Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Two Trillion Spent on Healthcare Each Year: A Sick Way to Prop Up an Ailing Economy

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted July 28, 2007.


Between 2001 and 2006, the healthcare sector added 1.7 million jobs while the rest of the economy added none. So how well is the economy really doing?
Advertisement

For the first four years after the dot-com bust in 2001, a weak economy in most sectors was masked by an explosion in real estate sales, rocketing home values and a surge of consumer spending as people taking advantage of super-low interest rates and easy credit grabbed chunks of equity out of their newly high-priced digs and went shopping.

In the summer of 2005, the New York Times reported that the real estate biz -- "everything from land surveyors to general contractors to loan officers" -- had added 700,000 jobs to the American economy during the previous four years, while the rest of the work force had lost 400,000 jobs over the same period. Technically the economy was in "recovery," when in fact most of it remained soft.

A few economists sounded a warning about having all our eggs in one economic basket. People like Yale's Robert Shiller and Dean Baker at the Center for Economic Policy and Research pointed out that home values weren't syncing up with the fundamentals of the market, and that we were headed for an "adjustment" -- either a real estate crash leading to a recession or, in the best case scenario, a "soft landing."

But while there were some voices of caution, other economists told us that everything was going gangbusters. This was the New Economy in action: American manufacturing may have been gutted during the previous few decades, but the service sector is where more "value" is added anyway -- where the big profits are -- and Americans would be just fine selling each other houses, insurance and the occasional cheeseburger until the Next Big Thing came along.

It was a hot debate, but something else was going on at the same time that got less attention: There was the emergence of what could be called the healthcare economy. As Michael Mandel wrote in Businessweek last September, "Without [the health sector], the nation's labor market would be in a deep coma." Between 2001 and 2006, 1.7 million new jobs were added in the healthcare sector. Meanwhile, the rest of the private sector added exactly zero new jobs (net) during that period.

(The conventional wisdom is that the economy needs to add about 150,000 jobs per month to keep up with the growth of the working-age population.)

If current trends continue, 30 percent to 40 percent of all new jobs created in the United States over the next 25 years will be in the healthcare business. Mandel argued that this trend is partly responsible for the United States' low overall unemployment rate. "Take away healthcare hiring in the U.S.," he wrote, "and quicker than you can say cardiac bypass, the U.S. unemployment rate would be 1 to 2 percentage points higher."

One could argue that this is precisely how a vibrant economy should work. A dynamic industry takes off and compensates for weaknesses in other sectors. When it cools, another field will explode, perhaps one we can't even conceive of today.

What's more, healthcare jobs have increased at the same time as we've shed millions of relatively high-paying manufacturing jobs. Wages in the health sector vary widely, but the average is slightly higher than the average income in the private sector as a whole. Healthcare is labor-intensive, so a lot of the more than $2 trillion we'll spend this year in the Unites States will end up in healthcare workers' pockets. It's also an industry in which offshoring and outsourcing are uncommon; you might be able to schedule your colonoscopy with a guy at a call center in Mumbai, but ultimately your ass has to be in the same country as the personnel who do it.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: economy, healthcare, jobs, employment

Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
William McGuire, former CEO of United Health Care received stock options valued at $1.6 billion .
Posted by: johngary66 on Jul 28, 2007 3:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
chief
Tuesday, April 18, 2006

By George Anders, The Wall Street Journal


MINNETONKA, Minn. -- When William McGuire switched careers in 1986, he was so restless that a pay cut of more than 30 percent didn't faze him. Health maintenance organizations were booming, and Dr. McGuire wanted to help run one. So he jettisoned a six-figure income as a pulmonologist in favor of an HMO management job that paid about $70,000 a year.

Savvy move. Today, the 58-year-old Dr. McGuire is chief executive officer of UnitedHealth Group Inc., one of the nation's largest health-care companies. He draws $8 million a year in salary plus bonus, enjoying perks such as personal use of the company jet. He also has amassed one of the largest stock-options fortunes of all time.

Unrealized gains on Dr. McGuire's options totaled $1.6 billion, according to UnitedHealth's proxy statement released this month. Even celebrated CEOs such as General Electric Co.'s Jack Welch or International Business Machines Corp.'s Louis Gerstner never were granted so much during their time at the top.

