(07-21-2009 09:17 AM)Artifice Wrote: Quote:Sending old people away to die is precisely how a lot of socialized medical systems control costs.
That's so far fetched as to be called ridiculous. You put me in the position of having to point out that life expectancies in a bunch of evil socialist countries are extremely high:
France, Switzerland and Sweden are all in the top 10. We're way down the list at #45. Source.
I wondered about the phenomenon you note, and did some more digging. As a result, I have three ponts in response:
1. Two of the countries you cite (France, Switzerland) do not have "socialized" medical systems. They have hybrid systems of the kind that I personally advocate. Their approaches are less "socialized" than what we will have under Obamacare. I would very much prefer a Swiss or French approach to Obamacare.
2. The comparisons you make are not apples-to-apples comparisons. The difference in life expectancy is almost entirely attributable to differences in infant mortality rates. In some cases it accounts for more difference than the actualy difference experienced. Having even a few more people in the mix who live to age 0 really reduces the average life expectancy in a hurry. Do the math and see for yourslef. Once you get past the infancy stage, life expectancy is generally better in the US. Treatment outcomes for most cancers and other diseases that older people get typically run much better in the US.
3. This is particularly important because the methodology used to calculate the infant mortality rate is different in the US from other countries. The US counts as a birth any baby that makes it out of the womb alive; foreign countries generally omit babies that are below a certain birth rate, or that survive only a few moments outside the womb, or other babies that would project with a low likelihood of survival. The formula is # infant deaths divided by # births in both cases, but by defiining birth differently, the US ends up counting a number of infant deaths that other countries do not. If the US figures are edited to conform to the overseas methodology, the US does better than most. And in turn, that jacks the US life expectancy up to a level that is better than most.
This is not to say that the US system could not be improved. As suggested above, I personally favor the French system. But it is to say that a few misunderstood statistics do not provide a basis for calling anyone "batshit crazy." And turning old people aside is exactly how socialized systems DO control costs. That is well-documented. As long as there is a viable private care (pay) option, I can live with it. There is some confusion as to what extend the current drafts of the bill permit a private care option; it looks like it's technically permitted, but the may me strong built-in biases against it. Those biases do not exist in, for example, Switzerland or France. Any solution including those biases is not an acceptable solution to me.