The 50 most developed countries in the world and Universal Healthcare.

[AzogtheDefiler]

No it won’t because there won’t be a minimum wage after robots take over. Not trying to be all Clyde Lewis about it, it robots are coming. Manuel labor won’t be what it was. Instead of one illegal digging a ditch, it will be some Paki IT dude sitting in a van operating a dozen robots digging ditches. That dude won’t do that for $15.00 an hour it will be for $35.00 an hour. So he will be paying all the medical bills. Not the rich guys and political elite who use private healthcare.

tax robots not humans!

If you want.

beats hearing right winger whine about taxes.

Which right winger and what tax’s? I have no gripe over tax’s. Tax’s pay my salary. Tax’s keep our rods looking good, or are supposed to. Where I take issue is someone else spending my money on what they ruin I need as far as my health go’s.

Forget daniel, he is a troll...all he will do is keep responding back with vague ramblings

I have him blocked.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

tax robots not humans!

If you want.

beats hearing right winger whine about taxes.

Which right winger and what tax’s? I have no gripe over tax’s. Tax’s pay my salary. Tax’s keep our rods looking good, or are supposed to. Where I take issue is someone else spending my money on what they ruin I need as far as my health go’s.

Forget daniel, he is a troll...all he will do is keep responding back with vague ramblings

I have him blocked.

Good advice

 

[Crixus]

If you want.

beats hearing right winger whine about taxes.

Which right winger and what tax’s? I have no gripe over tax’s. Tax’s pay my salary. Tax’s keep our rods looking good, or are supposed to. Where I take issue is someone else spending my money on what they ruin I need as far as my health go’s.

Forget daniel, he is a troll...all he will do is keep responding back with vague ramblings

I have him blocked.

Good advice

I try not to use ignore.

 

[Cecilie1200]

SOME PEOPLE come to the United States for healthcare. Some. Its a tiny percentage and not proof that the United States healthcare system is better.

Healthcare cost in Europe are about 1/2 to 2/3s of what they are in the United States. The Quality is better because the people there live longer. Everyone there is provided for. Its the three BIG WINS!

The United States can get the taxes it needs for Universal Healthcare from the top 20% of income earners who have 80% of the wealth in the country. Capital Gains, Property, Estate and other things besides just income will need to see increased tax rates. The Middle Class will only be lightly effected if at all by the increased tax rates. The lower class and the poor won't have to pay anything.

This is yet another example of the mythology that I'm talking about.

If what you said was true, then why isn't Europe doing that? You claim we can get all the money we need from the top 20%, right? Why isn't Europe doing that? Why are people in Denmark, who earn $40,000 a year, paying 50% income tax?

Why are people in France that earn $30,000 a year, paying 30% income taxes?

All over Europe, it isn't the rich and wealth, or the top 20%, or 10%, or 1% paying for health care.... it's the middle and lower class paying for it.

Do you know why France is having riots right now? It's because the government was trying to jack up taxes on fuel. They are already paying almost double in income tax, and they want to screw the lower and middle class over with fuel taxes.

Why? To pay for, among other things, their expensive health care system.

You keep telling everyone how it's cheaper... and then when I compare their insane taxes, to my health insurance premium... there is nothing cheaper about it.

You keep blabbering about how the rich and wealthy will pay for it... and then point to all these countries with it, where the poor and middle class are paying for it.

There is not one single example in this world, where the rich and wealthy, pay for the health care of the poor.

And maybe you missed it, but France tried a wealth tax, and the all the wealthy packed up and left.

And clearly you didn't get the memo, because Amazon was about to create 25,000 jobs in New York, and the politicians tried to get them to pay for a bunch of stuff.... and Amazon left, just like the wealthy of France started leaving, just like the wealthy of Venezuela left.

Your system doesn't work. How many hundreds of examples do you need, before you stop believing the mythology the left-wing spews at you?

