SamClem. I watched the video last night, but it was only one part of a 6 part series.
I had difficulty finding the whole series, but will continue to hunt them down until I can see the whole lecture on socialized medicine. I did wind up seeing a couple of other though in my search. One I found interesting which you should watch if you haven't. It was with a group of economists from other counties discussing his theories. They disagreed with him on his premise that big government and higher taxes was bad for a countries growth. When he (Freedman) asked them to name them, they mentioned Norway and Sweden but mentioned that there were others as well. When they argued his theories, Freedman last statement in the video was that he didn't think Norway will continue to do well down the road.
Well here it is about 30 years later, and Norway has continued to grow and prosper, and has remained #1 to this date. Jobs have increased expeditiously, and so has population. Even with the financial crises throughout the world and especially Europe, they have been little effected. There unemployment rate even today is around 3%, and wages still high.
I'll give you the link to the video I'm referring to, and you can do your own study on these countries they refer to yourself.
I don't want to wonder from the original subject of health care, but don't want to comment on Mr. Freedman's view until I see all the video's on the subject and feel I fully understand the logic behind his words. As I mentioned before, I have always enjoyed listening to Milton Freedman and read a couple of his books some years ago. I think he has some sound theories, but I am of the opinion too that many of them were not all inclusive and not applicable in individual cases and circumstances and that such a broad brush can never be applied to all people at all times. If we were on a different forum, I could give you concrete examples of what I mean, but that is for another time and place.
We will stick to the health care issue and what is to become of us moving forward. Many future retirees have a lot of concern in this area, and rightly so. How we make sense of it and go forward from here is important. I am of the opinion that assimilation of good and accurate information on the subject is badly needed, as well as keeping an open mind as to all possibilities and solutions.
I still remain somewhat unclear as to your actual proposed "fix" from where we are now, as opposed to where we should have been now. I personally would like to hear your plan as to what and how you would go about making health care right. Suppose the Supreme Court for argument sake strikes down the mandate provision, where would you go from there? What do you think would work for us?
Suppose we did what you say, separated health insurance from business. Now we are on our own. We still still have a handful of companies to chose from. You no longer have the protection of a large group plan that keeps companies (for the most part) from dropping you when you get sick or discriminating against you if you are. You can try and start your own large group that would mimic having one with a large company.
That would be helpful in the protection area and and the mobility of people, as well as give you some leverage. But what happens when the insurance companies get to only two. What do you suppose is going to happen to your leverage. It's not the kind of commodity we can walk away from and say "oh forget it, I don't want it". We have to have it. So who's got the better leverage? How are you going to deal with that without a level of protection from your government?
Remember, their objective is to make money and increase profits, yours it to provide good service for a reasonable cost. Somehow, having a middle man taking out profit makes little sense and acerbates the problem of affordability in this situation. These are my views anyway.
I had difficulty finding the whole series, but will continue to hunt them down until I can see the whole lecture on socialized medicine. I did wind up seeing a couple of other though in my search. One I found interesting which you should watch if you haven't. It was with a group of economists from other counties discussing his theories. They disagreed with him on his premise that big government and higher taxes was bad for a countries growth. When he (Freedman) asked them to name them, they mentioned Norway and Sweden but mentioned that there were others as well. When they argued his theories, Freedman last statement in the video was that he didn't think Norway will continue to do well down the road.
Well here it is about 30 years later, and Norway has continued to grow and prosper, and has remained #1 to this date. Jobs have increased expeditiously, and so has population. Even with the financial crises throughout the world and especially Europe, they have been little effected. There unemployment rate even today is around 3%, and wages still high.
I'll give you the link to the video I'm referring to, and you can do your own study on these countries they refer to yourself.
I don't want to wonder from the original subject of health care, but don't want to comment on Mr. Freedman's view until I see all the video's on the subject and feel I fully understand the logic behind his words. As I mentioned before, I have always enjoyed listening to Milton Freedman and read a couple of his books some years ago. I think he has some sound theories, but I am of the opinion too that many of them were not all inclusive and not applicable in individual cases and circumstances and that such a broad brush can never be applied to all people at all times. If we were on a different forum, I could give you concrete examples of what I mean, but that is for another time and place.
We will stick to the health care issue and what is to become of us moving forward. Many future retirees have a lot of concern in this area, and rightly so. How we make sense of it and go forward from here is important. I am of the opinion that assimilation of good and accurate information on the subject is badly needed, as well as keeping an open mind as to all possibilities and solutions.
I still remain somewhat unclear as to your actual proposed "fix" from where we are now, as opposed to where we should have been now. I personally would like to hear your plan as to what and how you would go about making health care right. Suppose the Supreme Court for argument sake strikes down the mandate provision, where would you go from there? What do you think would work for us?
Suppose we did what you say, separated health insurance from business. Now we are on our own. We still still have a handful of companies to chose from. You no longer have the protection of a large group plan that keeps companies (for the most part) from dropping you when you get sick or discriminating against you if you are. You can try and start your own large group that would mimic having one with a large company.
That would be helpful in the protection area and and the mobility of people, as well as give you some leverage. But what happens when the insurance companies get to only two. What do you suppose is going to happen to your leverage. It's not the kind of commodity we can walk away from and say "oh forget it, I don't want it". We have to have it. So who's got the better leverage? How are you going to deal with that without a level of protection from your government?
Remember, their objective is to make money and increase profits, yours it to provide good service for a reasonable cost. Somehow, having a middle man taking out profit makes little sense and acerbates the problem of affordability in this situation. These are my views anyway.
Last edited: