“And I cite examples of genuine free markets for cosmetic surgery and even (regardless of your views) abortion.”
Interesting to see how it’ll work but I don’t see much logic with some of the assertions, such as the quote above. Cosmetic surgery for example is largely inaccessible for lower-middle to lower-income citizens. The excuse is that it is not necessary for people’s health, which is true, but so it shouldn’t be used as an example. Abortion, that’s a whole different animal. Let’s use relevant examples…so it’d be interesting to see how this hospital performs.
Although in extreme examples plastic surgery is necessary in instances of severe skin deformation after being burned, for instance. However, in this case, this is not seen anymore as cosmetic surgery and the third payer could cover these costs.
Why should Cosmetic Surgery not be counted as a human health issue?
You see when you get into the business of insuring and providing healthcare for the entire nation (a democratic republic to add) there is no objective way to argue for what is rationally healthcare and what is not rationally healthcare. Because typically the people decide what is healthcare and what is not, and you will never be able to argue against any type of policy/tax/entitlement program etc when the people think they are getting a free lunch until the government collapses. It has happened throughout history multiple times. All of the biggest/grand-est empires fell because they overstretch their financial burden to encompass more than defense. They stretch into issues of subjectivity in which no man could argue objectively.
Runners are thiner than walkers; but walking may be better for heart disease.
I suspect runners have bad knees after a few years of running whereas walkers probably just waste more time covering the same distance.
About once a week I spend 20 to 30 minutes on an elliptical at the gym. However, when I hit the actual pavement five times a week I walk briskly for about a mile rather than run. Of course, when I walk I’m usually being pulled by a dog I’m hoping will do its business so I can head back home.
“More than two-thirds of people born before 1939 consider the welfare state “one of Britain’s proudest achievements”. Less than one-third of those born after 1979 say the same.”
“My only quibble is that the video doesn’t explain how government policies – such as the healthcare exclusion in the tax code – should be blamed for the grotesque waste, inefficiency, and featherbedding in most parts of the medical industry.”
“Good news from Europe: Each generation of Britons is more libertarian than the last and Sweden is leading every other country in privatizing health care.”
– One can only take so much government intervention before they realize they need a dramatic change.
Sweden proves that tightly regulated private companies can provide cost effective health care. In Sweden, some 97% of health care costs are paid by the government. It shows the problem in the US is we need more regulation.
@free market hospital
“And I cite examples of genuine free markets for cosmetic surgery and even (regardless of your views) abortion.”
Interesting to see how it’ll work but I don’t see much logic with some of the assertions, such as the quote above. Cosmetic surgery for example is largely inaccessible for lower-middle to lower-income citizens. The excuse is that it is not necessary for people’s health, which is true, but so it shouldn’t be used as an example. Abortion, that’s a whole different animal. Let’s use relevant examples…so it’d be interesting to see how this hospital performs.
Although in extreme examples plastic surgery is necessary in instances of severe skin deformation after being burned, for instance. However, in this case, this is not seen anymore as cosmetic surgery and the third payer could cover these costs.
Who defines what is necessary for human health?
Natural Law.
Who’s definition of natural law?
There is only one logical definition, Natural Law = negative rights, Natural Law =/= Positive Rights.
Why should Cosmetic Surgery not be counted as a human health issue?
You see when you get into the business of insuring and providing healthcare for the entire nation (a democratic republic to add) there is no objective way to argue for what is rationally healthcare and what is not rationally healthcare. Because typically the people decide what is healthcare and what is not, and you will never be able to argue against any type of policy/tax/entitlement program etc when the people think they are getting a free lunch until the government collapses. It has happened throughout history multiple times. All of the biggest/grand-est empires fell because they overstretch their financial burden to encompass more than defense. They stretch into issues of subjectivity in which no man could argue objectively.
“Runners are thiner than walkers; but walking may be better for heart disease.”
Solution: run some, walk some. Everybody wins.
Try a good combination of running and walking. Always a good idea to never do too much of one thing.
Runners are thiner than walkers; but walking may be better for heart disease.
I suspect runners have bad knees after a few years of running whereas walkers probably just waste more time covering the same distance.
About once a week I spend 20 to 30 minutes on an elliptical at the gym. However, when I hit the actual pavement five times a week I walk briskly for about a mile rather than run. Of course, when I walk I’m usually being pulled by a dog I’m hoping will do its business so I can head back home.
“More than two-thirds of people born before 1939 consider the welfare state “one of Britain’s proudest achievements”. Less than one-third of those born after 1979 say the same.”
Some unexpected good news.
“Runners are thiner than walkers; but walking may be better for heart disease.”
-I would rather walk as well.
“My only quibble is that the video doesn’t explain how government policies – such as the healthcare exclusion in the tax code – should be blamed for the grotesque waste, inefficiency, and featherbedding in most parts of the medical industry.”
…Yes, and Yes
“Good news from Europe: Each generation of Britons is more libertarian than the last and Sweden is leading every other country in privatizing health care.”
– One can only take so much government intervention before they realize they need a dramatic change.
Sweden proves that tightly regulated private companies can provide cost effective health care. In Sweden, some 97% of health care costs are paid by the government. It shows the problem in the US is we need more regulation.