Comments on: Socialized Medicine in the United States

By: Catron

Catron — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 03:28:06 +0000

Market forces are inexorable and real …

It is precisely because of this fact that I believe workable health care reform must be market based. A reform program containing no mechanism for dealing with market forces is like an airplane with no equipment for dealing with gravity. It is guaranteed to crash and burn.

How do you find time …

Easy. I just ignore my family and friends.

And, yes, Szymborska’s work is indeed something special. Perhaps I should say that Stallings is the best poet writing in English.

By: djschmidt

djschmidt — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 15:58:36 +0000

How do you find time to reply to these multiple inane emessages?
Public debate? I think this will all be decided in smoke filled rooms, since no one is unhappy enough to dislodge the powers that be. Sorry about the cynicism.
I argued that the IHS is efficient in that it’s results with the population it deals with(Apples to apples) are achieved at a much lower cost per capita than mainstream US medicine.
Is efficiency defined by outcome/cost?
Is efficiency really the goal? Or choice?
Your assumption(maybe mine since I haven’t seen you clearly state it) is that the Market is an efficient process. I disagree. Market forces are inexorable and real, but horribly inefficient. It got us all using Windows. Applying free market forces in specific areas of healthcare will create “best fit” efficiencies, rapid experimental solutions. But the costs will outweigh the marginal return.

I appreciated the link. “Man who won’t plant willows”is excellent. I will read others.
I am a Bukowski fan.

http://www.poetseers.org/nobel_prize_for_literature/wislawa_szymborska/

But she’s the best, no doubt.

By: Catron

Catron — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:17:38 +0000

If that is the kind of argument you want to make …

The “argument I want to make�? should be discernable in my post: The IHS, like all government-run operations, is inefficient and produces poor results.

I am amazed at the polarization on this subject of healthcare.

A vigorous public debate over an important issue like health care reform is healthy and, in my not-so-humble opinion, fun.

On a different subject, here’s a link to the best poet writing today (don’t be put off by the cheesy web site). Here’s the Wikipedia write-up.

By: djschmidt

djschmidt — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:24:15 +0000

OK, I read the article by Dr. Healy and your other two links. I’m afraid you’re confusing the issue. Is the poor health of the Native American population caused by a poorly delivered healthcare system? If that is the kind of argument you want to make, that is a communuty’s health is caused by their use/access/health system, lets study Utah and Nevada….
The IHS should be evaluated objectively( Wait times, cost, comparison to similar populations in outcomes) and directly. The article by Healy even points out that the IHS spends less than half the average of all Americans per patient, so in that sense it is a bargain.
I have read lots of your blog posts now and gather the tint of your glasses. I am amazed at the polarization on this subject of healthcare.

By: Catron

Catron — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 02:29:52 +0000

Obviously the linked article from Dr. Healy is one source. Here's another that discusses IHS facilities. And here's another discussing health disparities.

By: djschmidt

djschmidt — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:23:00 +0000

I just got done with a week at an IHS site. Excellent facility, same day access, excellent staff, on site pharmacy(true, they had a formulary of generics mostly…some rationing there, I guess) but I thought it was excellent. So how do you get your information? Mine is purely anecdotal but quite contrary to yours.