Recommended Posts

Posted

I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like

a man, standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.

-Winston Churchill

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the

support of Paul.

- George Bernard Shaw

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which

debt he proposes to pay off with your money.

-G Gordon Liddy

Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in

rich countries to rich people in poor countries.

-Douglas Casey

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys

to teenage boys.

-P..J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to

live at the expense of everybody else.

-Frederic Bastiat, French Economist (1801-1850)

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short

phrases:

If it moves, tax it.

If it keeps moving, regulate it. And

If it stops moving, subsidize it.

-Ronald Reagan (1986)

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it

costs when it's free!

-P..J. O'Rourke

In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as

possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.

-Voltaire (1764)

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.

The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

-Winston Churchill

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong

enough to take everything you have.

-Thomas Jefferson

Posted

Those are some great quotes...fitting to as we are coming into the heart of tax season.

Posted

It has always struck me as very, very curious that people make accept general conclusion about "government," without asking themselves what they mean by that term, or examining the real world.

There are those who seek to have a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Others that insist on demonizing an abstract concept, "government," as though its qualities and democratic nature don't matter.

The idea is essentially repulsive, of a society held together only by the relations and feelings arising out of pecuniary interest. ---John Stuart Mill

To feel much for others and little for ourselves; to restrain our selfishness and exercise our benevolent affections, constitute the perfection of human nature. ---Adam Smith

No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. ---Adam Smith

Division of labour destroys intellectual, social and martial virtues unless government takes pains to prevent it. [smith warns that the division of labour has the effect that a man] becomes as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become . . . unless government takes pains to prevent it. ---Adam Smith

The important thing for Government is not to do things which individuals are doing already, and to do them a little better or a little worse; but to do those things which at present are not done at all. ---Keynes

I think Capitalism, wisely managed, can probably be made more efficient for attaining economic ends than any alternative system yet in sight. But that in itself is in many ways extremely objectionable. Our problem is to work out a social organization which shall be as efficient as possible without offending our notions of a satisfactory way of life. ---Keynes

Singapore Airlines is one of the most highly regarded airlines in the world. Often voted the world's favorite airline, it is efficient and friendly. Unlike most other carriers, it has never made a financial loss in its 35-year history. . . . The airline is a State Owned Enterprise. ---Ha-Joon Chang

I personally think that society is responsible for a very significant percentage of what I've earned. If you stick me down in the middle of Bangladesh of Peru or someplace, you'll find out how much this talent is going to produce in the wrong kind of soil. I will be struggling thirty years later. I work in a market system that happens to reward what I do very well---disproportionally well. ---Warren Buffet.

Somebody infringed my copyright. What can I do?

A party may seek to protect his or her copyrights against unauthorized use by filing a civil lawsuit in federal district court. If you believe that your copyright has been infringed, consult an attorney. In cases of willful infringement for profit, the U.S. Attorney may initiate a criminal investigation. ---U.S. Copyright Office, the Government agency responsible for granting market distorting monopoly pricing rights to firms like Microsoft. (Maybe this is a good idea, maybe not, but this is heavy-handed government interference in the market. If you hate government interference on principle, here is one of the best places to start attacking. )

One cannot make general criticism of government. You have to look at the facts.

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it

costs when it's free!

-P..J. O'Rourke

Does this guy live in lala land? If he's got access to the internet he ought to know that the U.S. system of health care costs more than any other industrialized country, yet delivers worse outcomes.

Just to "brag" a little, I got all of the quotes above, except the one from the U.S. Copyright Office, without using the internet.

Best,

Pete

I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like

a man, standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.

-Winston Churchill

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the

support of Paul.

- George Bernard Shaw

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which

debt he proposes to pay off with your money.

-G Gordon Liddy

Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in

rich countries to rich people in poor countries.

-Douglas Casey

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys

to teenage boys.

-P..J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to

live at the expense of everybody else.

-Frederic Bastiat, French Economist (1801-1850)

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short

phrases:

If it moves, tax it.

