Interesting characters on a2k

It appears to me that you are determined to find something to find fault with or argue about here.

I have never denied that socialized medicine could have any appreciable effect on birth rates or any other measure of outcome. On the contrary I have suggested that such systems could be excessive motivated towards mass outcomes at the expense of the individual. I believe I noted above that the cheapest way to maximize life expectancy at minimal cost is to ration care to the aged and sick, and that available data suggests exactly that does occur.

I agree that socialized medicine does indeed "work" towards the achievement of its goals. Like anything run by bureaucracies , it "works" less efficiently and is far less creative and innovative in carrying out its tasks, than its alternatives (we see numerous examples of this), but it does "work". The more important issue is that its goals are set in an authoritarian manner and are , at their very best, optimized for the group, not the individual. I'm not a fan of the ant hill, and value individual human creativity and achievement over group action whenever there is a choice. I much prefer to maximize my field of choice, as well as that of others.

I am very surprised that you didn't see this very obvious point.

So let me get this straight: when you said that socialized medicine wasn't responsible for Europe's lower infant mortality rates, what you really meant to say was that socialized medicine was responsible for those lower rates, but that what's important isn't infant mortality rates - which is what you were ostensibly talking about - but rather individual choice.

I'm reminded of the "Seinfeld" episode, where George Costanza drives his dead fiancee's parents to the end of Long Island, spinning an increasingly baroque web of deceit, rather than admit to lying about having leased a house in the Hamptons in order to get out of attending a charity event. Not to suggest, of course, that you're lying - far from it, I think you're being perfectly sincere. It's just that I'm wondering if you'll ever reach the end of Long Island with this line of argument.

I don't recall ever saying that socialized medicine was not responsible for Europe's lower infant mortality rate. Instead I said that there were likely several other factors that influenced this outcome, and that increased treatment effectiveness was clearly not an observable intrinsic feature of socialized medicine, as the survival data for serious diseases in this country and Europe clearly indicate.

You appear to imply that differences in the outcomes of the various health care systems must of necessity be the result of only one thing, and that the issue at hand (if it suits you). That is wrong on both counts.

I have noted that the lower infant mortality rates in Europe are often touted as a natural result of Socialized medicine, but note also that those who press this point almost always fail to deal with the relatively worse outcomes it delivers on most chronic diseases. It is the highly selective choice of "proofs" that excites my scorn for these arguments.

The world we inhabit and our human natures are very complex things - far more complex than are the constructs of the unusually naive folks who assume that they (alone) can organize our lives better than we can do ourselves. The ongoing fiascos attendant to the rollout of Obamacare and the operation of VA hospitals attest to this quite well.

That said, it is believable to me that a government, and a people, who are becoming increasingly concerned about chronically low birth rates and a declining, aging population, who, in addition, also have chronic difficulties in accepting or assimilating immigrants of different cultures, might find a way to overcome even the inefficiencies typical of government run health care systems in improving the survival rates of the infants born.

I don't mind argument or discussions of issues such as this, but when they degenerate to "gotcha" games such as this they lose all meaning.

Believe it or not, I have never watched an episode of Seinfeld. I agree that the reasoning above is a bit more tortuous than the trivial binary answers the crowd was clamoring for above, but the truth is often like that. I wasn't lying or making it up as I went along, but do acknowledge that I was allowing for more complexity than many here were willing to endure.

I don't have a dog in this fight. All I wanted was an explanation for a particularly mystifying statement that you made a few pages back. Frankly, I don't know enough about the differing outcomes of medical care in the US and Europe to offer much of an informed opinion on the subject, and I don't care enough about it to educate myself.

Holy ****...I thought I was the only one in America who has never watched an episode of Seinfeld.

Perhaps that's why you were so mystified by such a reasonable statement.

Nope. I make it at least three then. (But, then, in the last 30 years or so I've hardly watched an episode of anything. ****-canned my TV back in the 80s; still see no use for it.)

I got rid of mine when I moved, back in '92. Haven't gotten around to replacing it yet.

I kept my tv only for my niece when she visited, and to use the vcr - gave it to a guy that helped me in the yard once in a while.

So that's 4 no Seinfelds.

Not ashamed to day I watch my TV every day. I love Seinfeld.

You don't need a TV to watch Seinfeld. They have all the seasons bundled on Netflix.
A hell of a good half hour in my estimation.

I think it's hilarious...very well put together...then I like Larry David. I thought "Curb Your Enthusiasm" was gold.

Jerry told about the time his Dad and Mom went down 95 to visit Florida.
He said when they got to Miami they still had the blinker on.

I really like Jerry Stiller...he's so darn crazy funny( so much more than his son ). I also thought he was good on "King of Queens".

When I was a kid Stiller and Meara were popular

He started way before my time but he's fantastic. Never knew he had been at it so long. Yet, I think he was the true talent behind "King of Queens"..also a powerhouse on Seinfeld .

oh man, I loved Stiller and Meara

I think they were the reason I wanted to live in New York - I thought everyone there would be like them.

First time I've ever heard of them

I liked them too..