So I was wondering what you thought of ......

[Charlotte Rowan]

You notice that they break hispanics into four different classifications those four combine to make up 75% of the illegal population. Combining them show a very different picture, and points to one of the biggest problems with today's health care.  

The math does not support this statement. If you add the four categories of "hispanics" and take the mean, it comes out to 5.62, which is still lower than the 5.66 for whites.

Women of Cuban ethnicity in the United States had the lowest infant mortality rate -- 4.55 per 1,000 live births, according to the report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

American Indian:  8.45
Puerto Rican:  7.82
Mexican:  5.47 (actually below the Caucasian average)
Asian/Pacific Islander:  4.67
Central/South American:  4.65

So (4.55 for Cubans + 7.82 for Puerto Ricans + 5.47 for Mexicans + 4.65 for = Central/South Americans)/4 = 5.62

[SirRichardBear]

You have to combine them by population then recalculate the percentage then the numbers come out that Hispanic come out just under African Americans.  Then you have to take the subset of those that are illegal and they come up just over African Americans.  Then you compare the difference in population make up between the USA and Europe and Canada.  That shows that the reason the USA has a higher rate is our higher illegal population.   The reason is that illegals are the poorest section of our population and the ones least likely to seek medical treatment.

None of which changes the facts that the plan before congress is about control not health care.  I've been on government run health care and private and never want to be forced back on to government care.  War on drugs, war on poverty, medicaid, medicare, all totally failed government programs.   If they can fix the problems without breaking the system fine but government doesn't have much of a track record of being able to do that in the past 40 years.

[groomporter]

Chuck Norris thinks Obamacare is a bad idea.

But then Norris is a wackjob who is a young earth* creationist and also recently thought Texas should secede from the union
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91103


*Young Earth Creationists believe the earth is only 4,000 or 6,000 years old deny the evidence of astronomy, geology, cosmology, paleontology and any number of other "ologies"

[Charlotte Rowan]

You have to combine them by population then recalculate the percentage then the numbers come out that Hispanic come out just under African Americans.  Then you have to take the subset of those that are illegal and they come up just over African Americans.  Then you compare the difference in population make up between the USA and Europe and Canada.

Please to show figures and sources...

Or as my high school math teacher would say... "Show your work!"

[Xanthenes The Unbalanced]

You have to combine them by population then recalculate the percentage then the numbers come out that Hispanic come out just under African Americans.  Then you have to take the subset of those that are illegal and they come up just over African Americans.  Then you compare the difference in population make up between the USA and Europe and Canada.  That shows that the reason the USA has a higher rate is our higher illegal population.   The reason is that illegals are the poorest section of our population and the ones least likely to seek medical treatment.

None of which changes the facts that the plan before congress is about control not health care.  I've been on government run health care and private and never want to be forced back on to government care.  War on drugs, war on poverty, medicaid, medicare, all totally failed government programs.   If they can fix the problems without breaking the system fine but government doesn't have much of a track record of being able to do that in the past 40 years.

I'm still not getting that math to add up, as the largest segment of Hispanic illegals in this country are Mexicans, and they have a lower infant mortality than Caucasians (and, again, the Census does combine illegals and legals in their infant mortality studies - they don't differentiate).  Were the numbers for illegals through the roof, that would mean the infant mortality for LEGAL Mexicans in this country would be somewhere around 1.5/1,000, which just doesn't make any sense, and isn't supported by any survey I can find.

Even allowing for a 0.3 differential due to the way we tabulate infant mortality, our CAUCASIAN rate is still higher than most of Europe.

We can nitpick the numbers til we're blue in the face, factoring in more career-focused women having babies in their 30's, drug use, immigration, poverty, etc., but most of these are factors at play in other health care systems, as well.

When you get right down to it, I feel the most embarrassing aspect of our infant mortality rates, our life expectancy, our WHO satisfaction ranking, etc., is the amount of money we're paying for those results. 

I'm not a huge fan of the government either, though I think it's far too easy to gloss over the things they do fairly well, but when I see a system which allows a guy like Bill McGuire, CEO of United Health Group, to regularly pull in cash-and-stock paydays of more than $100 million per year, there's something wrong.  The guy's sitting on a pile of stock options worth over $1.6 billion.  It's a health insurance company; that means that compensation comes from excessive insurance premiums, denial of coverage, or both.

I'm a capitalist and a business owner.  I think if you want a Corvette, you work for one and you buy it.  If you want an iPod, you work for one and you buy it.  There's nothing wrong with turning a profit.  Does that really mean, however, that we need to throw excessive profiteering into EVERY sector of the economy?  Does that mean we look at something as excessive and egregious as what Bill McGuire has done, and proclaim "Hey, that's the American way!"?  We're not talking about a citizens right to have an iPod or drive a Corvette or have an HD TV.  In many cases, we're talking about their lives.

There was a time when "war profiteering" was considered a bad thing.  As the war in Iraq has shown, that time has apparently past.  I fear the same thing has happened to health care.