If it keeps moving, regulate it. And

If it stops moving, subsidize it.

-Ronald Reagan (1986)

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it

costs when it's free!

-P..J. O'Rourke

In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as

possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.

-Voltaire (1764)

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.

The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

-Winston Churchill

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong

enough to take everything you have.

-Thomas Jefferson

Posted

I am both straight and happily married, but Pete...will you be my life partner?

HAHA

I get frustrated sometimes with the general political leanings of fellow B'sOTL so its very gratifying to see someone of like mind.

d

Posted

Oh dear ... politics ...

"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." — Mark Twain

Posted
I am both straight and happily married, but Pete...will you be my life partner?

HAHA

I get frustrated sometimes with the general political leanings of fellow B'sOTL so its very gratifying to see someone of like mind.

d

That's very flattering. Happily, I'm in the same situation, so I think my better half would rightly object vigorously should her worse half "partner" with anyone but her. I should say though, I am prepared to share cigars and scotch, preferably in large quantities.

Seriously, I don't think any of us are too far apart in fact, but when you start throwing slogans around, and trying to draw sweeping generalizations about mankind and society, that's when the arguments arise.

Best,

Pete

Posted
That's very flattering. Happily, I'm in the same situation, so I think my better half would rightly object vigorously should her worse half "partner" with anyone but her. I should say though, I am prepared to share cigars and scotch, preferably in large quantities.

Seriously, I don't think any of us are too far apart in fact, but when you start throwing slogans around, and trying to draw sweeping generalizations about mankind and society, that's when the arguments arise.

Best,

Pete

If anything , I got a good laugh out of it; there was some humor in it.

Posted
Does this guy live in lala land? If he's got access to the internet he ought to know that the U.S. system of health care costs more than any other industrialized country, yet delivers worse outcomes.

As a U.S. Physician I can tell you that nationalized health care has nothing to do with health or care. The push for socialized medicine is about power and control. It is offensive not for its cost but rather for its intrusion into the lives of American citizens. This is the 'cost' that O'Rourke is referring to. Costs are high because we do not ration care, recognizing the humanity of all. Costs are also high because of innovation. Outcomes are not worse in the U.S. The silliness of this notion is made plain when you consider the numbers of people who come here to be treated for difficult medical problems. The United States government did not create what I am proud to say is the finest healthcare system on earth. The people did! Look at the rationing of care and long delays in treatment elsewhere in the world. Ridiculous! That's what government gets you. Don't hand me any tripe about the poor. Everyone who presents for treatment gets it regardless of their ability to pay. I live it every day.

Posted
As a U.S. Physician I can tell you that nationalized health care has nothing to do with health or care. The push for socialized medicine is about power and control. It is offensive not for its cost but rather for its intrusion into the lives of American citizens. This is the 'cost' that O'Rourke is referring to. Costs are high because we do not ration care, recognizing the humanity of all. Costs are also high because of innovation. Outcomes are not worse in the U.S. The silliness of this notion is made plain when you consider the numbers of people who come here to be treated for difficult medical problems. The United States government did not create what I am proud to say is the finest healthcare system on earth. The people did! Look at the rationing of care and long delays in treatment elsewhere in the world. Ridiculous! That's what government gets you. Don't hand me any tripe about the poor. Everyone who presents for treatment gets it regardless of their ability to pay. I live it every day.

I won't get involved other than to say good post. :stir:

Posted
  1. Costs are high because we do not ration care, recognizing the humanity of all.
  2. Costs are also high because of innovation.
  3. Outcomes are not worse in the U.S. The silliness of this notion is made plain when you consider the numbers of people who come here to be treated for difficult medical problems.
  4. The United States government did not create what I am proud to say is the finest healthcare system on earth. The people did!
  5. Look at the rationing of care and long delays in treatment elsewhere in the world. Ridiculous!
  6. Don't hand me any tripe about the poor.
  7. Everyone who presents for treatment gets it regardless of their ability to pay.