Dr. McGuire's story shows how an elite group of companies is getting rich from the nation's fraying health-care system. Many of them aren't discovering drugs or treating patients. They're middlemen who process the paperwork, fill the pill bottles and otherwise connect the pieces of a $2 trillion industry.
The profit needed to pay Mr. McGuire $1.6billion in stock options had to come at the expense of patients denied service, How many died because the company denied a needed treatment to save money?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

denial of health (and dental) care is tantamount to cruel and unusual punishment
Posted by: Suzon on Jul 28, 2007 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for the "crime" of being working people.

Lastly, and most importantly, we're talking about investing an enormous chunk of our national income into a healthcare system that offers the lowest imaginable value for the dollar.

And the author isn't even talking about the people without any coverage whatsoever, the vast army of the working poor.

My son was in a road accident five years ago in which the other passenger was killed outright. Though he had no visible injuries, he was in horrific pain. The first hospital he went to sent him away (not many casual laborers can afford to finance their own medical insurance). When my daugher-in-law insisted he go to another hospital, they found his spleen was ruptured and did the necessary surgery. The doctor said he was two hours away from death. They struggle to pay what they can on the $5,000 doctor's bill.

This year he had a bad fall, didn't see a doctor and he now "walks funny". And how could I have helped without selling my house, the only family asset?

The rich and greedy have been running the world to suit themselves and it's high time we egalitarians took it back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rhetoric versus reality on health care
Posted by: pharmawatcher on Jul 28, 2007 4:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excellent overview, Josh. I was really glad to see you point out the health care/jobs/economy conundrum. Without rising health care expenditures, where would our economy be? But what are we getting for it and what is it doing to the rest of the economy? I addressed these issues on my own blog last November after the Democrats won the election (see this GoozNews). I'm glad to see others picking up the thread.
Merrill Goozner

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How the U.S. Economy Works
Posted by: hagwind on Jul 28, 2007 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Persuade us we're ugly and then sell us stuff (lots of stuff) to make us beautiful. Persuade us we're losers if we don't have two new cars and a great big house, then sell us the cars, the house, the mechanics, the landscapers, electricians, plumbers, and cleaning services. (Those who can't manage the cars, the house, etc., can buy fancy electronic equipment and expensive sneakers. If all else fails, there's always booze.) Persuade us that our bodies are dangerous animals that might turn against us, then sell us supplements, diets, and health club memberships to whip those animals into shape. And finally foster the economic and political conditions that make us sick and then sell (some of) us the possibility of cure. Look at all the jobs! Jobs to create the needs and jobs to answer them! Brilliant! Trouble is, no one's actually producing anything and a lot of the jobs pay sh*t. They make a few people very rich and the rest of us sick.

Supposedly this is OK because we're a democracy. We can vote. ("Persuade us that we the people can't fix things ourselves, then sell us candidates to do it for us. When all else fails, sell us angry gods, New Age claptrap, and a couple of bootstraps. Lotteries are also good.")

Seriously, this is an important article. Things are so screwed up on the ground that it's easy to forget the big picture. Where I live, booms in the real estate market are inversely proportional to the health of the community, and it's real easy to see because the place is pretty small. All jobs are not created equal. If half the population has jobs making a mess and the other half has jobs cleaning it up, are we really making progress?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Excellent Points!!!!!!!!!!NM Posted by: Gravitas
» RE: Actually, Posted by: oregoncharles
A matter of trust
Posted by: reinaldok on Jul 28, 2007 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would have to assume that the majority of healthcare providers are still honest, straight talking people. However, I can never be certain. A close family member just went through a series of heart monitoring tests. Nuclear, echo etc. Before receiving the corresponding results, we had to consider if the doctor was a true honest professional or just another, make a quick buck snake oil salesman. We were confronted with two options: "You need the whole nine yards,
angioplasty, stents, on and on and ten thousand bucks in my pocket" or "Your tests came out just fine- come back and see me in six months." In this particular case - the Your Just Fine option did win out. How many doctors would have opted for the ten grand, whether the procedure was required or not? I really don't know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A matter of trust Posted by: krose
Healthcare insiders report
Posted by: LHM on Jul 28, 2007 6:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if there have been any studies done about which jobs in health care have added to this workforce increase. I have been employed in nursing homes for the past 13 years. When I started, we were having a national discussion about a single payer system. Since then, I have watched the managed care and billing departments in nursing homes multiply while the direct care workers are downsized. In addition, those of us who provide direct care spend an increasing amount of time meeting and discussing how to bill, who to bill, how to get denied treatment for our patients, trying to get through to the HMOs and so on. If we don't do this, we risk closing our facilities. Does anyone keep track of these changes in how our time is used?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Healthcare insiders report Posted by: Joshua Holland
PREVENTION IS OUR ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS MESS
Posted by: drricklippin on Jul 28, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We need a healthcare system that's about caring for people's health, not a healthcare economy that is more effective at making an uncertain economy look strong than it is at keeping us well.

