Letter: Best?

Patricia J. Bush, Ph.D., Pelican Bay

Best?

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, defending his intention to overturn Obamacare, said that it would ruin the best health-care system in the world.

Does he live too far up the road to get the paper?

Best health-care system? What does he use to measure best health-care system?

According to United Nations and CIA 2011 data, we are an embarrassing 34th in the world in infant mortality. Slovenia, Cuba and South Korea do better.

We are 50th in life expectancy. We have 35 million to 55 million citizens without health insurance at any one time. Yet, we spend far more on health care than any other country — more than $6,000 per capita in the U.S., about $2,600 per capita in the United Kingdom, and a far greater percentage of our gross domestic product. We are the only developed country in the world that does not provide health-care coverage for all its citizens, whether via a single-payer or insurance system.

Boehner and your fellow Republicans: if you want to overturn the Affordable Care Act, tell us what you would put in place that would give us the best health-care system in the world, because by any logical measures, we sure don't have it now.

© 2012 Naples Daily News. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 44

Beachbaby writes:

Bravo, Dr. Bush. I can't wait for the ignorant Teapublicans on this forum to come back with their usual inane responses. Anicou, trader9, silentmoron, stinky? Anyone?

colinkelly2 writes:

The population of Slovenia is 2 million; virtually all of them Slovenes. The US population is 315 million people of ever ethnos in the world; 25 million of them, ten times the number of Slovenes, are immigrants born somewhere else.
To compare a demographic like infant death in these two states is like comparing apples to steel production, less than meaningless. Only the ignorant, or those trying to prove a political point, would do it.

colinkelly2 writes:

Is that ignorant enough for you, Beachbaby?

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to colinkelly2:

Is that ignorant enough for you, Beachbaby?

Not up to the challenge, colon? Well, then tell your Republicans to get out of the way, as they sure don't know how to lead.

CarpeVeritas writes:

in response to colinkelly2:

The population of Slovenia is 2 million; virtually all of them Slovenes. The US population is 315 million people of ever ethnos in the world; 25 million of them, ten times the number of Slovenes, are immigrants born somewhere else.
To compare a demographic like infant death in these two states is like comparing apples to steel production, less than meaningless. Only the ignorant, or those trying to prove a political point, would do it.

But Colin, I'd make the point that ethnicity plays a much smaller role in determining health outcomes than environment and level of health care received.

You make a good point about recent immigrants. But, using your figures, how does 8% of the population completely skew any data we have about the health of our health care delivery system?

whalling writes:

Obamacare does nothing to improve the quality of healthcare in America, it is just all about who makes the healthcare decisions and who pays what. In fact, healthcare decisions in many cases will be made by bureaucrats in the future under Obamacare which is certainly not an improvement. You may have thought the "death panel" discussions were not correct, but they are correct in the law. As to cost, that one is easy, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office recently released its projection that Obamacare will add $1.1 trillion to the national debt in a short number of years. So, where is something in Obamacare that improves healthcare and reduces costs????

Arushure writes:

CarpeVeritas, why do you bother dealing with Colin's sick mind?

Case in point:

> You make a good point about recent immigrants.

Recent immigrants are ALIVE, so they can hardly be a factor in the miserable stats on US infant mortality. If anything, the fact that they come to us having survived birth and childhood IMPROVES our statistics. Or, put another way, makes our non-immigrant natality results even worse.

Colin is just an old-fashioned racist. "If only there weren't those non-whites to whom our system denies health access, we'd have great results."

He is also an incorrigible ignoramus about the rest of the world who still doesn't know, and most assuredly doesn't want to know, the ethnic diversity and immigrant populations of the other industrialized countries who have national health systems and much better outcomes.

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to whalling:

Obamacare does nothing to improve the quality of healthcare in America, it is just all about who makes the healthcare decisions and who pays what. In fact, healthcare decisions in many cases will be made by bureaucrats in the future under Obamacare which is certainly not an improvement. You may have thought the "death panel" discussions were not correct, but they are correct in the law. As to cost, that one is easy, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office recently released its projection that Obamacare will add $1.1 trillion to the national debt in a short number of years. So, where is something in Obamacare that improves healthcare and reduces costs????

Whalling, in order to help you catch up with the real facts, here is a website to help you:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthrefor...

Now, after you have read the provided material, come back here, so you can be tested on your retention of these facts. Thank you.

ChiDem writes:

in response to Beachbaby:

Bravo, Dr. Bush. I can't wait for the ignorant Teapublicans on this forum to come back with their usual inane responses. Anicou, trader9, silentmoron, stinky? Anyone?