  • Outcomes are not worse in the U.S. The silliness of this notion is made plain when you consider the numbers of people who come here to be treated for difficult medical problems.

I just had to make sure this stays on record. I'll get to all the points, but frankly the one about people who come here to be treated is pretty funny! If I get the logic, the argument is that despite the fact that the U.S. has comparatively poor health outcomes in various measures, in fact the outcomes are not worse because many people come to the United States for treatment of difficult medical problems. Is that right?

So let's say, hypothetically speaking, that India had a medical tourism industry, and there were lots of people going there for difficult medical procedures. Then the WHO stats which say India has worse health outcomes than various developed countries is a silly notion that is made plain by considering the medical tourism industry. Let's say, hypothetically, that Voice of America, on 28 February 2011, reported that India expects 2.2 Billion in revenue from medical tourism by 2012. Suppose hundreds of thousands of people go to India for medical care.

Maybe you can even find reporting like this: "At least 85,000 Americans choose to travel abroad for medical procedures each year, according to a recent report by the consulting firm McKinsey & Company. Treatment includes dental implants, hip and knee replacements, heart valve replacements and bypass surgery. The cost of surgery performed overseas can be as little as 20 percent of the price of the same procedure in the United States, according to a recent report by the American Medical Association."

It's actually a little hard to know where to stop. But one last thing.

  • Don't hand me any tripe about the poor.

Evidently, many in the Indian government feel the same way. Some Indian doctors criticized their country's promotion of medical tourism, ""It is time," they said, "for the government to pay more attention to improving the health of Indians rather than to enticing foreigners from affluent countries with offers of low-cost operations and convalescent visits to the Taj Mahal."

They criticized the government as trying to capitalize on the medical tourism boom at a time when "the medical system is failing its own people," with tuberculosis killing half a million people and easily treatable diarrheal diseases killing 600,000 each year in India."

But those tuberculosis outcomes are a silly notion, because of all the people that come from all over the world, including the United States, which has the best system in world, to India for heart valve replacements.

Best,

Pete

I'll get to the rest later. Ciao!

Posted

OK. You go to India for your heart valve. I'll get mine in the US. :o

Posted

Costs in the U.S. are higher than other countries because costs are higher...a large part of that cost is labor. Not just the salary of the doctor, but he nurses, rent, etc. Obviously medical practitioners in India and Mexico, the Phillipines, Thailand and many other places face these same expenses, but at much lower cost to them. It stands to reason that they can charge less. Also...what about medical malpractice? What do they pay in those countries relative to the U.S.? A whole hell of a lot less, and in some countries nothing at all. So yes, medical care is more expensive in the U.S. than countries where people venture for medical tourism (which to a large extent I believe is more cosmetic in nature than life saving), but in the end...you are probably getting what you pay for.

Posted

Take note:

This started without the help of either Ken or Ray.... Rob! -LOL

Go getem' tigers!!!

And as quotes go; I like: Socialism works until you run out of other peoples' money! I also like, "Tough times ahead, invest in lead." I call that one my own.

Hear, hear Ozzy!

Posted

First of all, I mentioned medical tourism to show how the original argument about health outcomes was a little bit wonky. Lot's of people travel to India for health care, including "dental implants, hip and knee replacements, heart valve replacements and bypass surgery." This doesn't mean that it is a "silly notion" that India's health outcomes are worse than other countries.

Second, cost are higher in the United States for numerous reasons, three important ones, that no one talks about follow. Actually, two of the reasons are quite directly related to government regulation, probably highly inefficient.

