even surpass Europe.

Shrug. Maybe it's more fair to make people with good genes foot the bill for those with poor genes. The government will decide. But let's not pretend all these things don't have costs.

Noone has purely good genes. If they want to find something, they will about everyone. The thing is that they might argue that this was a preexisting condition that you did not even know about (unless you had a gene test), or they will require a gene test from you before you get insurance. But hey, if it is to save THEM money, I guess it is OK for you.
Got stocks in insurance?

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:48 pm

Ahahahaha. You dont know yor own history, do you? Compared to Europe, the US was a developing country back then.
It was only after the destruction and suffering of two world wars and a devastating flu outbreak that the US managed to catch up, even surpass Europe.

You have NO IDEA what you're talking about. Here's a chart of GDP per capita as of 1900. Europe is way behind the U.S. and Australia.

# 1 New Zealand: $4,320.00
# 2 Australia: $4,299.00
# 3 United States: $4,096.00
# 4 Belgium: $3,652.00
# 5 Netherlands: $3,533.00
# 6 Switzerland: $3,531.00
# 7 Germany: $3,134.00
# 8 Denmark: $2,902.00
# 9 Austria: $2,901.00
# 10 France: $2,849.00

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_g ... apita-1900

A "developing country??!" My God, the ignorance. We surpassed Europe in the 1800s due to our innovation and free markets. It had nothing to do with the Continent's wretched wars.

How do you think we pioneered the first commerical steamboats and etc?

Did you really try to understand my sentence? No you did not

It didn't make any sense. Seriously, think before you write something like "If they change the conditions so they dont have any risk at all." Otherwise this is like debating someone in grade school.

FYI, "acts of God" is a legal term for indemnity due to unforeseeable circumstances outside of human control. I can't see what application it has to health insurance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_God

Sometimes it seems to me that the insured person has a higher risk of the insurance company not paying, than the insurance company has of having to pay.

I don't even know how to respond to something so out of touch with reality.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, American physicians are very much against socialist health care:

Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:38 am

Heroin does not get you addicted after the first try.

That is pure government propaganda. It takes about 6 months of steady use.

Even then - only about 1 out of 10 who try heroin get addicted and then factor in that less than 10% of the population tries heroin - ever - and you pretty much have a non-problem.

You can read all about it in the Consumer Reports link above.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -H. L. Mencken

http://www.quoteland.com/author.asp?AUTHOR_ID=77

BTW the Swiss are pretty smart about heroin. Read up on how they handle it these days. And it was voted on and passed by 60+%.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:50 am

The Libertarian View of Government:

“The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods.” - H. L. Mencken

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:04 am

From what I have heard you guys would liberalize child molestation "if it is with the consent of the child". Disgusting.

From what I hear European conservatives would practice cannibalism. Without the consent of the forthcoming meal.

Well yes. I suppose Americans are rather primitive. As long ago as 1914 even. However, it is my understanding that your Austrian ancestors were mass murdering undesirables as late as 1945. And the Americans, Canadians, Ozzies, and Brits had to murder rather a lot of you savages before you would give up those vile practices. Thus the European attitude of moral superiority.

BTW are you aware that even with heroin prohibition you are following the American lead? Look up "The Single Convention Treaty".

And you are no doubt aware that the Swiss legalized heroin without ill effects. In fact it worked so well they voted in favor of it twice. The second time the measure won with 60+% of the vote. No doubt the Swiss are really primitive.

You are also aware that the Portuguese decriminalized all drugs (possession) in 2001 and the results have been positive. You can look it up.

Of course if you read my Consumer Reports link you would know fear of heroin is all superstition.

TallDave · Post by **TallDave** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:36 am

Noone has purely good genes. If they want to find something, they will about everyone

Then everyone will have the same risks and it won't matter. What are they going to do, refuse to sell insurance to anyone?

Again, you clearly do not understand the purpose of insurance. Buying insurance after finding you have a risky gene is like buying fire insurance after finding a pool of gasoline under your house: it changes the risks. Would you sell life insurance to someone on their deathbed? Are you evil if you don't?

Now maybe the gov't will decide your coverage/premium cannot be affected by your genes. I'm agnostic on the issue. But if not, a free market would allow you to buy "gene insurance."

If you knew anything about finance and risk management, you would recognize these are simply hedge contracts.

But hey, if it is to save THEM money, I guess it is OK for you.
Got stocks in insurance?

No, I just don't want vastly higher premiums.

You don't seem to understand how insurance companies work, either. A premium is based on expected costs; actuaries spend HUGE amounts of efforts figuring out likely costs and risks. If the costs are higher, the premium is higher. They don't deny people coverage to make more money (in fact, insurance companies make most of their money on the float, not the difference between premium and cost), they deny people coverage because if they cover things that the contract isn't supposed to cover, the premium doesn't match the costs and all that actuarial effort is wasted; they would have to charge much higher premiums to cover pre-existing conditions.

But it gets worse, much worse. If you have a system where all pre-existing conditions must be covered, insurance becomes useless because no one has any incentive to buy insurance until they develop an expensive illness (why pay for it till you need it?)-- and once they do, the insurance will cost about as much as their illness anyway because only people with expensive illnesses are buying it. This is basic economics. You can't hedge against an outcome that's already known.

