Posted by Anon at 8:59pm Jul 16 '09Four, I didn't make that analogy to show you that cell phones and medical technology are apples and apples. Thanks for pointing out the ways in which they are different, but it really just served to broadcast to me that you aren't even trying to hear anything but that which comes from the choir.
Ha! Yes, I keep forgetting that anyone that isn't supporting what Four supports can't possibly be a thoughtful person, they're just bound by their rigid little ideology. Yet, Four, who supports more government just about everywhere, is being a high-minded free thinker when he supports more government in health care!
lol.
But what I find really really interesting is this:
Oh really, you mean like food and exercise? People routinely live to 80 or even 100 with no medical care. They just have good genes and usually very good life practices. For those with bad genes and bad lifestyles the end comes sooner and all advanced care does is prolong it a bit at great expense.
And lets not forget the impact that a healthy economic does for life expectancy. In 1900 the average life expectancy for a newborn was 50 years. The fact that we've added 27 years with over 100 in advances in technology seems like a bit of a letdown. I'd think that medication significantly reducing high blood pressure would do that in itself.
But you know what the average life expectancy was in India as recently as the 50's? 32 years. You know what it is in Afghanistan right now? 42 years.
You think the difference comes down to preventive care? You think Obama could fix their problems? Nope.. Even no wars and a stable government wouldn't help much, because being impoverished is what damages health the most.
Think about it, most of the people that founded this country back in the late 1700's live to be 70 or 80. Not because they had access to advanced treatments, you could get better care from a EMT with no equipment today. It was because they were wealthy and lived well.
So when you talk about "essential service like health care" to which there apparently is no equivalent, don't forget food. You can live to 100 with no medical care ever, but you can't live more than a few week without nutrition. Yet we seem okay with trusting our primary food mechanism to the scary market. Sure the government involves themselves, but nobody ever thinks they do any good at it.
If the market is so scary and evil then how come we always seems to provide an excess of whatever it is that we want? Cheaper surplus of cell phones? Check. 24 hour entertainment? Check. Reliable and cheap vehicles? Check. Computers, flash drives, wireless accessories, etc., etc.? Check. Fast food, junk food, energy drinks, strange pills with unrealistic promises? Check.
And the list goes on forever.
What about the areas that the government manages? How are those doing? Let's see:
Energy - screwed up and outdated
Military - outdated vision and highly overpriced
Education - most expensive in the world and also a laughingstock
Retirement benefits - spent all our reserves and in an impossible situation
Roads and Bridges - Ha! Don't make me choke up my milk!
Money Supply - Weeps
But no, you're right Four. We really need to let the government control this. It would only be consistent if we let them fuck up more of the most important things in our society.
That which can be mass-produced and sold in stores or is non-essential to life and health, is best-served by the free market model. Most medical technology does not fit that model, and trying to shoehorn it in due to ideological concerns harms us all.
Ha! Yes, I keep forgetting that anyone that isn't supporting what Four supports can't possibly be a thoughtful person, they're just bound by their rigid little ideology. Yet, Four, who supports more government just about everywhere, is being a high-minded free thinker when he supports more government in health care!
lol.
But what I find really really interesting is this:
That which can be mass-produced and sold in stores or is non-essential to life and health, is best-served by the free market model.
Oh really, you mean like food and exercise? People routinely live to 80 or even 100 with no medical care. They just have good genes and usually very good life practices. For those with bad genes and bad lifestyles the end comes sooner and all advanced care does is prolong it a bit at great expense.
And lets not forget the impact that a healthy economic does for life expectancy. In 1900 the average life expectancy for a newborn was 50 years. The fact that we've added 27 years with over 100 in advances in technology seems like a bit of a letdown. I'd think that medication significantly reducing high blood pressure would do that in itself.
But you know what the average life expectancy was in India as recently as the 50's? 32 years. You know what it is in Afghanistan right now? 42 years.
You think the difference comes down to preventive care? You think Obama could fix their problems? Nope.. Even no wars and a stable government wouldn't help much, because being impoverished is what damages health the most.
Think about it, most of the people that founded this country back in the late 1700's live to be 70 or 80. Not because they had access to advanced treatments, you could get better care from a EMT with no equipment today. It was because they were wealthy and lived well.
So when you talk about "essential service like health care" to which there apparently is no equivalent, don't forget food. You can live to 100 with no medical care ever, but you can't live more than a few week without nutrition. Yet we seem okay with trusting our primary food mechanism to the scary market. Sure the government involves themselves, but nobody ever thinks they do any good at it.
If the market is so scary and evil then how come we always seems to provide an excess of whatever it is that we want? Cheaper surplus of cell phones? Check. 24 hour entertainment? Check. Reliable and cheap vehicles? Check. Computers, flash drives, wireless accessories, etc., etc.? Check. Fast food, junk food, energy drinks, strange pills with unrealistic promises? Check.
And the list goes on forever.
What about the areas that the government manages? How are those doing? Let's see:
Energy - screwed up and outdated
Military - outdated vision and highly overpriced
Education - most expensive in the world and also a laughingstock
Retirement benefits - spent all our reserves and in an impossible situation
Roads and Bridges - Ha! Don't make me choke up my milk!
Money Supply - Weeps
But no, you're right Four. We really need to let the government control this. It would only be consistent if we let them fuck up more of the most important things in our society.
Why am I not surprised? - Anon