The irony is, even some of the socialists in this country admit that universal health care would cost at least a 12% on everyone. And that's BS, because that's way to low.

As a percentage of GDP, your average European country spends about 11% of their GDP on healthcare. The United States by contrast spends 17% of its GDP on healthcare. Also consider that US GDP and US GDP per capita is higher on average than these European countries.

The Europeans spend less as a percentage of GDP, cover everyone in the country, and live longer on average than Americans. Those are the facts, and it shows that the Europeans WIN in all three categories.

Israel spends only 7% of its GDP on healthcare and everyone is provided and they live longer than Americans.

"Never mind your facts. I want to believe this is true, so I'm going to keep insisting on it!"

Life expectancy has nothing to do with healthcare. You've had this explained to you ad nauseam. Ergo, arguments about "We need to copy these countries because they live longer" is the same as you saying, "I have no argument, I just want it!"

Also, if you want to blather about healthcare expenditures as a percentage of GDP, you need to explain exactly which spending you're referring to, and provide sources. There is entirely too much loose, sloppy conflation of different healthcare spending numbers for anyone to just take your vague word for it.

Life Expectancy has everything to do with healthcare regardless of your wishful thinking that it does not.

Were looking at total spending on healthcare as a percentage of GDP. The United States has the highest rate in the world. That is according to the CIA World Fact Book. The United States spends more as a percentage of GDP on health care, more per person on health care, than any country in the world. That's an indisputable fact. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that. The United States is 34th in life expectancy. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that fact. The United States does not provide health coverage for all its citizens while the Europeans do provide coverage. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that fact.

Europeans win when it comes to taking care of all of their citizens, they win in terms of how much they spend per person, they spend less than the United States, and finally they win on the most important metric of all which is life expectancy.

Actually, the quality of healthcare does not have much to do with life expectancy. Once you get over the basic stuff, like having antibiotics and vaccinations, the rest hardly makes a noticeable dent. The big improvements in life expectancy came when cities improved their sanitation, when our diets improved, and when vaccinations were developed for all the major childhood diseases.

And when regular use of penicillin to combat infections became common. You know how abortion advocates love to cite stats showing that women dying from pregnancy complications went down after Roe v. Wade? They're actually taking credit for penicillin use.

 

[danielpalos]

a higher minimum wage will encourage greater market participation.

No it won’t because there won’t be a minimum wage after robots take over. Not trying to be all Clyde Lewis about it, it robots are coming. Manuel labor won’t be what it was. Instead of one illegal digging a ditch, it will be some Paki IT dude sitting in a van operating a dozen robots digging ditches. That dude won’t do that for $15.00 an hour it will be for $35.00 an hour. So he will be paying all the medical bills. Not the rich guys and political elite who use private healthcare.

tax robots not humans!

If you want.

beats hearing right winger whine about taxes.

Which right winger and what tax’s? I have no gripe over tax’s. Tax’s pay my salary. Tax’s keep our rods looking good, or are supposed to. Where I take issue is someone else spending my money on what they ruin I need as far as my health go’s.

inequality can do that.

 

[danielpalos]

tax robots not humans!

If you want.

beats hearing right winger whine about taxes.

Which right winger and what tax’s? I have no gripe over tax’s. Tax’s pay my salary. Tax’s keep our rods looking good, or are supposed to. Where I take issue is someone else spending my money on what they ruin I need as far as my health go’s.

Forget daniel, he is a troll...all he will do is keep responding back with vague ramblings

I have him blocked.

You lost All of your arguments.

 

[Harry Dresden]

WRONG...because automation will fill many of those jobs. You're 20, right?

Yup. Even illegals will be out of work soon.

Well, if that were the case, we'd have rising levels of unemployment and no unfilled jobs. Reality is different. 4% unemployment and dropping, 7.3 million unfilled jobs. Robo-worker is failing miserably when it comes to making a dent in these figures.

Did you not see the robots?