Joshua Holland- Excellent phrase to end your very important article.

As you know I am a prevention advocate-both individual(=health behaviors) and institutional(=public health). But prevention must be implemented-

-incrementally
-with fairness
-always with compassion

All of us will require treatment in our lifetime- sometimes often-sometime even very expensive high tech treatment.

But our current high tech very expensive treatment based "disease care system " is not economically sustainable

Prevention will free up health care dollars ($) so they can flow to where treatment is needed most

Congratulations Josh and AlterNet on an excellent article

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southamptton, Pa
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Advertising Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Advertising Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Advertising Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Advertising Posted by: bornxeyed
» ????? Posted by: gellero
» Everyone knows the risks... Posted by: bornxeyed
America's trademark "Fear Mongering"
Posted by: ray burchard on Jul 28, 2007 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In America, a society whose culture is designed around "fear mongering", is it really any wonder that there would be better capitalization in leveraging fears immediacy rather than its probability, suprise, suprise.

This will always be the predicted results when we use a system of applied mathematics designed specifically to facilitate commerce (merchant mentality) as foundation for all logical resolve, the continuum of "pathetic fallacy", equating everything to the almighty dollar.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time for Americans to Join the World and Wake-Up
Posted by: sofla100 on Jul 28, 2007 7:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Moore pointed out when it comes to health care, we have a solution, already proven across the world, and America just need to implement it. Single payer, universal health care. Gid rid of all these insurance companies, cap hospital profits, and provide doctors and other health care provides with uniform, fair salaries. As for increasing demand in the healthcare field, of course it will continue to increase. Just look at the demographics. Life expectancies in America continue to increase as well as the population, especially of elderly Americans. Consequently, even though prevention is important, especially as Americans are so obese, all the prevention in the world is not going to stop the demand for more health care. But why does America not adopt the universal healthcare type of system everyone else in the world is using? It's obvious. Our corrupted political process. The millions insurance and drug companies spend on lobbying and "influence peddling," to keep the current system, and the brainwashing of the American people. It's also the foolish American adherence to the idea of "the markets," and unabashed capitalism. But, the bottom line is obvious, "the markets," and unfettered capitalism does not work in the field of healthcare. When people need a doctor, they need a doctor. Time for Americans to start waking up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look at the Conyers-Kucinich healthcare bill
Posted by: Democritus on Jul 28, 2007 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich have proposed a "single-payer" health-care bill that will put everyone under Medicare. This bill is supported by most physicians. People who want to get private insurance to pay for high-cost yet unnecessary further diagnostics can always do so. We need to have doctors making medical decisions, not insurance companies. We need universality in medical services, not a costly, patchwork scheme that puts us in a third-world position in health care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One Thing He Didn't Mention
Posted by: Gravitas on Jul 28, 2007 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think HagWind raised an excellent point that the original article, as good as it was, forgot to mention. If health care is so important to our economy, it will be treated just like any other business that needs to expand! Therefore, it will try and create more demand for itself by convincing us we are sicker than we are. Thus we get bombarded with restless leg syndrome and the like. And the acceptable blood sugar levels, weight and blood pressure have been lowered to pathologize us as much as possible. I always laugh when headlines read disease X is costing us millions a year. Yeah! That is profit for some stockholder. What would happen if disease X did go away? Marketers would need to recoup by inventing disease Y!