[Xanthenes The Unbalanced]

Chuck Norris thinks Obamacare is a bad idea.

But then Norris is a wackjob who is a young earth* creationist and also recently thought Texas should secede from the union
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91103


*Young Earth Creationists believe the earth is only 4,000 or 6,000 years old deny the evidence of astronomy, geology, cosmology, paleontology and any number of other "ologies"

In fairness, I've visited Texas several times and have often left thinking the same thing. 

* And I'm not touching Creationism.  This has been quite peaceful so far.  Throw some religion into the mix and this thread gets shut down in 3...2...1

[groomporter]

Yup I'll leave evolution/creationism out of it, but Norris has a number of stances that make me a bit paranoid. One of my favorite podcast lists him as on of the Ten Most Wanted: Celebrities Who Promote Harmful Pseudoscience http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4125

But enough thread-jacking, back to health care discussion.

Does that really mean, however, that we need to throw excessive profiteering into EVERY sector of the economy? 

That's the other puzzlement is the number of HMO's that have "non-profit" status. Admittedly even non-profits have to take in more than they spend or they go out of business, but there's something funny there.

[Xanthenes The Unbalanced]

Brilliant stats, as usual, Xanthenes. Always much appreciated!

Thank you, m'lady.  Admittedly, I'm now tiring of stats and am seriously thinking of going back to my Magic 8-Ball.

//*shake*  Reply hazy, try again???  Damn thee, Magic 8-Ball!

[Charlotte Rowan]

Brilliant stats, as usual, Xanthenes. Always much appreciated!

Thank you, m'lady.  Admittedly, I'm now tiring of stats and am seriously thinking of going back to my Magic 8-Ball.

//*shake*  Reply hazy, try again???  Damn thee, Magic 8-Ball!

Tis true that the Magic 8-Ball never lies! I actually was unpacking a  couple of boxes last night and came across mine. Fun fun.

[Dracconia]

Ok...HMO's is being thrown around a lot and I have a vague idea, even Goggled it....however there are many different defs...mostly good versus evil....I felt like I was researching vouchers for debate again...no definition of what they are or are supposed to be...only opinions.....any help?

[Xanthenes The Unbalanced]

Ok...HMO's is being thrown around a lot and I have a vague idea, even Goggled it....however there are many different defs...mostly good versus evil....I felt like I was researching vouchers for debate again...no definition of what they are or are supposed to be...only opinions.....any help?

While I'm, admittedly, not a huge Michael Moore fan, this clip from "Sicko" contains a portion of Nixon Tapes concerning the creation of Kaiser's HMO, one of the first modern HMO's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QkgUkM0o6Q

It's about 15 seconds in.

  An HMO differs from a PPO (Preferred Provider) in a number ways, but the biggest is the type of network they set up.  In essence, an HMO offers the least expensive doctors in a given area a steady stream of patients if those doctors reduce their rates even further.  This is what leads many to describe HMOs as "assembly line health care".  In some cases, the doctor gets more cases than he/she can handle, at a cut-rate, and therefore has to run patients through as quickly as possible to remain profitable, or even in business.

[Anna Iram]

Quite a number of years ago I had an HMO plan through another company. The doctors I was allowed to see on my plan were the worst. It was like going to a free clinic. I felt I received the bare minimum required. Under an HMO, if you want to see a specialist you have to go through you primary healthcare doc to get permission. Though there may be some HMO programs that do not require reference from a primary care physician.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMO

Now with my current PPO I can choose my own doctors/dentist within network or choose to go outside that network for a bit more. Good if you already have healthcare practitioners you like, and if I need to see a specialist I can go without prior approval. I feel I am in much better control of my own health.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferred_provider_organization

[Breandan]

My father is a physician, and still does business the old-school way in addition to taking insurance. I have seen him take a goat and five chickens as payment from a rural couple for treating their son, I kid you not. He is in his sixties, and part of a dying breed, but if we had more like him, the whole bloody discussion would be moot.

[RSLeask]

Under an HMO, if you want to see a specialist you have to go through you primary healthcare doc to get permission.

You forgot the hoops you have to jump through in order to get that referral.  Hoops on fire.  With vats of acid on either side.  That are also on fire.  And there's you.  Trying to make the jump through.  While on fire.

[Noble Dreg]

Generalities are bad...Ironically a generality in itself.

As a teen I was part of my fathers insurance plan, an HMO.  Cannot recall the name of the group though it included the letters H-M-O in their name.  Great care as I recall.  Got my wisdom teeth removed (Lost 12 IQ points as a direct result).  Had full preventative care including seeing specialists for a nasal issue.  Missed it dearly as a young adult without insurance and had to go to the free clinic. 

Worse was going to the University of Minnesota and having to use their health service (forced to sign up and pay for as a part of admission).  "Would you mind if 65 students came in to help with the examination of your schwanzstucker"?  "All right class, who would like to go first?  One glove each please"!