Yep, I saw them. Still not making any dent in U.S. labor shortages though. 7.3 million unfilled jobs, lowest unemployment rate in half a century. Robo-workers have failed to prevent this from happening.

a higher minimum wage will encourage greater market participation.

oh geezus.....you say the same shit in every thread danny.....

 

[Cecilie1200]

Life expectancy US - 79.68 - avg. weight for male - 192 pds
Life expectancy UK - 80.54 - avg. weight for male - 184 pds

LOL

Edge is such a child.

Universal Healthcare in the United States would help address that problem.

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

 

[Cecilie1200]

People in the US are also taller/larger on average...shorter/thinner people live longer. 80 is pretty damn good!

Actually Northern Europeans tend to be taller than Americans. The Dutch on average are the tallest people. They live longer than Americans on average. Italians live longer too, but average they are equal or smaller in terms of height.

Wrong. Average height for males in the US is 5'10. Same in Netherlands. They live one year longer. And it is weight not height. Their aveage weight is 185 vs. 192 for the US. Try again. You're losing badly. And the delta is one year. LMAO.

One year is a big difference when your dealing with average life expectancies among large populations. Universal Healthcare can help reduce the obesity problem in the United States.

And you really hope that if you just state it as a fact enough times, it'll make it true and make up for the fact that you can't prove it.

 

[dudmuck]

Life expectancy US - 79.68 - avg. weight for male - 192 pds
Life expectancy UK - 80.54 - avg. weight for male - 184 pds

LOL

Edge is such a child.

Universal Healthcare in the United States would help address that problem.

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

 

[danielpalos]

Yup. Even illegals will be out of work soon.

Well, if that were the case, we'd have rising levels of unemployment and no unfilled jobs. Reality is different. 4% unemployment and dropping, 7.3 million unfilled jobs. Robo-worker is failing miserably when it comes to making a dent in these figures.

Did you not see the robots?

Yep, I saw them. Still not making any dent in U.S. labor shortages though. 7.3 million unfilled jobs, lowest unemployment rate in half a century. Robo-workers have failed to prevent this from happening.

a higher minimum wage will encourage greater market participation.

oh geezus.....you say the same shit in every thread danny.....

lol. and, y'all still have nothing but fallacy for rebuttal, every thread.

 

[danielpalos]

Life expectancy US - 79.68 - avg. weight for male - 192 pds
Life expectancy UK - 80.54 - avg. weight for male - 184 pds

LOL

Edge is such a child.

Universal Healthcare in the United States would help address that problem.

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

advancing food preparation technologies may be a cost effective alternative.

 

[bripat9643]

This is yet another example of the mythology that I'm talking about.

If what you said was true, then why isn't Europe doing that? You claim we can get all the money we need from the top 20%, right? Why isn't Europe doing that? Why are people in Denmark, who earn $40,000 a year, paying 50% income tax?

Why are people in France that earn $30,000 a year, paying 30% income taxes?

All over Europe, it isn't the rich and wealth, or the top 20%, or 10%, or 1% paying for health care.... it's the middle and lower class paying for it.

Do you know why France is having riots right now? It's because the government was trying to jack up taxes on fuel. They are already paying almost double in income tax, and they want to screw the lower and middle class over with fuel taxes.

Why? To pay for, among other things, their expensive health care system.

You keep telling everyone how it's cheaper... and then when I compare their insane taxes, to my health insurance premium... there is nothing cheaper about it.

You keep blabbering about how the rich and wealthy will pay for it... and then point to all these countries with it, where the poor and middle class are paying for it.

There is not one single example in this world, where the rich and wealthy, pay for the health care of the poor.

And maybe you missed it, but France tried a wealth tax, and the all the wealthy packed up and left.

And clearly you didn't get the memo, because Amazon was about to create 25,000 jobs in New York, and the politicians tried to get them to pay for a bunch of stuff.... and Amazon left, just like the wealthy of France started leaving, just like the wealthy of Venezuela left.

