Comments on: The Lion Deep in Winter

By: Woody

Woody — Sat, 24 May 2008 17:13:23 +0000

Let’s hire the French to run King-Drew and see if they could do any better. Our culture, demographics, and needs are different. You would think that a country that is so great at health care could raise a strong military before it raises the white flag.

By: "reg"

"reg" — Sat, 24 May 2008 04:06:20 +0000

In France, those people would have insurance that would allow them to avoid places like King-Drew for lack of alternatives.

By: Woody

Woody — Fri, 23 May 2008 19:01:40 +0000

reg, what’s at consideration isn’t how France’s system is run but how America would run its system, even trying to model it like that of France. King-Drew might be closer than you want to admit.

By: "reg"

"reg" — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:14:51 +0000

Woody, King-Drew has exactly nothing to do with the way health insurance is paid in France. It’s telling when someone asks for coherent data to back up some assertions and all that one gets is two people changing the subject, either to examples from another continent or to micro-issues.

By: "reg"

"reg" — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:09:49 +0000

So there’s no coherent data supporting the fiction that France’s health care system doesn’t consistently perform better than ours, either in costs or outcomes – nothing disproving the WHO analysis, etc.

Why I’d spend one minute confronting someone who has the arrogance to pull bullshit assertions out of their ass and present exactly nothing to back them up is the real question.

By: WBC

WBC — Fri, 23 May 2008 04:10:49 +0000

reg, why on earth I’d spend one minute producing data that anyone in the industry knows, is beyond me. Do the research as I said, interview people who might want to spend the time, those who don’t know what a waste of time it would be to talk to you — there’s an entire industry based on this basic premise.

By: Woody

Woody — Fri, 23 May 2008 02:57:42 +0000

Why can't we be more like Europe? European Court agrees to hear chimp's plea for human rights

By: Woody

Woody — Fri, 23 May 2008 01:32:23 +0000

Fine, send Ted Kennedy to France and let’s see their miracle health care system save him. In fact, rlc may want to have his pacemaker replaced with the French version.

The biggest difference between you and me is that I have witnessed government ruin institutions, like schools, and expect nothing different in the long run with health care. You think government makes things better.

Ask Celeste how King-Drew is doing.

By: reg

reg — Fri, 23 May 2008 01:20:15 +0000

Woody, you don’t even begin to make any sense. Just a bunch of assertion – ideological fundamentalism of the worst sort.

I’ve looked at the empirical stuff that’s available on how much the French spend on health care as well as their health outcomes. That’s the only reason I make the claims I make about France being both more cost effective and consistently delivering quality care to more people.

By: reg

reg — Fri, 23 May 2008 01:10:51 +0000

Of course I’m aware of the difference- you stupid ass – but you can’t produce any data that proves a goddam thing you claim about how we’re “cost-effective” and France isn’t. Cost per capita is central to the issue and the US is far higher than any other country – and we don’t even have universal coverage. You, madam, are the idiot because you’re talking out of your ass. I asked for date that shows the French are running a mismanaged, expensive system that doesn’t produce health outcomes as good as ours. You’ve engaged in double-talk and attempting to narrow the subject because there’s nothing to back your assertions up. I’ve asked for you to name someone or some study that contradicts findings such as the WHO comparative data. I’m coming to the conclusion it simply doesn’t exist.

And Woody’s babbling about differences in infant mortality statistics that don’t even begin to address the overall data. You are both making arguments that are either anecdotal or carping at the margins. If anyone has produced a comprehensive analysis that backs up a general argument that the U.S. system is on a cost-benefit basis, or simply on outcomes overall, I’d like to see it. The stuff from the Cato Institute doesn’t fit the bill. It tries to take issue with existing data – nitpicking really, like the infant mortality “controversy” without actually providing a counter-analysis or counter study that shows our overall outcomes are actually even equal, much less better. And of course it’s starting from a point of pure ideology.

You’ve got nuthin.