When I saw the notification that you replied, was fully expecting a Bernie heart attack pun lol. Still a good reply though!
A Bernie/Trump debate and Yang/Pence debate preceded by an IQ test that would be displayed on TV after the debate was over would be mana from heaven.
Well firstly, my comparison was Australia, which is more similar to the USA then europe for some obvious reasons (a new country of immagrants, very advanced tech, more similar free and self indulgance attitude like USA) IMO. Secondly, I do appreciate the experience you have behind your comments on living in both USA and europe, but I find you too often rely on something which is anecdotal in its nature to dissmiss statistically factual problems. Most of your post on your experience comes back to your conclusion that you've lived in both places, and you find the US to be best, which perfectly fine as it very likely is best for you. This doesn't however, dimiss or excuse the fact that we have major problems with our life expectancy and healthcare, you personally may not have problems with your healthcare (and hopefully life expectancy) in the US, many others do. If we use personal experience, I have a personal problem with our healthcare system, I have a personal problem with our life expectancy, and I have a personal problem with our infant mortality rate. Whatver the USA's problem may be (and of course it's a compounding affect of many, many failures within our country) it NEEDS to be addressed in a major way. Within our homes, our schools, our churches, our government, whatever and wherever it may be, the US needs a "war" on our lack of healthcare, a "war" on our declining life expectancy, whether the solutions be complicated or not.
If Biden was sure he could maintain the African-American vote, that actually would be a pretty solid ticket as it would cover a lot of bases for the Dems.
I don't deserve the line that is regurgitated for conservatives who don't want universal healthcare. I do want single payer. But I also admit no system can afford our "climb every mountain" approach to people who are very and sometimes terminally sick. I know via friends in the 30+ countries that their better outcomes are not achieved by sparing any expense once someone has cancer, for instance. Part of the longer lifespans come from better lifestyle and less stress. And preventative care, reasonable care, sure. But gene therapies for stage 4 cancer? I am betting no. 20 days in a medically induced coma to recover from a bad stroke? I am betting no.
I'm not using any line for conservatives, it wasn't a line I pulled form anywhere, I checked personally the number of countries with a higher life expectancies, I didn't check, however how many had universal coverage out of those countries because I already knew it was all of them. Perhaps we don't have much in disagreement, when I was originally responding I thought ya'll we're angling at universal coverage being unrealistic due to the level of care we have available, which you say you're for universal coverage (and even single payer), but you are also saying some levels of care are too expensive and should be... barred? I'm not sure. And do all 30 of those countries have high level, just cutting edge tech? No, but some, probably over half, legitametley do. Japan, Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand, Norway, Iceland, Sweden and others have high cancer survival rates, have the cutting edge tech, some of those countries are leaders in survival rates for certain types of cancers, and all have universal healthcare coverage. How is it done for them? Like I mentioned earlier, it just personally hurt to see people writing off something I wish we'd all have a passion to strive for, because our people deserve it. Maybe we mostly agree, on everybody deserving basic level healthcare at least, and perhaps our life expectancy being shameful.
Wait, what? What's wrong with Gene therapies for stage 4 cancer? What's wrong with staying in a medically induced coma for weeks? What's wrong with being on a breathing machine for 18 years! End of life care or quality till the end of life is important. Idiots call it the death penalty. But I see that as education more than denial. I bet if you do the proper job of educating, of impacting the culture, the society, you can achieve both - high-quality life toward the end and less needless medical induced trauma and pain for the individual and their family and friends - aka cost saving. Denial of such, however, has negative consequences of both unmet needs for those that insisted on that type of care (and I would think because they aren't fully aware of the impact, but who knows, maybe they are) and of advancement in medicine for the need of such care. I don't mind at all we spend some portion of our wealth to do both, balanced by a need for all. I think we shouldn't have such a scarcity mindset - we should instead push for creative way of meeting our needs.
you’re not even reading what I’m writing, which is honestly kind of unusual for you. But whatever. Peace.