Your system doesn't work. How many hundreds of examples do you need, before you stop believing the mythology the left-wing spews at you?

The irony is, even some of the socialists in this country admit that universal health care would cost at least a 12% on everyone. And that's BS, because that's way to low.

As a percentage of GDP, your average European country spends about 11% of their GDP on healthcare. The United States by contrast spends 17% of its GDP on healthcare. Also consider that US GDP and US GDP per capita is higher on average than these European countries.

The Europeans spend less as a percentage of GDP, cover everyone in the country, and live longer on average than Americans. Those are the facts, and it shows that the Europeans WIN in all three categories.

Israel spends only 7% of its GDP on healthcare and everyone is provided and they live longer than Americans.

"Never mind your facts. I want to believe this is true, so I'm going to keep insisting on it!"

Life expectancy has nothing to do with healthcare. You've had this explained to you ad nauseam. Ergo, arguments about "We need to copy these countries because they live longer" is the same as you saying, "I have no argument, I just want it!"

Also, if you want to blather about healthcare expenditures as a percentage of GDP, you need to explain exactly which spending you're referring to, and provide sources. There is entirely too much loose, sloppy conflation of different healthcare spending numbers for anyone to just take your vague word for it.

Life Expectancy has everything to do with healthcare regardless of your wishful thinking that it does not.

Were looking at total spending on healthcare as a percentage of GDP. The United States has the highest rate in the world. That is according to the CIA World Fact Book. The United States spends more as a percentage of GDP on health care, more per person on health care, than any country in the world. That's an indisputable fact. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that. The United States is 34th in life expectancy. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that fact. The United States does not provide health coverage for all its citizens while the Europeans do provide coverage. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that fact.

Europeans win when it comes to taking care of all of their citizens, they win in terms of how much they spend per person, they spend less than the United States, and finally they win on the most important metric of all which is life expectancy.

Actually, the quality of healthcare does not have much to do with life expectancy. Once you get over the basic stuff, like having antibiotics and vaccinations, the rest hardly makes a noticeable dent. The big improvements in life expectancy came when cities improved their sanitation, when our diets improved, and when vaccinations were developed for all the major childhood diseases.

And when regular use of penicillin to combat infections became common. You know how abortion advocates love to cite stats showing that women dying from pregnancy complications went down after Roe v. Wade? They're actually taking credit for penicillin use.

The invention of the automobile was a big factor in improved public health because it got rid of the mountains of horseshit littering the streets. Flies are important vectors for disease, and they swarmed in big clouds when horses were the principle means of transportation.

 

[bripat9643]

Life expectancy US - 79.68 - avg. weight for male - 192 pds
Life expectancy UK - 80.54 - avg. weight for male - 184 pds

LOL

Edge is such a child.

Universal Healthcare in the United States would help address that problem.

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

Junk food is not cheap. It's expensive. Chicken, rice, potatoes and vegetables are all cheap and healthy. You can buy a chicken roaster for $0.49/lb. Rice is $0.25/lb. There's nothing healthier than oatmeal or eggs, and they are both cheap.

The claim that healthy food is expensive is a damn lie.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Well, if that were the case, we'd have rising levels of unemployment and no unfilled jobs. Reality is different. 4% unemployment and dropping, 7.3 million unfilled jobs. Robo-worker is failing miserably when it comes to making a dent in these figures.

Did you not see the robots?

Yep, I saw them. Still not making any dent in U.S. labor shortages though. 7.3 million unfilled jobs, lowest unemployment rate in half a century. Robo-workers have failed to prevent this from happening.

a higher minimum wage will encourage greater market participation.

oh geezus.....you say the same shit in every thread danny.....

lol. and, y'all still have nothing but fallacy for rebuttal, every thread.

yea fallacy for some reason you could not answer....like you could not tell us were ellis island is ....here is a clue....its not in Arizona....