  1. Government granted and enforced monopoly pricing rights, i.e. patents. These allow medical equipment manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies to charge far higher than marginal cost for their machines and drugs. Maybe, or maybe not, this intervention into the market is necessary to incentivize innovation. However, it is undeniable that it is a vigorous intrusion into the market for health care, and it results in high costs. On top of this the Federal Government has restricted itself from bargaining with pharmaceutical companies when buying drugs. Again, maybe this is a good thing, the pharmaceutical companies need to be carefully protected from the monopsony power of the federal government. It does, however, increase costs. (Can you imagine the Pentagon, refusing to bargain for its office supplies or something? That would be an analogous situation.) (In a free market, or course, one could manufacture generics without fear of going to jail or having your pants sued off.)
  2. The federal government highly restricts immigration. As thechenman points out labor in other countries is cheaper. Many highly qualified doctors would be happy to come to the States and work for less money than the American physicians who are protected from competition by immigration law. I'm not saying immigration restrictions aren't a good idea, but they are in fact a major distortion of the labor market, and one way in which health care professionals can be protected from competition.
  3. Finally, there is an enormous amount of bureaucracy in the U.S. health care system. Physicians for a National Health Plan has done studies indicating there are hundreds of billions to be saved if this bureaucracy could be eliminated. I would guess many of the non-U.S. members of this forum have never heard of pre-authorization, or in and out of network doctors, or spent hours on the phone trying to figure out how to get something simple from their insurance provider. Having lived in Montréal, I can both say that the health care system there, in Québec, isn't great, but there are some real benefits. For example, if you get a referral to a specialist, you can pick any specialist who has an appointment available! Few people can do that in the States. And there are many, many example like that. Remember in the United States you have insurance companies mediating everything between you and your doctor, unless you pay out of pocket.

It's also worth noting that the health insurance industry harms other businesses. From the Washington Post, years before the hysteria over Obamacare set in, "High health care costs have "created a competitive gap that's driving investment decisions away from the U.S.," Ford Vice Chairman Allan Gilmour said in a speech at a recent auto industry conference. "If we cannot get our arms around this issue as a nation, our manufacturing base and many of our other businesses are in danger," he said, according to a transcript of the speech."

You can read the rest of the article, A Heftier Dose to Swallow.

I'm sure people are sincerely scared about government intrusion in their lives, but I don't understand why that would justify even worse intrusion from insurance companies. Health insurance agencies decide what treatment you will and won't get, and what they will pay for. Many people in the United States go bankrupt from health care bills, even when they have insurance.

Any non-U.S. residents, if you've actually made it this far, care to tell us what your provider networks are like, and how easy it is to get pre-authorization for certain procedures? Also maybe you could let U.S. residents know about what its like to talk to billing departments in your countries' clinics and hospitals? Do you ever have issues where your doctor isn't sure about what is and isn't offered by your health plan, and you need to mediate between the doctor, the billing department and your insurance provider?

Best,

Pete

Costs in the U.S. are higher than other countries because costs are higher...a large part of that cost is labor. Not just the salary of the doctor, but he nurses, rent, etc. Obviously medical practitioners in India and Mexico, the Phillipines, Thailand and many other places face these same expenses, but at much lower cost to them. It stands to reason that they can charge less. Also...what about medical malpractice? What do they pay in those countries relative to the U.S.? A whole hell of a lot less, and in some countries nothing at all. So yes, medical care is more expensive in the U.S. than countries where people venture for medical tourism (which to a large extent I believe is more cosmetic in nature than life saving), but in the end...you are probably getting what you pay for.
Posted
First of all, I mentioned medical tourism to show how the original argument about health outcomes was a little bit wonky. Lot's of people travel to India for health care, including "dental implants, hip and knee replacements, heart valve replacements and bypass surgery." This doesn't mean that it is a "silly notion" that India's health outcomes are worse than other countries.

Second, cost are higher in the United States for numerous reasons, three important ones, that no one talks about follow. Actually, two of the reasons are quite directly related to government regulation, probably highly inefficient.

