<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><span></span></div><div><div>On Tuesday, March 28, 2017 5:58 PM John Clark <<a href="mailto:johnkclark@gmail.com">johnkclark@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><span>On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 Dan TheBookMan <<a href="mailto:danust2012@gmail.com">danust2012@gmail.com</a>>wrote:</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>The USA has gone backward. In 1960</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>> Note the changes in medical legislation from 01956 onward. Would you say that has nothing to do with this?</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>> Obviously not, if I thought otherwise I would not have mentioned</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>it as this thread is about medical legislation. </span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>Then what effect do you believe those changes had? Did they make things better or worse overall? Did they causes healthcare prices to rise or fall overall? (I realize the case is more complicated, hence my use of "overall.")</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>> Do you want to do data analysis or just do pretend science by factoid?</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>> Factoid?? We're talking about the results of a experiment that lasted</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>decades involved about a billion people and cost trillions of dollars,</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>and the results are clear as a bell; like it or not single payer</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>countries get more bang for their buck, they live longer and spend</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>less, a lot less. As a libertarian I wish the facts could have produced</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>a different conclusion but reality doesn't give a damn what I prefer. </span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>Whoa! The strict libertarian position is to allow voluntary interaction to be the rule in healthcare. The US during the 20th century, especially after the FDA act and with the spread of occupational licensing and other regulations, did not even approximate the libertarian position. So, you're comparing two (or more) different systems of government intervention in healthcare.</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>In this case, you'd have to make sure you're comparing like to like.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>> Of those 30 countries you can't find one that is anything like</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>the USA? Are Canadians a different species? </span></blockquote><span></span><br><span>They had different starting positions. Now, I'm not arguing here for what the conclusions are. Recall my initial post on this thread. I asked questions about the data and conclusions that were not biased against them. You might be right about single payer being better here, but without answering my questions there's a chance -- and not a small one in my mind -- that you're comparing unlike to unlike.</span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>[snip of smoking example and your response]</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>Be honest Dan, if the 30 single payer countries I mentioned</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>spent twice as much on healthcare as the USA and yet their</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>citizens had shorted lives than the USA would you be</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>complaining about sampling errors and experimental bias?</span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>We both know you wouldn't. >></span><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>> To be honest, John, it's not entirely honest on your part to</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>avoid my questions based on how you feel I might have answered</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>were the data different. In a word, you're sidestepping...</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>inconvenient questions.</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>I don't know which question of yours I've sidestepped,</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>Well, I've only posted them twice on March 28, so here goes for a third time (rewording them slightly in hopes this helps you to answer them):</span><br><span></span><br><span>1. What are the historical rates of life expectancy for all nations?</span><br><span></span><br><span>2. Are there any nations with single payer systems that have shorter than the US life expectancy?</span><br><span></span><br><span>I don't know the answers to these. If you do, then this might help you case or harm, depending on what the answers are.</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>but I know of a question of mine that you have sidestepped: if</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>the 30 single payer countries I mentioned spent twice as much</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>on healthcare as the USA and yet their citizens had shorter</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>lives than the USA would you be complaining about sampling</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>errors and experimental bias? </span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>No, I didn't sidestep your question. I asked my questions specifically to test your question.</span></div><div><br></div><div>Let's say I were as biased as you. Unthinkable, I know, but bear with me.;) Then it would be still be the correct thing to ask these questions about the data and not merely accept a single piece of data as the decisive element in our policy choices. This would even be the case if somehow we found out single payer systems, from one data table, were worse. Yeah, sure, those who detest single payer systems might cling to such data, but then folks like you -- imagining you your bias -- would have to ask those questions. <br><span></span><br><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Regards,</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Dan</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> Sample my Kindle books via:</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><font color="#000000" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><a href="http://author.to/DanUst" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">http://author.to/DanUst</a></font></div></div></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><br></div></body></html>