George Carlin on Education and the owners of America

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I think the key is to ask yourself if something is a necessity for a country's citizens.If it is a necessity.then it's much cheaper for the Government to do it than the private sector.Look at the oil companies.They are charging the American People 10 billion a quarter(often) in profit. Even if the government kept gas prices high(to reduce consumption) it could use those billions for many necessary things(healthcare,education,etc.) the government workers(in the long run..with decent pensions etc. that private industry won't pay) cost more,but people aren't noticing that you cut out the business owners who isn't around to pocket billions.I am talking about necessary services and products.Not anything that could be considered optional....fire,police,military,education,healthc are,energy(oil etc./solar/agri-fuels.)

[timmgirvan]

Diogenes is still lookin.......

[skippy3481]

More people should have healthcare, but the government should not run it. Name one country where socialized medicine has ever worked? I won't give you much time beacause there isen't one. Thats why canadians stream across the border to get medical help if something really goes wrong. Just ask yourself one question, If you had rare form of cancer..... what country would you seek medical treatment in?

[Mortimer]

The country nearest the Tropic of Cancer.








( I believe it's him....right? )

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

The country nearest the Tropic of Cancer.








( I believe it's him....right? )

oh boy..

[Mortimer]

ror!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

More people should have healthcare, but the government should not run it. Name one country where socialized medicine has ever worked? I won't give you much time beacause there isen't one. Thats why canadians stream across the border to get medical help if something really goes wrong. Just ask yourself one question, If you had rare form of cancer..... what country would you seek medical treatment in?

As a country,we spend more on healthcare than those countries with socialized medicine.They underfund it(which is what politicians do to programs they don't agree with.)If you don't fund it properly,then of course it isn't gunna be satisfying .To answer your question,if I could get treated anywhere I want,it would be Germany,Switzerland,or Scandinavia.I don't know where the idea comes from that says it's more efficient to pay a middleman huge profits for services to citizens.It doesn't make any sense.It's stupid.If you ever just looked at what you're talking about,you would see that it's cheaper to provide a service if you aren't trying to make a billionaire a billion more dollars. Simply look at PGRDN'S school district.They are out to do what? Make profit? No,they are there to provide a service.Nobody is getting rich off that school district.If it was a for profit school district,then they would have worse healthcare for teachers,and worse pensions for them(if any.) That's how they would afford to pay some guy a 10 mil a year for owning it.Well,just ask PGRDN why he doesn't teach at a private school.

[Mortimer]

All FAR from the Tropic of Cancer.

[skippy3481]

Scuds, how then, do we raise enough funds to properly fund it?

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

Scuds, how then, do we raise enough funds to properly fund it?

Bust out the teachers retirement stash..

[Mortimer]

nyuk nyuk nyuk

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

Scuds, how then, do we raise enough funds to properly fund it?

good question. the only thing the govt seems to know how to fund properly is the military. certainly not social security, which is essentially a pathetic version of a pyramid scheme--and plenty of people getting SS disability who actually aren't disabled.. medicare, medicaid, both are full of fraud and waste. oh yeah, i can see our health care going in the right direction if the feds took over.

most of those services should be provided by the states, the fed govt is too bloated, too wasteful and is too far away geographically to handle many of these areas for it's citizens. if each state took care of these services, we'd all be better off.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by Danzig

good question. the only thing the govt seems to know how to fund properly is the military. certainly not social security, which is essentially a pathetic version of a pyramid scheme--and plenty of people getting SS disability who actually aren't disabled.. medicare, medicaid, both are full of fraud and waste. oh yeah, i can see our health care going in the right direction if the feds took over.

most of those services should be provided by the states, the fed govt is too bloated, too wasteful and is too far away geographically to handle many of these areas for it's citizens. if each state took care of these services, we'd all be better off.

Ohio's WComp. invested in rare coins.






God it was a great scam!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

Scuds, how then, do we raise enough funds to properly fund it?

We are already spending more than enough on healthcare.It's not like more money needs to go in to fund it.We just need to get lawyers,and insurance companies' hands out of our healthcare money.We have the funds,but we piss it away by giving it to these 2 groups.You would rather do that then have the Gov't run it,and so we will continue to have poor healthcare in this country.

[Danzig]

they need to cap lawsuits. people need to quit treating accidents and such as winning the lottery.
i don't know how many people have already told us to get a lawyer because of my daughters wreck. no injury or anything. only thing i want is for the guy to be charged with reckless driving. what do i need a lawyer for?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

We are already spending more than enough on healthcare.It's not like more money needs to go in to fund it.We just need to get lawyers,and insurance companies' hands out of our healthcare money.We have the funds,but we piss it away by giving it to these 2 groups.You would rather do that then have the Gov't run it,and so we will continue to have poor healthcare in this country.

Lawyers and ins companies have, in the long view, have little to do with the cost of health care. This is the rhetoric of politicians who every 3-4 years say they can solve HC costs by "taking on" these two groups (plus pharma) and making things more efficient." If you made medical lawyers and ins companies non-profit, you'd have a modest one-time drop in costs, but the rate of medical inflation would be unchanged.

Costs are high here for two reasons.

1. The US is where the vast majority of research and innovation take place. That is costly. It takes place here because 55% of health care cost is borne privately (gov't programs mae up 45%). You just do not get the level of R&D in other nations as we have here becuase there is no $$ for it. People complain that the pay $1 for a Crestor pill that costs $.01 to make. This ignores the fact that the while that pill they took may have cost $.01, the FIRST Crestor pill cost $100 million.

2. In the US, we spend FAR greater amounts on treating people with advanced disease and illness. 97% of our HC $$'s go to treating 50% of our population. 25% goes to treating our sickest 1%. It's much more likely that people in the US have access to the most advanced and costly treatments than anywhere else.

This is why it costs so much here... Innovation and the willingness to make advanced/costly treatments available widely. Both occure because of private funding and our willingness (so far) to pay for it.

Until you hear real conversation about reducing innovation and making advanced treatment availablilty subject to cost/benefit type analysis, you won't have any basis for substaintial change.

Whether any of this is good/bad/etc,... is your call. It is pretty sad that despite spending more per acpita on HC than any other nation, we are no healthier than many nations.

KAiser non-profit has some good white papers. kff.org.