Here is my ignorant Response.

We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase

and fined if we don't,

with the SAME government regulated insurance policies with lobbyist written mandated coverages, no competitive free market that we were forced by government to take with minimal choice, for decades

where “Tort reform is not in the bill because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers. And, that is the plain and simple truth.” ((former DNC chair Howard Dean)

which, purportedly covers at least ten million more people,

without adding a single new doctor, but cutting billions from the existing one's compensation

but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,

written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it,

passed by a Congress that was s----- enough not to read it

but smart enough to exempt themselves from it,

and exempted ten of thousands of people, for some unknown reason, before it even starts,
as determined by a bureaucrat, without legislated guidelines

with thousands of regulations, taxes, and fines that haven’t even been written yet by bureaucrats, not our elected representatives

with original CBO cost estimate of $900 billion over ten years, revised by the CBO to $2.6 trillion over ten years.

and signed by a President who smokes and was told to cut back on alcohol consumption,

with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, and couldn't find a job out of college until daddy gave him a job

for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect,

by a congress which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, and the Great Society that has continually gotten worse for 60 years after $6.3 trillion being spent,

with CBO estimates of $33,646 cost per additional insured

with provisions to make lawyers richer off the system and suing health care providers and selling out the doctors to pay off the trial lawyers

all to be overseen by an obese surgeon general and a herd of HHS secretary bureaucrats

and paid for by a country that's broke and headed for Another Recession!!

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG???

So Beachbaby, what is your rebuttal? I'll assume you will not have one, or it will involve name calling.

ChiDem writes:

in response to ChiDem:

Here is my ignorant Response.

We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase

and fined if we don't,

with the SAME government regulated insurance policies with lobbyist written mandated coverages, no competitive free market that we were forced by government to take with minimal choice, for decades

where “Tort reform is not in the bill because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers. And, that is the plain and simple truth.” ((former DNC chair Howard Dean)

which, purportedly covers at least ten million more people,

without adding a single new doctor, but cutting billions from the existing one's compensation

but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,

written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it,

passed by a Congress that was s----- enough not to read it

but smart enough to exempt themselves from it,

and exempted ten of thousands of people, for some unknown reason, before it even starts,
as determined by a bureaucrat, without legislated guidelines

with thousands of regulations, taxes, and fines that haven’t even been written yet by bureaucrats, not our elected representatives

with original CBO cost estimate of $900 billion over ten years, revised by the CBO to $2.6 trillion over ten years.

and signed by a President who smokes and was told to cut back on alcohol consumption,

with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, and couldn't find a job out of college until daddy gave him a job

for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect,

by a congress which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, and the Great Society that has continually gotten worse for 60 years after $6.3 trillion being spent,

with CBO estimates of $33,646 cost per additional insured

with provisions to make lawyers richer off the system and suing health care providers and selling out the doctors to pay off the trial lawyers

all to be overseen by an obese surgeon general and a herd of HHS secretary bureaucrats

and paid for by a country that's broke and headed for Another Recession!!

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG???

So Beachbaby, what is your rebuttal? I'll assume you will not have one, or it will involve name calling.

Forgot to add a humorous snippet.

back in 1990 as the internet scenario goes, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for $13,000,000 in tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. (do you know how much profit you need to make to owe $13 million in back taxes?) Now we are trusting the ONLY health care insurance of our country to the same nit-wits who couldn't make money running a hore house and selling booze!

Humorous if you consider government deciding your health care as humorous.

Write_Thinker writes:

"We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't."

As opposed to carrying whatever illness you have around until it grows to the point of bringing you into the Emergency Room by ambulance, then receiving only enough care to stabilize you, then off you go again, until your next costly return. Since you elected your right not to carry insurance, you now have a choice of hocking everything you have or going bankrupt and passing all your bills onto those that do have insurance.

Sounds like the conservative thing to do.

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to ChiDem:

Forgot to add a humorous snippet.

back in 1990 as the internet scenario goes, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for $13,000,000 in tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. (do you know how much profit you need to make to owe $13 million in back taxes?) Now we are trusting the ONLY health care insurance of our country to the same nit-wits who couldn't make money running a hore house and selling booze!

Humorous if you consider government deciding your health care as humorous.

Yes, but could Bernie Madoff have run it any better?

ChiDem writes:

in response to Write_Thinker:

Yes, but could Bernie Madoff have run it any better?