This is why, if the gov't forces insurers to cover everyone regardless of pre-existing conditions, they must also force everyone to buy insurance. Otherwise the few people who are using a lot of healthcare drive up the premiums to the point no rational actor who isn't expensively sick would buy it. But coercion is difficult. So you might as well just tax everyone and have the gov't pay.

And that's how countries end up in the single-payer hole, with vastly inferior rationed care that's as "free" as the bread in Soviet shops.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:16 am

Well yes. I suppose Americans are rather primitive. As long ago as 1914 even. However, it is my understanding that your Austrian ancestors were mass murdering undesirables as late as 1945. And the Americans, Canadians, Ozzies, and Brits had to murder rather a lot of you savages before you would give up those vile practices. Thus the European attitude of moral superiority.

Well, the Americans Canadians and especially the Ozzies had enough dirt on their stick as well, especially when we are talking about savages, arent we? We dont need to talk about discrimination of african americans long after 1945 either, do we? So we better let that go.
Arround 1900 most of the US was still wild west, with a few larger settlements and very few bigger towns inbetween. There was barely any infrastructure outside the big cities and definitely not better medical treatment than in Europe. This is ridiculous. Heck your roads are still crap compared to ours. You still have free hanging power lines and transformers hanging freely arround. We have not had that since the 1930ies or so. In some rural areas in the US you still have to have your own power supply and water supply because you have no connection to the local sewage, water and electrical grid. Isnt it so?
In Austria you can go out somewhere into the highest mountains and far away from everywhere and people have power and water and sewers.

What are they going to do, refuse to sell insurance to anyone?

No, but they will refuse you coverage for illnesses caused by said gene mutations or they will ask exactly those vastly higher premiums from you that you are so affraid of.

This is why, if the gov't forces insurers to cover everyone regardless of pre-existing conditions, they must also force everyone to buy insurance. Otherwise the few people who are using a lot of healthcare drive up the premiums to the point no rational actor who isn't expensively sick would buy it.

Most people here are quite happy with our system. Certain professional groups (e.g. lawyers) are allowed to make use of private alternatives. They do that to about 60% actually. The government might extend this program to other professions, but I dont know when. Private insurance companies have to abide to the same rules that Obama proposed for US insurance companies and they have the competition from the government. Pretty much every larger insurance company here offers the private option to lawyers. None of them has files bankrupthy.

Still many people stay with the "old, public system" since the differences are not that big (though the privates are a little cheaper and offer more flexibility in what you want covered, etc). Generally Austrians are happy with our system though. Personally, I am actually rather critical of it, because not everyone can have a private alternative and because they are spending to much money on unnecessary treatments (e.g. 8 children are enough, you dont have to pay IV fertilization for a turkish woman, so she can have a 9th).
This ruthless spending is the only thing driving up our cost. Still it is working OKishly despite all the abuse ( though the government needs to add smaller financial support injections every now and then).
Still according to your calculation, everybody here should be dieing at the age of 10 and be paying much more than people in the US do. Neither is the case.

Heroin does not get you addicted after the first try.
That is pure government propaganda. It takes about 6 months of steady use.

Most Heroin addicts will tell you otherwise.

BTW the Swiss are pretty smart about heroin.

Yeah, have you been there lately? Their left wing did a pretty good job at ruining the country.
The only reason why they are still affloat is because of their bank laws and because of all the Nazi gold they have been sitting on since WW2

Meanwhile, back in the real world, American physicians are very much against socialist health care:

This poll says otherwise:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =112818960

You don't seem to understand how insurance companies work, either.

I very well do, my mother is working at one, actually. They wont give me insurance either (you can buy additional private health insurance here, which gives you some advantages, not in the quality of treatments, but rooms with a single bed, etc). Geee, I wonder why?
As any private company, insurance companies want to maximize profits. Denying coverage for a condition increases their profit, because they took the persons money and still dont have to pay for his treatment. That means more profit.
Insurance companies are always making good money. Very few are closing. At least here they are doing pretty well, despite the financial crisis. I wonder why that is?
Also, not all preexisting conditions mean that the insurance company would ever have to pay for anything. E.g. it is highly unlikely that I will ever have any problems again before very old age. According to my doctors, I have about the same chance as someone who is smoking or someone who is slightly overweight (not obese).
Seeing smokers here live until the age of 90 and older without heart problems, I think I will fare pretty well.
Now I dont see insurance companies deny insurance to someone who is fat (or even obese). That is probably because they would be sued for discrimination then. They would also loose a lot of customers. But who knows, maybe they will do that one day.
Maybe then more of you will wake up. Maybe not.

Also in the link I had posted earlier, they denied coverage to a woman who simply had a crooked nose. That from Blue Cross Blue Shield, who is supposedly among the best private health insurers in the US. I find this rather amusing, really.

And that's how countries end up in the single-payer hole, with vastly inferior rationed care that's as "free" as the bread in Soviet shops.

Our care is not inferior and it is not rationed. I doubt that any private insurance company in the US would pay for a an in vitro fertilization. Would they?
Our system here would definitely not deny someone coverage because of their deviated septum.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:36 am

Skipjack,

And with your rapidly aging population due to lower birth rates how much longer can you maintain your free lunch?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Austria

In the USA with its relatively smaller (per capita) government system and decent birth rates we are running out of government ability to pay for government care.

I'd like to know how Austria with its vastly lower birth rate plans to maintain health care socialism.