[McCall]

Consdering half of the US is complaining about having to pay for their own health system, I think it would be kind of hard to forget that it's paid for in the UK with taxes. And no, I don't think that's wrong, and I'm happy to pay.

Yes, people abuse the system, but as for the funding, I disagree, a LOT of that money goes into the wages of people who perform no medical function in the NHS whatsoever, the funding isn't going to medical causes to nearly the degree it should be, it's going in administration and management which is growing to the point of becoming excess baggage.

Anecdotes are the realm of the Daily Mirror, not proper analysis of the system.

The Daily Mirror is the realm of sad old lefties.

The day I really stopped being happy to pay was the day I got income taxed £1,000 in a week. Call it an epiphany, but something told me I wasn't getting value for money any more... can't imagine what.

If a LOT (sic) of the money is going into non-medical crap, wouldn't that indicate that the first problem is cutting out said non-medical crap. Then you can start looking at whether you've got enough funding. I kinda suspect that - within a reasonable expectation, as total healthcare is a bottomless pit - they might just have enough dough.

[McCall]

<quote>Statistics are collections of lots of anecdotes, the precise opposite of book learning. Enough anecdotes to actually mean something.

Any honest statistician would agree.</quote>

Nope, she didn't.

[iamzack]

So statistics isn't "the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by inference from sampling?"

[McCall]

Sounds like something out of a text book. I'll check on that when she gets home. But a collection of anecdotes? Nah, she didn't buy that.

[iamzack]

Well when you collect anecdotes, you get data. And that's the definition I pulled from here.

[General Battuta]

Sounds like something out of a text book. I'll check on that when she gets home. But a collection of anecdotes? Nah, she didn't buy that.

I trust you can read 'anecdote' as 'data point', which is the intent. One health care experience = one data point. Put a lot of data points together, and you get statistics.

Anecdotes cannot describe macro-scale systems; they're just employing the fallacy of vividity. You need statistics to pick out trends and assess effectiveness.

[McCall]

Are you using fancy words to try to impress me? I'm already taken.

Now, I really was meant to be doing something before the missus gets home, so I guess I'll have to catch you folks later.

[iamzack]

What fancy words?

[General Battuta]

Are you using fancy words to try to impress me? I'm already taken.

Now, I really was meant to be doing something before the missus gets home, so I guess I'll have to catch you folks later.

As long as you understand the fundamental point that an anecdote means nothing. One, ten, or fifty bad experiences with NHS cannot describe NHS as a whole, since no system is perfect and NHS. Now, if you had data to compare the number of good experiences to bad experiences, that would be telling.

[McCall]

"the fallacy of vividity"

Beautifully poetic, but the FD would probably be laughing his ass off (as I got handed my P45) if I ever tried to use that in real life now. You guys aren't all in college/university are you?

Anecdotes, if you collect enough, mean a heck of a lot in my line of work. If I went around ignoring people and just referring to my last set of tractor production figures (common piss-take reference to Gordon Brown we use here), I wouldn't last very long. And I like my job; they pay me well.

Not really sure what I'm doing discussing the NHS with you guys though really, unless you too are tax-paying Brits. It's about as much your business as US healthcare is mine. We probably ought to butt out of each other's domestic business.

My only real point (at the beginning) was to warn you that it isn't anywhere near as rosy as some folks here make out. It's become something of a sacred cow, and we've had it so long I don't think anyone can really imagine life without it. Fear of the unknown and all that.

If a model like ours is definitely what you want though, go ahead. Just be prepared for it to fall a little short. That was really the only point I wanted to make.

All the best!

[iamzack]

Fallacy of vividity is a term for a specific logical fallacy. It's a proof by example, basically.

Anecdotes, if you collect enough, mean a heck of a lot...

That's what we said.

My only real point (at the beginning) was to warn you that it isn't anywhere near as rosy as some folks here make out.

We're well aware it's not perfect. We're arguing that a system in which everyone is guaranteed affordable health care is inherently better than one in which millions of people go broke with or without private insurance due to health care costs.

[General Battuta]

"the fallacy of vividity"

Beautifully poetic, but the FD would probably be laughing his ass off (as I got handed my P45) if I ever tried to use that in real life now. You guys aren't all in college/university are you?

It's a term for a specific logical fallacy, as iamzack said. No poetry involved.

Anecdotes, if you collect enough, mean a heck of a lot in my line of work.

Precisely; that's when they become statistics, when you get a big enough N to have a high-probability representative sample.

If I went around ignoring people and just referring to my last set of tractor production figures (common piss-take reference to Gordon Brown we use here), I wouldn't last very long. And I like my job; they pay me well.