  1. Government granted and enforced monopoly pricing rights, i.e. patents. These allow medical equipment manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies to charge far higher than marginal cost for their machines and drugs. Maybe, or maybe not, this intervention into the market is necessary to incentivize innovation. However, it is undeniable that it is a vigorous intrusion into the market for health care, and it results in high costs. On top of this the Federal Government has restricted itself from bargaining with pharmaceutical companies when buying drugs. Again, maybe this is a good thing, the pharmaceutical companies need to be carefully protected from the monopsony power of the federal government. It does, however, increase costs. (Can you imagine the Pentagon, refusing to bargain for its office supplies or something? That would be an analogous situation.) (In a free market, or course, one could manufacture generics without fear of going to jail or having your pants sued off.)
  2. The federal government highly restricts immigration. As thechenman points out labor in other countries is cheaper. Many highly qualified doctors would be happy to come to the States and work for less money than the American physicians who are protected from competition by immigration law. I'm not saying immigration restrictions aren't a good idea, but they are in fact a major distortion of the labor market, and one way in which health care professionals can be protected from competition.
  3. Finally, there is an enormous amount of bureaucracy in the U.S. health care system. Physicians for a National Health Plan has done studies indicating there are hundreds of billions to be saved if this bureaucracy could be eliminated. I would guess many of the non-U.S. members of this forum have never heard of pre-authorization, or in and out of network doctors, or spent hours on the phone trying to figure out how to get something simple from their insurance provider. Having lived in Montréal, I can both say that the health care system there, in Québec, isn't great, but there are some real benefits. For example, if you get a referral to a specialist, you can pick any specialist who has an appointment available! Few people can do that in the States. And there are many, many example like that. Remember in the United States you have insurance companies mediating everything between you and your doctor, unless you pay out of pocket.

It's also worth noting that the health insurance industry harms other businesses. From the Washington Post, years before the hysteria over Obamacare set in, "High health care costs have "created a competitive gap that's driving investment decisions away from the U.S.," Ford Vice Chairman Allan Gilmour said in a speech at a recent auto industry conference. "If we cannot get our arms around this issue as a nation, our manufacturing base and many of our other businesses are in danger," he said, according to a transcript of the speech."

You can read the rest of the article, A Heftier Dose to Swallow.

I'm sure people are sincerely scared about government intrusion in their lives, but I don't understand why that would justify even worse intrusion from insurance companies. Health insurance agencies decide what treatment you will and won't get, and what they will pay for. Many people in the United States go bankrupt from health care bills, even when they have insurance.

Any non-U.S. residents, if you've actually made it this far, care to tell us what your provider networks are like, and how easy it is to get pre-authorization for certain procedures? Also maybe you could let U.S. residents know about what its like to talk to billing departments in your countries' clinics and hospitals? Do you ever have issues where your doctor isn't sure about what is and isn't offered by your health plan, and you need to mediate between the doctor, the billing department and your insurance provider?

Best,

Pete

Pete... I love ya' mate but where have you been living? I can to go the Tipsy Fox (a corner market) and pick up 25 illegal immigrants to work on my yard, RIGHT NOW! The US does not encourage immigration... really?

Wait... there's more! You can come over the US boarder, pregnant, go into any hospital with labor pains, get your child delivered for free, and then go to the welfare office and collect monthly payments to make sure that your kid does not starve. These are facts mate! We have "taxpayer" paid healthcare now and it is arguably at least one reason, the hole in the water barrel, that makes healthcare costs what they are for the people that pay the bill.

We have lawyers advertising on TV for consumers who took certain drugs, to encourage them to join suits, because they can! Just call us, we will get you money! It is what they advertise.

Patents interfere with the free market? Really!!! Do you keep your house locked? I would argue that your door lock interferes with my right to steal your belongings. You are therefore interfering with my trade of stolen goods.

Mate if you don't believe in private property just come out and say it and don't keep us all guessing. If I have a "right" to a doctor's time and efforts without compensation, or at a rate that he/she does not agree to contract to, then he has no right to his own body. If I have the "right" to produce drugs, the intellectual property and real investment of others, potentially adding up to billions of dollars, then they have no rights to their efforts and investments either.