 

[Cecilie1200]

Life expectancy US - 79.68 - avg. weight for male - 192 pds
Life expectancy UK - 80.54 - avg. weight for male - 184 pds

LOL

Edge is such a child.

Universal Healthcare in the United States would help address that problem.

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

Again, I have no idea where YOU are shopping, that the processed, packaged crap is cheaper than fresh. I cook most of my family's meals from scratch in large part because it helps keep the food budget low, as compared to premade packaged crap. And don't even get me started about the cost of eating out.

We are in agreement that consumers CHOOSE to eat fattening crap. They aren't doing it because they can't afford to make better choices, as Edge keeps trying to pretend. Nor are they doing it because they don't know any better, as he's also trying to pretend.

I disagree on why the government subsidizes crops, largely because nothing the government does is ever that simple or straightforward. Fact remains that the cheapest way to feed your family is to do most of your shopping in the butcher and produce sections, and avoid most of the rest of the store. Coincidentally, that's also the healthiest thing to do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As a percentage of GDP, your average European country spends about 11% of their GDP on healthcare. The United States by contrast spends 17% of its GDP on healthcare. Also consider that US GDP and US GDP per capita is higher on average than these European countries.

The Europeans spend less as a percentage of GDP, cover everyone in the country, and live longer on average than Americans. Those are the facts, and it shows that the Europeans WIN in all three categories.

Israel spends only 7% of its GDP on healthcare and everyone is provided and they live longer than Americans.

"Never mind your facts. I want to believe this is true, so I'm going to keep insisting on it!"

Life expectancy has nothing to do with healthcare. You've had this explained to you ad nauseam. Ergo, arguments about "We need to copy these countries because they live longer" is the same as you saying, "I have no argument, I just want it!"

Also, if you want to blather about healthcare expenditures as a percentage of GDP, you need to explain exactly which spending you're referring to, and provide sources. There is entirely too much loose, sloppy conflation of different healthcare spending numbers for anyone to just take your vague word for it.

Life Expectancy has everything to do with healthcare regardless of your wishful thinking that it does not.

Were looking at total spending on healthcare as a percentage of GDP. The United States has the highest rate in the world. That is according to the CIA World Fact Book. The United States spends more as a percentage of GDP on health care, more per person on health care, than any country in the world. That's an indisputable fact. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that. The United States is 34th in life expectancy. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that fact. The United States does not provide health coverage for all its citizens while the Europeans do provide coverage. No anecdotal evidence or examples can rebut that fact.

Europeans win when it comes to taking care of all of their citizens, they win in terms of how much they spend per person, they spend less than the United States, and finally they win on the most important metric of all which is life expectancy.

Actually, the quality of healthcare does not have much to do with life expectancy. Once you get over the basic stuff, like having antibiotics and vaccinations, the rest hardly makes a noticeable dent. The big improvements in life expectancy came when cities improved their sanitation, when our diets improved, and when vaccinations were developed for all the major childhood diseases.

And when regular use of penicillin to combat infections became common. You know how abortion advocates love to cite stats showing that women dying from pregnancy complications went down after Roe v. Wade? They're actually taking credit for penicillin use.

The invention of the automobile was a big factor in improved public health because it got rid of the mountains of horseshit littering the streets. Flies are important vectors for disease, and they swarmed in big clouds when horses were the principle means of transportation.

Not to mention it made it easier for garbage to be hauled farther away from populated areas.

 

[dudmuck]

Universal Healthcare in the United States would help address that problem.

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

Again, I have no idea where YOU are shopping, that the processed, packaged crap is cheaper than fresh. I cook most of my family's meals from scratch in large part because it helps keep the food budget low, as compared to premade packaged crap. And don't even get me started about the cost of eating out.

We are in agreement that consumers CHOOSE to eat fattening crap. They aren't doing it because they can't afford to make better choices, as Edge keeps trying to pretend. Nor are they doing it because they don't know any better, as he's also trying to pretend.

