Pay $43,000 for an Appendectomy? Or less than $3,000?

[Markle]

Those are some good cherrypicked claims, but how do they explain higher life expectancies in those countries?

Quite simple but I believe it is over your head. At least what you would admit. Before that, since we've had Obamacare, our life expectancy has DROPPED over the past two years. Why?

A major reason our country has a lower life expectancy than the countries you enumerated is because they are: "homogeneous nations". Those are nations made up of nearly 100% one race. Different races and nationalities have different life expectancies regardless of the health care they do or do not receive.

The life expectancy in Norway at birth is 81.8 years. Until Muslim refugees started moving into the country, they are nearly 100% white Norwegians.

In Minnesota, a very large percentage of their population are Scandanavians. They also eat many of the foods from the Old Country. Their life expectancy is 81.05.

There are other reasons as well. We have far more vehicular fatalities than other countries.

 

[Markle]

Your argument doesn't apply to generics, yet prescription generics often have insane prices. What was it, $600 for two epipens recently, even though these deliver a generic drug? You're a stupid person who buys stupid excuses for the people to be robbed. But, you're on to one thing. The FDA is government and government is the problem.

 

[bgrouse]

Those are some good cherrypicked claims, but how do they explain higher life expectancies in those countries?

Quite simple but I believe it is over your head. At least what you would admit. Before that, since we've had Obamacare, our life expectancy has DROPPED over the past two years. Why?

Why are you asking me? I never supported Obamacare.

A major reason our country has a lower life expectancy than the countries you enumerated is because they are: "homogeneous nations". Those are nations made up of nearly 100% one race. Different races and nationalities have different life expectancies regardless of the health care they do or do not receive.

The life expectancy in Norway at birth is 81.8 years. Until Muslim refugees started moving into the country, they are nearly 100% white Norwegians.

In Minnesota, a very large percentage of their population are Scandanavians. They also eat many of the foods from the Old Country. Their life expectancy is 81.05.

There are other reasons as well. We have far more vehicular fatalities than other countries.

That could certainly explain it. But then different racial makeup could just as easily be claimed as the reason for different rates for those particular diseases.

And it still doesn't address the fact that you cherrypicked a handful diseases out of potentially millions of other diseases out there. Rating a medical system based solely on survival rates of breast cancer, prostate cancer, rectal cancer, and statin availability is like rating a car based solely on it's ability to maintain control while driving 34.5 miles per hour on 0.5 inches of snow during a full moon and the availability of tailpipe replacement parts.

 

[Skull Pilot]

As I said this goes far beyond your limited 2 dimensional thinking

Republicans claim to be the party of the free market. They aren't. And, Democrats don't make this claim.

Democrats would give us socialized medicine. As inherently oppressive and inefficient as socialism is, it's better than our current monopoly pricing. E.g. Canada has universal coverage at half of what the US spends.

Democrats gave working people subsidized health insurance (Obamacare) which is good thing, given the government-jacked cost of medical care.

Republicans claim to be bent on repealing Obamacare (or, wrecking it by removing the mandate), but they have nothing to replace it with. They have nothing, like the free market and deregulation, to address the monopoly pricing that makes medical care affordable to the working class.

I have always said that republicans just like democrats are focused on expanding the size scope and cost of government and history proves this as no republican ever reduced the size of government

subsidized health insurance is also giving people skyrocketing premiums and deductibles and less choice as far as doctors.

Removing the mandate gives people a choice and I know how much democrats hate people being able to make their own choices.

 

[dblack]

As I said this goes far beyond your limited 2 dimensional thinking

Republicans claim to be the party of the free market. They aren't. And, Democrats don't make this claim.

Democrats would give us socialized medicine. As inherently oppressive and inefficient as socialism is, it's better than our current monopoly pricing. E.g. Canada has universal coverage at half of what the US spends.

Democrats gave working people subsidized health insurance (Obamacare) which is good thing, given the government-jacked cost of medical care.

Republicans claim to be bent on repealing Obamacare (or, wrecking it by removing the mandate), but they have nothing to replace it with. They have nothing, like the free market and deregulation, to address the monopoly pricing that makes medical care affordable to the working class.

I have always said that republicans just like democrats are focused on expanding the size scope and cost of government and history proves this as no republican ever reduced the size of government

subsidized health insurance is also giving people skyrocketing premiums and deductibles and less choice as far as doctors.

Removing the mandate gives people a choice and I know how much democrats hate people being able to make their own choices.

I've stopped using "choice" when it comes to characterizing freedom. It's really not accurate. Statists often brag that their programs offer a "choice" - eg. "buy insurance or pay a penalty", or "choose one from column A and one from column B". Instead, I'd say freedom is merely the absence of coercion, a condition where your choices aren't constrained or dictated by a third party.

 

[Skull Pilot]

As I said this goes far beyond your limited 2 dimensional thinking

Republicans claim to be the party of the free market. They aren't. And, Democrats don't make this claim.

Democrats would give us socialized medicine. As inherently oppressive and inefficient as socialism is, it's better than our current monopoly pricing. E.g. Canada has universal coverage at half of what the US spends.

Democrats gave working people subsidized health insurance (Obamacare) which is good thing, given the government-jacked cost of medical care.

Republicans claim to be bent on repealing Obamacare (or, wrecking it by removing the mandate), but they have nothing to replace it with. They have nothing, like the free market and deregulation, to address the monopoly pricing that makes medical care affordable to the working class.

I have always said that republicans just like democrats are focused on expanding the size scope and cost of government and history proves this as no republican ever reduced the size of government

subsidized health insurance is also giving people skyrocketing premiums and deductibles and less choice as far as doctors.

Removing the mandate gives people a choice and I know how much democrats hate people being able to make their own choices.

I've stopped using "choice" when it comes to characterizing freedom. It's really not accurate. Statist programs often brag that their offer a "choice" - eg. " ... buy insurance or pay a penalty, your choice!", or "choose one from column A and one from column B"

good point.