I don't know what you do for a living mate, but if I were to demand that you come over to my house and do it without compensation, or based on a rate that "I" deemed acceptable I would be stealing from you. And you would likely be justly pissed off about it.

You have confused rights, entitlements, and theft. When a doctor donates his time it is called charity. When the government donates his time (and does not pay an acceptable rate to the doctor) it is called tyranny.

Lastly mate, as an individual I contract with an insurance company, willfully. Last time I contracted with the US government was when I signed my last 1040. If they don't agree with my findings I get fined, no judge, no jury... in fact I have no rights at all. Furthermore I am compelled to sign my 1040 form against my will or they won't accept it and then fine me for not filing on time. If you don't see a difference... well we just don't have anything else to talk about!

...and I thought I was going to stay out of this! -Piggy

Posted
Oh dear ... politics ...

"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." — Mark Twain

Agreed! It was already a joke over 100 years ago. :P

This issue is most interesting when studied from the perspective of other countries that have implemented national health care/single-payer systems. Some work better than others. Once U.S. citizens(after they reclaim that privilege) get past the politics and rhetoric, a study should be made comparing some of the more successful ones. At the same time we'll have to examine how the present system failed so miserably in certain areas.

But, and this is the big but, the present oligarchy cannot and will not do it. So this is moot until a critical mass of the population is sufficiently miserable to accept that the "system" cannot be fixed from within. :lol3:;):stir:

Posted
Patents interfere with the free market? Really!!! Do you keep your house locked? I would argue that your door lock interferes with my right to steal your belongings. You are therefore interfering with my trade of stolen goods.

Mate if you don't believe in private property just come out and say it and don't keep us all guessing.

The patent system is supposed to be designed "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

Without government taking it upon itself to enforce patents and copyrights, and granting the private right to sue, Authors and Inventors cannot block other people from using their writings or inventions. Notice, by the way, that the typical system of patent law grant the monopoly right only for "limited Times." Think about what you are saying, patents are private property, however this private property is extinguished after a limited time?!

The patent system is meant to fix a market defect. The idea is that if I invent something, it will be too easy for other market participants to figure out how I make my invention, and the free ride off of my work. Therefore the government must step in to do something - many governments choose to set up a system of patents. This may or may not be true. Crucially, the "limited Times" must be set so that I can extract monopoly rents for long enough to properly reward my invention, without it becoming a drag on the economy.

Did you know that in the United States you used to be able to patent the inventions of other people, as long as they were foreigners? Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with this in principle. Before the United States began to lead the world in technological development, it made more sense to allow U.S. citizens to make products here without having to pay royalties or be under the restrictions of foreign patent holders.

Suppose a guy in China invents Device X, and has it patented in China. You come along and also invent Device X, but after it was patented in China. Should the Chinese inventor be able to prevent you from marketing "his" Device X, because he has a patent?

Seriously, the "for limited Times" "exclusive Right" is quite different from real property or goods.

Do I believe in private property? Yes, of course I do. It is a matter of fact. But I know what you mean, do I believe that private property is a good thing as opposed to some other system. Depends on the other system, and depends on what aspect of the law of property.

The laws of property in the United States, and other countries, are not all that straightforward. Piggy, what do you think about a restriction, sometimes called the rule against perpetuities, on transferring real property from one person to another. Under the common law, you are allowed to transfer by sale, gift, or bequest, your real property, but such transfers are subject to various restrictions --- that override any contract you might make. These restrictions, imposed by courts, are firmly part of the common law.

When you ask whether I think private property is a good thing for a society, you are asking a question about a complex body of law, some of which is very good, some of which not.

People have an inherent right to privacy, and from this it entails that people have a right to exclude others from, and have exclusive control of, certain things. But after that point the devil is in the details.

Best,

Pete

By the way - I hope you'll agree: I've only respond to what folks have written. I've never questioned anyone's motives, or made assumptions about political leanings of any other poster.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.