I disagree on why the government subsidizes crops, largely because nothing the government does is ever that simple or straightforward. Fact remains that the cheapest way to feed your family is to do most of your shopping in the butcher and produce sections, and avoid most of the rest of the store. Coincidentally, that's also the healthiest thing to do.

Its just the raw data:

Still trying to find rice and eggs

 

[bripat9643]

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

Again, I have no idea where YOU are shopping, that the processed, packaged crap is cheaper than fresh. I cook most of my family's meals from scratch in large part because it helps keep the food budget low, as compared to premade packaged crap. And don't even get me started about the cost of eating out.

We are in agreement that consumers CHOOSE to eat fattening crap. They aren't doing it because they can't afford to make better choices, as Edge keeps trying to pretend. Nor are they doing it because they don't know any better, as he's also trying to pretend.

I disagree on why the government subsidizes crops, largely because nothing the government does is ever that simple or straightforward. Fact remains that the cheapest way to feed your family is to do most of your shopping in the butcher and produce sections, and avoid most of the rest of the store. Coincidentally, that's also the healthiest thing to do.

Its just the raw data:

Still trying to find rice and eggs

What's your point?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

How? My insurance doesn't tell me not eat bad foods? Please explain this. I live in Boston, the best place for healthcare in the WORLD.

Being able to talk to doctors and healthcare providers and being given access to low cost quality food. That's how. Many people in low income areas don't have very good access to healthcare professionals or low cost high quality food options.

1) You can already talk to more healthcare providers about diet and nutrition - for free - than you can shake a stick at.

2) "Access" doesn't make people WANT to talk about dieting, let alone want to follow the advice.

3) Losing weight doesn't require much or any input from a doctor for most people, and everyone already knows how.

4) "Univeral healthcare" does nothing about access to food.

5) There is no one in this country who doesn't have access to nutritious food if they want it. Fresh produce is literally the cheapest stuff in the supermarket, and a whole hell of a lot cheaper than junk food. I have no idea where you've been shopping that McDonald's and potato chips are cheaper than fruits and veggies.

6) The left is the home of the people screeching about the need to ban any and all technological innovations in food production, which exist primarily for the purpose of making things like fresh produce and fresh meat widely available at prices even poor people can afford. Noticeably, the "organic" shit is vastly more expensive.

Processed foods do tend to be less expensive than most fresh foods. In part, they're that cheap because the U.S. government subsidizes the producers of corn and wheat, the main ingredients in those packaged snacks, which helps keep crop prices low. In addition, lean meats and fish, as well as fresh fruits and vegetables, are highly perishable items, and there's a cost involved in delivering them unsullied to your table or cafeteria tray. But the fast food burger does not necessarily need to be less expensive than the garden salad. Fresh, wholesome foods are not intrinsically more expensive to produce.

Underlying most of the food price disparity in America is the fact that we, the consumers, have voted with our forks and told our government and food suppliers that all we want is cheap, convenient processed junk. Therefore, our government subsidizes crops that provide these food-like products (corn, soybeans, and wheat) so that they become very cheap to purchase and the most profitable for farmers to grow.

Again, I have no idea where YOU are shopping, that the processed, packaged crap is cheaper than fresh. I cook most of my family's meals from scratch in large part because it helps keep the food budget low, as compared to premade packaged crap. And don't even get me started about the cost of eating out.

We are in agreement that consumers CHOOSE to eat fattening crap. They aren't doing it because they can't afford to make better choices, as Edge keeps trying to pretend. Nor are they doing it because they don't know any better, as he's also trying to pretend.

I disagree on why the government subsidizes crops, largely because nothing the government does is ever that simple or straightforward. Fact remains that the cheapest way to feed your family is to do most of your shopping in the butcher and produce sections, and avoid most of the rest of the store. Coincidentally, that's also the healthiest thing to do.

Its just the raw data:

Still trying to find rice and eggs

Rice = 5%? What do you mean?