Home of the Free

dteowner said:

And in the Canuck system, how long do you wait for basic surgical procedures?

Click to expand...

It varies depending on location and the urgency of your condition. A relative of mine recently had to wait about 2 months for a hip replacement.

dteowner said:

And in the Canuck system, how long do you wait for basic surgical procedures?

Click to expand...

I don't know about the details of how things work in Canada, but I do know that public health services come in all quality levels. Some are corrupt, inefficient, and offer very low standards of service (e.g. the Ukrainian one); others are efficient, cheap, and offer very high standards of service (e.g. the French one). Most are somewhere in-between the two (e.g. the Scandinavian ones or the British one). Some even have a dual system, where you can choose to go to a private clinic for your procedure, and the state reimburses you with the calculated cost of the procedure in a public clinic.

I think the salient facts in the debate are pretty simple:

1. The USA is the only rich country without universal health care.
2. The USA has the highest health care costs per capita in the world.
3. The USA scores very low (among rich countries) in statistical public health indicators (infant mortality, life expectancy, chronic diseases).
4. The USA scores low (among rich countries) in statistical indicators of health care quality.

Those are the facts. Make of them what you will.

(If you want to look up the numbers yourself, they're here : [ http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/36/38979632.xls ], available from the OECD website here [ http://www.oecd.org/findDocument/0,3354,en_2649_33929_1_119656_1_1_1,00.html ].)

Geist said:

Recently, we have seen a sharp shift to the right, politically, in many of those European "welfare states" (and in North America as well), but this is not so much a case of the system not working, as it is a product of globalization (as a result of outsourcing, companies put increasing pressure on governments to cut taxes, and cut back the rights of workers in order to be able to compete with cheap labor abroad).

Click to expand...

Also note that the Euro-rightist are far to the left of, for example, the American Democratic party, when it comes to social security and such. There's no (mainstream) challenge to the European social/political model currently on the table. By US standards, Sarkozy would be a total pinko.

Pinko = Leftist, socialist ?

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinko ]

Also,the USA had 34 million homeless people in 2003.About 10% of the country's population...

Please,i would be grateful if any american told me of the US social care and social politics..Because i have the impression that only the rich have oppotrunities in life there,from what i know about colleges and education cost...

DimGrav, your statistic is off by a factor of ten. Move the decimal point over. It's about 3.5 million. Of course, that's still alarming.

As far as opportunities go, there's a long discussion there where many will disagree. But everyone here can plainly see that the rich aren't the only ones who ever succeed.

I grew up in a far from rich family and got top-notch education, my wife's family had even less and she has 3 degrees ... opportunities certainly exist. Hard work is rewarded - the entitlement system of many countries doesn't encourage hard work to the same extent, it could be argued.

I see..Thnx for the correction,I didn't notice..

It is rather good to see that there's access to high level education in general.In Greece,universities are open to anyone as long as he/she succeds the score needed from each of them in order to be accepted as a student.The conservative government which(as it seems from today's re-election--we have election here today) is trying to make laws in favor of educational institutes(like your colleges) that require payment,but the student and academic community has reacted to such a decision by protesting intensively for over 2,5 months..

Squeek said:

As far as opportunities go, there's a long discussion there where many will disagree. But everyone here can plainly see that the rich aren't the only ones who ever succeed.

Click to expand...

The USA is actually towards the bottom of the pack (among rich countries) when it comes to social mobility (the likelihood of dying poor if you were born that way).

(Source: [ http://www.suttontrust.com/reports/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf ])

However, this is a comparatively recent phenomenon: in 1973, 23% of sons born to fathers in the lowest 25% of income had moved to the highest quarter; in 1998, the number was 10%.

(Source: [ http://www.cepr.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10&Itemid=36 ], see "Horatio Alger is Dead")

txa1265 said:

I grew up in a far from rich family and got top-notch education, my wife's family had even less and she has 3 degrees ... opportunities certainly exist. Hard work is rewarded - the entitlement system of many countries doesn't encourage hard work to the same extent, it could be argued.

Click to expand...

That's quite true. I once spent some time in an artists' commune in Montana. I was struck by the way everybody in the commune was very much aware of the implications of their lifestyle choices: all had figured out some way of making ends meet. I know similar people from European welfare-state countries, and many of them take it as a given that they're entitled to hand-outs. I have a lot more respect for those Montanan artists than the European ones.

On the other hand, I also had a view over a parking lot where a bunch of Native Americans regularly scavenged food from the dustbins of a restaurant by the lot. You don't see as much of that sort of thing in most of Europe (although it's certainly not unheard-of.)