Finally some logic out of you.

Government is compared to Madoff.

But it is different when Madoff steals from people vs when government steals from people??

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to ChiDem:

Finally some logic out of you.

Government is compared to Madoff.

But it is different when Madoff steals from people vs when government steals from people??

The point that sailed right over your tiny head is that private industry is no guarantee of any ability to do things better than government. Take Romney, and Bain Capital, for example. They would have bankrupted the hore house and put all the workers on the unemployment line, as they would shut down the operation and try to move it to China. Then wonder why that did not work, it looked good on paper?

herrick9 writes:

I for one would like to see the data source supporting 16,000 additional IRS agents in support of the penalty for non insured. Let's see that's 4% or 4-million projected to forgo the insurance for H/C and a penalty of $95.00.
Now if my math is any good that's one agent for every 250 people forgoing the insurance.
How about "highly unlikely" in lieu of saying you are blowing smoke out a body orifice?

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to Damyankee:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Well, where can we go to find any credibility then? You guys claim any data, which is data, is no good simply because it comes from someone you declare to be not credible. Soon, the only information that will be allowed will come from GBTV, Rush or the Heritage Foundation, all of which is owned by the Koch Bros. You have to look at the data and make judgement. If the data is good, what difference the source?

pmz writes:

Please don't confuse neo-republican politics with health care. They are unrelated.

Please don't confuse Obamacare with health care. It is merely the means to the end of having a competitive nation for business. Sick people are notoriously ineffective at work so the goal is to invest in health, and reap the benefits in business.

Republicans used to the party of business. The neo-republican mob has replaced them and is the party of self. As long as self is healthy, everything else is waste.

See the problem?

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to pmz:

Please don't confuse neo-republican politics with health care. They are unrelated.

Please don't confuse Obamacare with health care. It is merely the means to the end of having a competitive nation for business. Sick people are notoriously ineffective at work so the goal is to invest in health, and reap the benefits in business.

Republicans used to the party of business. The neo-republican mob has replaced them and is the party of self. As long as self is healthy, everything else is waste.

See the problem?

"Republicans used to the party of business. The neo-republican mob has replaced them and is the party of self. As long as self is healthy, everything else is waste."

Now that makes the most sense of anything I have seen anywhere in quite a long time. All Republicans should be forced to read and consider those three sentences.

pmz writes:

in response to herrick9:

I for one would like to see the data source supporting 16,000 additional IRS agents in support of the penalty for non insured. Let's see that's 4% or 4-million projected to forgo the insurance for H/C and a penalty of $95.00.
Now if my math is any good that's one agent for every 250 people forgoing the insurance.
How about "highly unlikely" in lieu of saying you are blowing smoke out a body orifice?

"I for one would like to see the data source supporting 16,000 additional IRS agents in support of the penalty for non insured"

Why would you claim it if you have never seen any data to support it?

pmz writes:

in response to Damyankee:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

The cult which owns DamYankee's mind does so by telling him what is true and what is false and which resources support their claims and which don't.

Among those sources that he is forbidden to believe are the UN, Wikipedia, the Federal Government (any branch), especially the Supreme Court who has consistently interpreted the Constitution in favor of we, the people, rather than the owners of DamYankee's cult, the wealthy.

pmz writes:

in response to Write_Thinker:

Whalling, in order to help you catch up with the real facts, here is a website to help you:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthrefor...

Now, after you have read the provided material, come back here, so you can be tested on your retention of these facts. Thank you.

Why would you ever assume that wailing whining Whalling is interested in "real facts"?

Do you realize how inconvenient to him they are?

anicou writes:

in response to Beachbaby:

Bravo, Dr. Bush. I can't wait for the ignorant Teapublicans on this forum to come back with their usual inane responses. Anicou, trader9, silentmoron, stinky? Anyone?

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

romneygate writes:

in response to colinkelly2:

Is that ignorant enough for you, Beachbaby?

