Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...Would you rather have brain surgery by a doctor that makes $2MM a year here or some government doctor there? Yeah, I thought so.
America is exquisitely good at delivering top-end goods or services, be it in healthcare, science, consumer goods or whatever else. The place to perform complicated and risky procedures is right here. But America is woefully inept at delivering routine and basic services at low cost. An example would be basic dental care, immunizations, treating minor infections and so forth. This is why it's not uncommon for Americans to travel to Mexico or elsewhere in Latin America for dental procedures. This is also why it's so hard to marshal resources to start making N95 masks, gowns, gloves and the like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maddie104
You are correct. The question should be was the economic price worth the lives saved by the measures to prevent infection, slowing the curve so patients can get necessary treatment, etc. We don't know the answer to that question. At some point, we may have a better understanding of that number. An interesting point of comparison may be Sweden's relaxed approach to determine if it was worth a shut down of economic activity.
Sweden is indeed an interesting example.
I remain persuaded that a hybrid approach is best. The most vulnerable persons should continue to be under quarantine. But from what's been observed for example about the low susceptibility of children and youth, does it still make sense to keep schools closed?
Sales tax in Quebec is nearly 20%. Gas also hovers around $4 / gallon. Income tax is higher than USA too.
The "Universal Health Care" provided by Canada (and ALL "developed" nations) is paid for by higher taxes - which you (citizens) pay out of your pocket.
If you want "free" healthcare - then just save 10% of your pay, and send it to an insurance company. Same thing.
You would have insurance, sure, but your take-home pay would be reduced by the amount equal to the insurance. Does that sound "free" to you?
What you're referring to - I guess - is that it's not free for people without a job. Fair enough. It's not. And that's a problem. We should really look into reducing the cost of health care - not reducing my paycheck to pay for yours.
Once the cost is "affordable" - then we can look at moving Lotto money or something else to pay for it. We "profit" about 50 billion a year on the Lotto. That would insure 25 million people, at a reduced premium, say, 2K per year? Seems do-able, folks, without charging 7 dollars a gallon for gas as in the UK.
But no matter how you slice it - that stuff ain't free - anywhere.
I remain persuaded that a hybrid approach is best. The most vulnerable persons should continue to be under quarantine. But from what's been observed for example about the low susceptibility of children and youth, does it still make sense to keep schools closed?
Kids and adolescents are just as apt to catch COVID-19 as older people are. They are just more likely to remain asymptomatic or to have a very mild case of the disease. The problem is that if they pick it up at school, they may transmit it to their parents or grandparents, who won't have such an easy time of it.
Kids and adolescents are just as apt to catch COVID-19 as older people are. They are just more likely to remain asymptomatic or to have a very mild case of the disease. The problem is that if they pick it up at school, they may transmit it to their parents or grandparents, who won't have such an easy time of it.
WHich is why the certain populations such as the elderly should be quarantined. Does it make sense to keep a significantly larger population of youth from school in case they transmit it to their grandparents, many of whom grandparents are deceased. Parents would need to take precautions like wearing masks, gloves, etc.
One of the problems in Italy and the reason for the high death rate is that it has a large elderly population and multi-generational families stay in close physical contact.
WHich is why the certain populations such as the elderly should be quarantined. Does it make sense to keep a significantly larger population of youth from school in case they transmit it to their grandparents, many of whom grandparents are deceased. Parents would need to take precautions like wearing masks, gloves, etc.
One of the problems in Italy and the reason for the high death rate is that it has a large elderly population and multi-generational families stay in close physical contact.
Schools do not contain only healthy children and young adults. Teachers, administrators, janitors, bus drivers and others. People who may appear reasonably healthy could well be living with suppressed immune systems or other health issues that put them at risk regardless of their age.
They're here. Look how quickly we developed the 5 minute test. This is what I mean when I say "CHILL, this is America."
I don't give a rat's *** about what some liberal article you cite, us being below Costa Rica in global health care. That's a joke. Would you rather have brain surgery by a doctor that makes $2MM a year here or some government doctor there? Yeah, I thought so. Why do celebrities come here from Europe for complex surgeries?
That's a WHO rating. Actually, it's from some years ago; we've fallen slightly in the rating since then. I don't know what it is now. Latin America has private doctors and dentists who got their training in the US. Embassy staff use them, and have a list of recommended practitioners they provide to US citizens who need care while abroad.
Schools do not contain only healthy children and young adults. Teachers, administrators, janitors, bus drivers and others. People who may appear reasonably healthy could well be living with suppressed immune systems or other health issues that put them at risk regardless of their age.
That why I stated "certain populations" should quarantine. It's a matter of the mathematics of at risk populations self-quarantining vs. stay at home measures for all school aged children.
This really isn't what I was talking about though.
That other poster asked what nation doesn't have M4A?
That would be us, and we don't want it.
No, that's not what the other poster asked. He asked what other developed nation doesn't have universal healthcare. Universal healthcare =/= Medicare For All. You keep trying to make him out to be a Burnie supporter, putting words in his mouth. I have no idea who his preferred Presidential candidate is or was, but Medicare For All is a cheapskate woefully inadequate plan, that many supporters of healthcare for all citizens and legal residents do not support. The topic is much more nuanced than waving a magic wand at the health care access issue, and proclaiming "Medicare For All" as the solution. You may be making erroneous assumptions about poster markg.
That why I stated "certain populations" should quarantine. It's a matter of the mathematics of at risk populations self-quarantining vs. stay at home measures for all school aged children.
It isn't practical to do that. Some schools wouldn't have the staff to function, some people wouldn't self quarantine and some parents would send their kids to school sick anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
