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.
Are you saying that America has a shortage of "strawberry pickers" just because we import them from Mexico? LOL
No, actually. But we do have a shortage of people to pick strawberries.
Quote:
Its not that "the UK must import 1/3 of doctors from Pakistan" but rather Pakistan has a surplus of doctors. As a matter of fact both Pakistan and India have medical schools that teach in English and prepare graduates for either the American SMLE or its British equivalent.
No, Pakistan does not have a surplus of doctors. Pakistan has a deficit of opportunity, and so those with abilities leave.
No, actually. But we do have a shortage of people to pick strawberries.
No we don't have a shortage of people to pick strawberries, its not like you have to get a college degree or years of training to pick strawberries. We simply don't have enough people willing to pick strawberries for $5.50 an hour. If the job paid $20 /hr there would be no need for Mexican workers altogether.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk
No, Pakistan does not have a surplus of doctors. Pakistan has a deficit of opportunity, and so those with abilities leave.
Deficit of opportunity (or as an economist would say: demand) is called SURPLUS as in difference between the supply and demand in non-elastic context of job market for highly skilled professional like MD's.
No my friend, in reality it's even more complex than that: Pakistan and India train doctors specifically for the American labor market - in English. These special med schools do not train doctors for Pakistan and India but for the US and the UK. We have been always importing doctors from other countries, at some point even from the UK, Australia and Canada and later Russia, China, India and Pakistan. Nothing wrong with that. Our society is getting older (as in the percentage of people over 65) and we need more and more doctors every year,
Last edited by random_thoughts; 09-21-2014 at 11:08 PM..
70 years ago you would not have spent any money after a heart attack. Want to know why? The technology did not exist. Now, we know how to operate on a human heart, replace valves, have medicine to control blood pressure, etc. In the 80's you would have died from HIV. Want to know why? We had no technology to combat HIV.
You missed the point. All you did was state the obvious that when something new comes out it is expensive. Once others use that technology and it becomes more common place costs go down. Technology lowers the cost in fields except when government gets involved. All one has to do is look at the price of other products like computers or flat screen TVs. Speaking of 70 years ago how about 40 years ago? How long did it take calculators, which became popular in the 70's, to have lower prices?
You switched from backing Thief A to Thief B in a fictional statist system.
I'm not impressed.
You were a mainstream conservative that moved middle to left on an issue.
He's backing the universal thief, and abdicating his freedom to make health care choices, putting faceless, nameless bureaucrats in complete control of his health.
Little by little the government interferes and destroys our health care system, until they make it so dysfunctional that people beg government to just take it all over. Is that about how this plays out?
No one would be forcing you to use the Medicare. No one would force you to purchase insurance anymore either.
Lie.
From where, exactly, does the government obtain resources that it uses to do anything? It initiates force against the citizen, that's how. That is the first step in anything the government does that involves resources. They produce NOTHING. They simply redistribute resources according to political motives. But the first step in redistributing a thing is to first acquire that thing, and they acquire via a monopoly on law, force, and life & death itself.
I have no intention of ever using Mediwelfare, but I have been forced to fund it my entire working life. I have no option to waive future participation in order to reclaim my lost 2.4% of salary. Someone decided 2 years before I was born that I was going to participate whether I liked it or not. So I am indeed forced to participate. I might be able to choose to turn down the benefit, but I have no choice in paying the premiums.
From where, exactly, does the government obtain resources that it uses to do anything? It initiates force against the citizen, that's how. That is the first step in anything the government does that involves resources. They produce NOTHING. They simply redistribute resources according to political motives. But the first step in redistributing a thing is to first acquire that thing, and they acquire via a monopoly on law, force, and life & death itself.
No one is arguing that the government is a producer or that a single payer system is free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
I have no intention of ever using Mediwelfare, but I have been forced to fund it my entire working life.
You will use Medicare when you're 65.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
I have no option to waive future participation in order to reclaim my lost 2.4% of salary. Someone decided 2 years before I was born that I was going to participate whether I liked it or not. So I am indeed forced to participate. I might be able to choose to turn down the benefit, but I have no choice in paying the premiums.
Yawn. Stop using libertarianism to fight government, and start using it to improve government. There is such a thing as libertarian government.
No one is arguing that the government is a producer or that a single payer system is free.
But you ARE arguing that I have a choice in things related to government health care. I am flat out stating that is untrue. I have no such choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan
You will use Medicare when you're 65.
Why? I can't insure in the private market at that age? I can't choose to forego insurance generally? Why will I for sure be using Mediwelfare at 65?
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan
Yawn. Stop using libertarianism to fight government, and start using it to improve government. There is such a thing as libertarian government.
Not using anything, just arguing the nonsense that I have a choice in things that the federal government controls. So your blathering about the "fairest" way to arrange tyranny is ironic and nonsensical, and it has nothing to do with libertarianism, liberty, or freedom.
But you ARE arguing that I have a choice in things related to government health care. I am flat out stating that is untrue. I have no such choice.
You would have a choice to use private insurance at a private clinic, or use your Medicare card...at a private doctor as well. There will be no "government health care." The VA is "government health care," the UK NHS is "government health care" and that is a road I do NOT want to march down.
All the government will be is a single funding mechanism to ensure basic care for all citizens and permanent residents, and financial disaster insurance in case of cancer, etc. The government can and should be proactive sectors in which there is not a perfectly free market.
Another great example are reasonable environmental regulations. Every time you drive a car, you are emitting fumes that impose a cost on other people, because your fumes are being released into public space. In order to compensate for that "force" you are initiating on my lungs, instead of compensating me, you are forced to purchase vehicles with certain environmental quality standards because it's simply the easiest and most efficient way to do things.
A free exchange of compensation between you and I for the pollution we create simply is not possible, hence, we compensate each other by paying a little extra to have certain environmental standards on our vehicles. This is the libertarian argument for reasonable environmental regulations. Libertarianism falls flat in areas where a free market isn't possible.
Likewise with healthcare. This is something by which you have no choice of consumption in your life. You will undoubtedly require healthcare at some point in your life, assuming you're a rational human being and won't exclude yourself from purchasing health care simply to prove a libertarian point. This prevents a perfectly free and efficient market, most especially with regard to a funding mechanism.
The profit mechanism in health care is distorted, hence it requires regulation. You should not be able to make a profit off of things over which you have no control.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
Why? I can't insure in the private market at that age?
You certainly may.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
I can't choose to forego insurance generally? Why will I for sure be using Mediwelfare at 65?
This is my biggest gripe with the ACA. You should NOT be forced to purchase a product from the private sector.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
Not using anything, just arguing the nonsense that I have a choice in things that the federal government controls. So your blathering about the "fairest" way to arrange tyranny is ironic and nonsensical, and it has nothing to do with libertarianism, liberty, or freedom.
A) Allow hospitals and doctors not to serve patients who can't pay
or
B) Pay for the healthcare of the people who can not afford to pay.
This in between stuff was what caused the price of healthcare to rise faster than the rate of inflation.
Economically speaking, in the end, everyone ends up paying for someone else's health care.
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.