You proved your "point", and described your condition correctly!

pmz writes:

in response to thepartyofknow:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

The classic neo-republican intellect. No wonder you need a cult to tell you how to think.

marcari writes:

I am always suspect when someone uses a professional designation i.e., Ph.D other than when communicating in a professional context. Patricia Bush uses UN statistics as apples when commenting on oranges. Small homogeneous nations should have better birth survival rates than large diverse countries. Much of the birth rate problem stems from children having children, illiterates, and those who avoid Ellis Island (that's a joke). The birth rate problem is more one of cultural decline than medical care. Didn't I just read about a 19 month wait for heart surgery in one of those inexpesive systems? Also a cultural problem...America has become addicted to the Lola syndrome ("blasted Yankees" allusion) If we have a heart problem we get it taken care of tomorrow. And we have more heart problems because we eat too much of the wrong things. Then the Ph.D's among us blame the medical sysytem. They also conclude that if statistics say blacks are disproportionately jailed, it's racism. But if Asians are disproportionately holders of higher college degrees...no comment. The censor didn't like the reference to the Broadway musical wherein Lola said "What Lola wants Lola gets". How about #&%@ Yankees?

TiredoftheBS writes:

in response to Write_Thinker:

The point that sailed right over your tiny head is that private industry is no guarantee of any ability to do things better than government. Take Romney, and Bain Capital, for example. They would have bankrupted the hore house and put all the workers on the unemployment line, as they would shut down the operation and try to move it to China. Then wonder why that did not work, it looked good on paper?

You mean like Obama's big financial supporter Jeffrey Immelt of GE sending ten of thousands of jobs outside our country?

It doesn't look good on any paper but Obama says, do as I say and go fuch yourself!

TiredoftheBS writes:

in response to herrick9:

I for one would like to see the data source supporting 16,000 additional IRS agents in support of the penalty for non insured. Let's see that's 4% or 4-million projected to forgo the insurance for H/C and a penalty of $95.00.
Now if my math is any good that's one agent for every 250 people forgoing the insurance.
How about "highly unlikely" in lieu of saying you are blowing smoke out a body orifice?

It isn't worded exactly as 16,000 IRS agents to investigate the penalty of health care.

Actually is claims that 16,500 new employees at the IRS may be needed to support the new health care. Their use there is anybody's guess.

TiredoftheBS writes:

in response to Write_Thinker:

"Republicans used to the party of business. The neo-republican mob has replaced them and is the party of self. As long as self is healthy, everything else is waste."

Now that makes the most sense of anything I have seen anywhere in quite a long time. All Republicans should be forced to read and consider those three sentences.

Talking with yourself?

TiredoftheBS writes:

in response to pmz:

The classic neo-republican intellect. No wonder you need a cult to tell you how to think.

And your lemmocrat thoughts can't even be called an intellect!

Talk about a cult.

Since Clinton, 88% of democrats voted along party lines, with 92% of those saying they never have or will ever vote for another party.

Now only 64% of republicans have voted party lines in the same time frame with 52% of those saying they would always do so.

So in general 80% of dems are lemmings while only 30% of repubs are.

Which appears to be a true cult!

BTW: Independents have voted 71% for dems with 23% percent of those saying that they always would.

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to thepartyofknow:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

You write this, and suggest pmz is "certifiable?" Hahaha, now that was funny joke.

Write_Thinker writes:

I think you boys should consider starting a PMZ fan club. He certainly has worked wonders in getting your brain cells rejuvenated and working, finally.

Arushure writes:

> CIA 2011 data, we are an embarrassing 34th in the world in infant mortality

According to CIA 2012 estimates, the US is 49th.

The usual fools here trip over their own rhetoric. The US is either one of the richest countries in the world or it isn't, but if it is yet can't even assure infant survival as well as comparably rich countries or even much poorer ones, then the inequalities and failures of the health system are just proved even more.

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to Write_Thinker:

I think you boys should consider starting a PMZ fan club. He certainly has worked wonders in getting your brain cells rejuvenated and working, finally.

Now, to just get them working properly.

pmz writes:

in response to TiredoftheBS:

And your lemmocrat thoughts can't even be called an intellect!

Talk about a cult.

Since Clinton, 88% of democrats voted along party lines, with 92% of those saying they never have or will ever vote for another party.

Now only 64% of republicans have voted party lines in the same time frame with 52% of those saying they would always do so.

So in general 80% of dems are lemmings while only 30% of repubs are.

Which appears to be a true cult!

BTW: Independents have voted 71% for dems with 23% percent of those saying that they always would.

Believe me, you're no republican.

They were the party of business. Your cult of self are the neo-republican mob. Day and night difference with the Republican Party.

The cult of neo-republicans vote, think, speak and write identically. Just watch it here. It's totally unarguable.

As I said earlier, trunk to tail elephants all in a row each one powered by the flatulence from his predesessor.

Pragmatic1 writes:

in response to Beachbaby:

Bravo, Dr. Bush. I can't wait for the ignorant Teapublicans on this forum to come back with their usual inane responses. Anicou, trader9, silentmoron, stinky? Anyone?