Then I'm honestly misinterpreting your point I guess. I wouldn't strawman on these topics, honest. My question to this was, you want a single-payer/universal coverage system, let's say we get exactly that.... what happens to those who need our "climb every mountain" approach if you are saying you also believe no system could afford it? Do we not provide some levels of advanced, or extreme care within our universal system? I honestly don't know what your opinion on this is. Then you posted And to be more clear, I agree that the better life expectancies and perhaps some health outcomes play a large part in the diet and lifestyle of the citizens in some of these countries (especially Japan, Spain, Italy) but as you noted, basic healthcare and better preventative care also likely play major roles as well. America can vastly improve in both of these areas, we have terrible diets, lifestyles, and many don't get access to basic and preventative care, this is the core of topic in many ways, I don't think we disagree here. This is what confused me. Firstly gene therapy is only in clinical trials right now correct? We're not the only country doing them, Italy, China. Israel, Spain, Norway, South Korea, Finland and Sweden, Austria, Singapore, New Zealand, and Denmark have all had or have ongoing gene therapy clinical trials as well. As for a 20 days medically induced coma, those are of course very rare, I can't find numbers on that, but I'm fairly certain that the USA isn't the only place in the world capable of doing it. I don't think your point was to be overly focused on gene therapy or medically induced comas, but to say the USA has very advanced care available, which is expensive in nature. The point I was making when naming a handful of countries, is that we're not the only country with highly advanced care (or extreme care as you put). Now, of course, the USA is a powerhouse in new advanced tech, I'm not downplaying that, my point was it certainly isn't the only one. UK, Japan, France, Australia, Canada and many more countries also have world-class, cutting edge, "extreme" care or extreme end of life care, yet are all capable of delivering these options to their citizens, within their universal healthcare systems, WHILE also having life expectancies much higher than the USA. Hopefully, I responded more to what you posted this time around or hopefully, I'm at least being more clear on where I'm coming from if I wasn't before.
Thanks much. Sorry if you felt like you needed to do so much lifting, but I appreciate it. We're largely on the same page. I think there's just not enough money, in any system, to, for example, go to incredible lengths to save people in their 70's and 80's. My understanding (could be wrong) is that a hospice path is embraced earlier in a lot of the universal systems. Yeah, I think my examples sucked. I do know some northern Europeans who have pursued their own private insurance, on top of the government provided medical care, that unlocks a sort of "cheat code" to faster care and more expensive care. This is what they tell me. Here's an example from a guy in Norway who really needed back surgery. He was told to basically wait a year and could not get a second opinion, and he was in basic agony waiting for that surgery. by purchasing private insurance that would kick in more $, his options increased and he was able to get the surgery sooner, and, (he believes), with a better option of surgeon. I have similar stories from the UK. I've been meaning to read the following book. Like you, I care about these comparisons around the world, but I want to be better informed! My basic point is that, yes, other healthcare systems can offer advanced techniques for sure, and with their system, they can probably do so at a lower price (avoiding the US R&D carried costs, for example), BUT as far as I understand it, you are more likely to get the advanced techniques if it could provide you many years of productive, comfortable life, versus if you needed such techniques in your 70's or 80's. I could be wrong about that point. But whatever happens, I do think America is slightly unhealthy about how old age is supposed to work. (Said the guy who ruined his avatar to look e-younger.) I really love the Atul Gawande piece "Letting Go" about the great good of hospice -- that resonated with me, and I saw it up close with an elderly relative who opted not to go for aggressive cancer treatments with an advanced and fast-spreading type of cancer. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/08/02/letting-go-2 We complain politically about healthcare and all these great countries, but I'm not convinced we're looking with clear eyes at what these countries dispense for care necessarily. Thanks for the dialogue.
Did you not read the article that King C posted to you? It perfectly correlated to what nook said. Nobody is excusing anything why are you going there?
I am not even necessarily against universal care in the USA, I just think everyone needs to understand that it will not solve all our issues related to health, and it is not going to suddenly increase our life expectancy.There will be sacrifices by those that have good insurance. There will not be situations where they keep terminally ill people alive at all costs. There are serious differences in culture, diet and expectations in the USA compared to most other Westernized nations..... and all of those components need to be considered.
It's about to go down Yang Gang!!! https://pitchfork.com/news/donald-glover-announces-andrew-yang-campaign-event/