How fortunate for us to have had you as a guest in our country, PJ. I imagine your hosts explained to you how Native Americans govern themselves. I don't know their situation over in Montana, but many of the local tribes here in Southern California are very wealthy.

He quotes statistics - and we all know that while statistics cannot be ignored as they indicate some aggregate view of a situation, they also are not always an accurate view of reality.

He also HATES the US and has frequently and repeatedly wished DEATH on the country and its' citizens, therefore all of his opinions are as trustworthy as George Bush talking about WMD's.

So take what you will and remember that as he himself pointed out, the discussion by experts' in a minor game forum is somewhat suspect to begin with.

Analysis like PJ's used to be called "dime store." It's not bad, but it's not good either. Honestly, what's the value of statistics if they don't help you reach accurate conclusions?

Every business plan I've ever seen or heard of cited favorable statistics. But most of them fail. Take a close look at VC funds, and you'll see what I mean.

Gathering statistics is one thing. Understanding them and deciding what they mean is another. Learning where and when to take a serious hard look at them, that comes with age (or mileage!).

Well, most statistics when applied by non-statisticians are done with bias or ulterior motive as the primary driver. Since we know PJ's motives and bias, the use of statistics and the conclusion of *every* statement he makes becomes obvious and foregone.

even if there was an "indian casino" on every corner and gold dubloons flowing out of every native americans pockets, i'd say its a wee bit different than being the respectful stewards of the great land known as america. who knows though maybe thousands of years from now their ancestors will be roaming the lands again.

Squeek said:

How fortunate for us to have had you as a guest in our country, PJ. I imagine your hosts explained to you how Native Americans govern themselves. I don't know their situation over in Montana, but many of the local tribes here in Southern California are very wealthy.

Click to expand...

He most certainly did. He also gave me a couple of very interesting books on how the West was won (and where it got us). The one about the Iroquois Confederacy was particularly enlightening...

I've lived in your beautiful country for several years, by the way.

txa1265 said:

He also HATES the US and has frequently and repeatedly wished DEATH on the country and its' citizens, therefore all of his opinions are as trustworthy as George Bush talking about WMD's.

Click to expand...

That's a non sequitur. My feelings vis a vis the US do not invalidate my analysis. If an idea is sound, it doesn't matter if Satan himself came up with it. The comparison to GWB and WMD isn't sound either: GWB is a fool and a liar, while I am neither.

Second, just to set the record straight, I have not and do not wish death on the USA nor its citizens. What I do wish is:

* That the US loses its position of disproportionate economic and military power in the world. This is because the US has shown that it cannot use the power it has in a responsible manner. (In particular, the US re-elected GWB; this suggests to me that GWB was not a fluke but a product of the system, and therefore it's quite likely that without structural change the system will produce another GWB, sooner rather than later.)

* That the US political system be reformed so that it will again be capable of playing a constructive role in world politics.

However, and this is where I believe you're getting confused, I believe that to achieve these goals, the hold of the military-industrial complex on the US political system has to be broken; for that to happen, the culture of militarism that it has so effectively fostered must be discredited, and for *that* to happen, the US must be soundly defeated militarily. I'm not sure the current drip-drip-drip of casualties and erosion of capabilities is a sufficient shock to the system; therefore, I'm hoping the US attacks Iran and loses something like a carrier group in the process. Unfortunately this does involve a lot of US military personnel dying, but hey, that's what they're paid for, no?

So take what you will and remember that as he himself pointed out, the discussion by experts' in a minor game forum is somewhat suspect to begin with.

Click to expand...

Indeed.

Squeek said:

Analysis like PJ's used to be called "dime store." It's not bad, but it's not good either. Honestly, what's the value of statistics if they don't help you reach accurate conclusions?

Every business plan I've ever seen or heard of cited favorable statistics. But most of them fail. Take a close look at VC funds, and you'll see what I mean.

Gathering statistics is one thing. Understanding them and deciding what they mean is another. Learning where and when to take a serious hard look at them, that comes with age (or mileage!).

Click to expand...

Well, then, since you're so old and wise, why not take a serious hard look at those statistics, instead of just waving your hands and blowing smoke?

txa1265 said:

Well, most statistics when applied by non-statisticians are done with bias or ulterior motive as the primary driver. Since we know PJ's motives and bias, the use of statistics and the conclusion of *every* statement he makes becomes obvious and foregone.

Click to expand...

Even if that were true (which I dispute), it would still not invalidate these conclusions. If someone has a strong preference for rain and likes to post weather reports from places where it rains, it does not change the fact that it does rain in these places.

What's more, you're mistaken about my motives (as your previous post in this thread clearly demonstrates). There's much more to it than simple "hatred of America" -- that very convenient excuse to discredit anyone critical of or even hostile to your country.