Naturally you've got to use the right statistic, one that actually describes the situation.

Not really sure what I'm doing discussing the NHS with you guys though really, unless you too are tax-paying Brits. It's about as much your business as US healthcare is mine. We probably ought to butt out of each other's domestic business.

My only real point (at the beginning) was to warn you that it isn't anywhere near as rosy as some folks here make out. It's become something of a sacred cow, and we've had it so long I don't think anyone can really imagine life without it. Fear of the unknown and all that.

If a model like ours is definitely what you want though, go ahead. Just be prepared for it to fall a little short. That was really the only point I wanted to make.

The whole point is that it would be a definite improvement over the US model. No one thought it would be flawless.

[High Max]

I'm going to try not to derail to the thread, despite the fact you're...well you're trying to dodge Fury's lock and doing so duplicitiously. (For the record, I PM'd a global mod and they didn't take action before now.)

If I cared a lot or was that worried, I wouldn't have posted it publicly. I assumed something could happen and it is always possible, but life is full of risks. PM the mods to your heart's content. I consider it a run and hide action instead of dealing with it yourself. You have to call in reinforcements? What I do is I normally deal with it by myself without help or I argue and then try to let it go. I don't go running to authorities, especially over words. Never once have I reported anyone on this forum, and I won't.

[iamzack]

SHUT UP HIGH MAX AND WHOEVER IS PROVOKING/ENCOURAGING HIM NGTM-1R

[Flipside]

Having just read what sounded like an editorial from the Daily Mail, I don't think I even need bother responding to McCall's statements....

[Herra Tohtori]

* Herra Tohtori dives into the maggot container

The crux of the question is this:

Should human suffering be allowed to be exploited and turned into multi-billion dollar business, or should the government take care of reducing that suffering on a non-profit basis (ie. paid from public funds simply because it must be done, not because it's profitable)?

Personally, I think something like healthcare belongs firmly in the public domain of economy and should always be mainly funded with tax money.

On the topic of black and white capitalism versus socialism that is always dragged into this sort of conversation... in my opinion, private sector enterprises work perfectly fine in cases where the interests of the consumer and the interests of the business do not conflict as harshly as they do in the healthcare business of US of A. Like, say, buying a car or a computer. Hell, considering Microsoft's operating systems I shudder to think what an operating system designed by a governmental committee would be. So yes, in some cases I do think private sector can do a lot better job than public sector would.

However, this only works as long as you don't desperately need car or a computer. When a statistically significant portion of the populace desperately needs treatment, making them pay for it is tantamount to extortion, and to my view point that is exactly what the insurance companies try to do. From a business stand point, it's just numbers of course. Which is exactly why things like healthcare should not be about numbers and profit, but getting the job done.

Maybe the reason why so many people abhor taxes is because they don't like paying other people's expenses, as they think of it. However, this kind of thinking fails to take into account that statistically it's not entirely impossible for them to be in a bad situation. Like catching some illness or other, and the treatment being more costly than what their insurance covers under the small print... then they can't get the treatment, lose their health, lose their job, lose their life. Whereas if they had been paying for NHS in taxes while being at work (and not paying for a crappy health insurance, so its plus minus zero), they would be getting their treatment statistically much more likely than with a private sector, insurance-dependant system.


Note that public healthcare does not rule out private healthcare sector or additional health insurances. What it does rule out is people not getting treatment because of their inability to pay for it.

[Flipside]

@Herra

Exactly, there is a private option in the UK as well as the public option, the equipment is slightly better, you get an individual room instead of a ward, there's no waiting lists etc, the option is there for those that want it. There are certain operations the NHS will not perform, mostly cosmetic-type treatment, that can be got on private services, but not always on the NHS.

No-one claimed the NHS was perfect, but it provides a basic need of the populace, sometimes it could do better, but not having it at all would be a lot worse.

[blackhole]

I just want to point out that most americans haven't a goddamned clue what healthcare actually means, much less what they're voting for. All they hear is "SOCIALISTIC" and they go completely bonkers. It's like throwing meat to a bunch of crocodiles.

[High Max]

I still feel that if people made better health choices in their life and had enough self respect to do so, healthcare would cost less since there would be less people in the hospital at the same time (not crouded) and thus, less doctors needed and working less hours.

[blackhole]

I still feel that if people made better health choices in their life and had enough self respect to do so, healthcare would cost less since there would be less people in the hospital at the same time (not crouded) and thus, less doctors needed and working less hours.

I believe there has been an article saying something about our health care costs skyrocketing mostly because of fat people.