Great Letter.

As for the the Teapublicans, they will ignore it or change the subject as they always do.

colinkelly2 writes:

Arusure, you win the ignorance prize. Infant mortality is a demographic whose variables so outweigh the result that the result is meaningless in the context you use it.
What you don't know about demographics would fill a book. In fact, it does, a book called "Demographics".

pmz writes:

in response to colinkelly2:

Arusure, you win the ignorance prize. Infant mortality is a demographic whose variables so outweigh the result that the result is meaningless in the context you use it.
What you don't know about demographics would fill a book. In fact, it does, a book called "Demographics".

Neo-republicans hate data.

Silent1nomore writes:

in response to Beachbaby:

Bravo, Dr. Bush. I can't wait for the ignorant Teapublicans on this forum to come back with their usual inane responses. Anicou, trader9, silentmoron, stinky? Anyone?

Silentmoron, huh? Now you've gone and hurt my feelings! What did I ever do to you?

Here, I was under the impression that Liberals were the party of compassion and believed in the Golden Rule more than the right!

I guess it's true what the right says about the left and it's hypocrisy!

Have I ever resorted to calling anyone names in this forum? No!

I'm so disillusioned! Oh, and did I mention hurt?

Tony writes:

Two years ago, a good friend of mine was denied a CT scan to check the status of a mass on his lung. The doctor wanted to have a second scan done about 10 months after the first scan. His insurance company denied the scan because it does not allow CT scans twice in one year.
This was way before "Obamacare." Decisions on what a person may or may not have covered by their insurances, etc... have always been determined and decided upon by bureaucrats and bean counters. So whats different?

Write_Thinker writes:

in response to Tony:

Two years ago, a good friend of mine was denied a CT scan to check the status of a mass on his lung. The doctor wanted to have a second scan done about 10 months after the first scan. His insurance company denied the scan because it does not allow CT scans twice in one year.
This was way before "Obamacare." Decisions on what a person may or may not have covered by their insurances, etc... have always been determined and decided upon by bureaucrats and bean counters. So whats different?

The biggest difference, as you pointed out, is that instead of life-decisions being made in the backroom of some insurance corporation office, with profit motive the top priority, decisions will, hopefully, be made more in the broad daylight of public discourse, where both sides of the argument are heard, and profit is not the top priority.

Arushure writes:

A notion of why the US infant mortality rates are low comes from a comparison with France, and a prenatal care study done jointly in 1994 by the French-American Foundation and the National Center for Education in Maternal and Child Care in Virginia (NYT, Jan 1995)

"The report said [statistics] reflect the fact that 96 percent of children in France are born to mothers who receive early prenatal care, against 76 percent in the United States."

The prenatal care results in fewer premature births: "Only about 0.5 percent of live births in France are seriously premature, against 1.3 percent in the United States, and France has less than half the American number of preterm births as well as a much lower rate of cesarean deliveries."

"A key to the French success is the carnet de santé, an 80-page health document issued for every child at birth. The book sets out a series of preventive examinations and inoculations needed during infancy and childhood, and enables doctors to see at a glance whether the child is receiving correct medical care. . . . The book contains a certificate that doctors must send to a local health agency after a certain number of examinations. If the certificate does not arrive, or if it identifies risk factors, the agency is responsible for making sure the mother and child receive the health, social and financial assistance they require."

For descriptions of real cases of mothers who experienced child health care in BOTH countries:
www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92116914

nstinks writes:

If Obama loves America so much, ask yourself this.

Would anyone want to “fundamentally change” something they love?

Obama knows NOTHING about business.

The only thing Obama has delivered business wise is the recognition that he does NOT deserve another term in office.

Read about it in the new Naples Tea Party blog entry.........

http://www.naplesnews.com/blogs/naple...

pmz writes:

in response to nstinks:

If Obama loves America so much, ask yourself this.

Would anyone want to “fundamentally change” something they love?

Obama knows NOTHING about business.

The only thing Obama has delivered business wise is the recognition that he does NOT deserve another term in office.

Read about it in the new Naples Tea Party blog entry.........

http://www.naplesnews.com/blogs/naple...

"Would anyone want to “fundamentally change” something they love?"

Are you claiming that changing us from a democracy to a corporate plutocracy is not a fundamental change?

Want to participate in the conversation? Become a subscriber today. Subscribers can read and comment on any story, anytime. Non-subscribers will only be able to view comments on select stories.

Features