Speaking of fear mongering, if anyone wants an alternate opinion to the "obesity is contagious" frenzy making all the headlines, you can find one here. Since it is tangential
related, I will post my opinion in a link instead of a post:

http://truthwhisperer.wordpress.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good link Posted by: hagwind
» And what you forgot to mention Posted by: bornxeyed
» Yup!!! Good Point NM Posted by: Gravitas
Prevention of High Health Care Costs Sought for Over A Century
Posted by: smokedoctor on Jul 28, 2007 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Joshua Holland is right to call attention to escalating health care costs. Nonsmoker writers have been warning for over a century of the ever-growing costs caused by the No. 1 cause of preventable diseases, tobacco use. For the century of references, see Costs.

For a list of tobacco-caused conditions and behaviors, see Effects. For background on tobacco ingredients that cause such dangerous effects, see Ingredients.

Prevention of high health care costs is crucial, and needs to be implemented on a crash basis. Let's follow the wise example of, e.g., Iowa, Tennessee, and Michigan, which banned cigarette making by law. See references on said laws at Iowa Law, Tennessee Law , and Michigan Law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bait & Switch Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Bait & Switch Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Bait & Switch Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Bait & Switch Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Bait & Switch Posted by: vultureculture
» RE: Bait & Switch Posted by: krose
» Which? Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Bait & Switch Posted by: hagwind
Old news
Posted by: veive on Jul 28, 2007 8:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big deal, where's the news in this item? So George W. Bush makes us sick. I thought most of us knew that already. And we put him in office TWICE. That may indicate we're terminal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Old news-NO THIS IS NEW NEWS! Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Old news Posted by: krose
Re: Old News
Posted by: R.I.P. on Jul 28, 2007 9:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This was an excellent informative piece of writing. Thank you Mr Holland. Rip Tragle

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

food
Posted by: snowhound on Jul 28, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The government continues to subsidize big food manufacturers that are motivated to control the food Americans consume. This food is over processed and genetically modified. The human race did not evolve for thousands of years to eat this type of food. If we continue to consume these foods we will become increasingly sick and obese.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "THEY" control your food?? Posted by: gellero
» RE: "THEY" control your food?? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: "THEY" control your food?? Posted by: snowhound
Universal Healthcare: NEVER EVER...
Posted by: LeaderofMen on Jul 28, 2007 9:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...here's why.

1. Too many lobbyists have way too much control over our elected officials. No universal healthcare for you. Go to the back of the line.

2. Too many insurance companies, hospital equipment manufacturers (unregulated) and pharmas (unregulated and lobbyists) involved to EVER EVER EVER allow YOU to get universal healthcare (read: one payer).

3. Almost 2 million jobs created in the last 6 years in this industry alone will preclude them from losing their jobs, since they support the unregulated businesses that feed the healthcare industry, have something to do with the insurance companies - whose vested interest is to maximize profits - and thus, deny your claim, and are very highly paid lobbyists employed by pharmas and equipment manufacturers whose job it is to not only keep their extremely highly paid jobs, but to make sure that no legislation ever gets written by politicians that will allow universal, single-payer healthcare. The lobbyists are there the WRITE the policies and HAND them over to politicians who they've BOUGHT.

Thus, the US will never, ever ever in a MILLION years ever have universal, single-payer healthcare.

Besides, if Hillary ever becomes Prez, remember - she was right under Ricky Santorum for the second largest recipient of insurance company money. Thus, she's already been purchased, bought off and silenced with respect to this issue. So, DON'T even look to her to help us out on this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Universal Healthcare: NEVER EVER... Posted by: racetoinfinity
Article missed the biggest issue
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Jul 28, 2007 9:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and that's the statistics showing a "sound, growing economy". The inflations numbers are simply fraud. The REAL price inflation rate is at least 6 percent, putting the economy in recession or near recession. Ditto for jobs growth and unemployment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Nightmare that is Healthcare
Posted by: ld7440 on Jul 28, 2007 9:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's nothing healthy about our "healthcare" system. Your excellent article points out how the system is designed to reward "administrators", while punishing us - the patients. The discrepancies are shameful. While I try to practice preventive medicine by scheduling heart and colon screenings, I'm told that I can "wait" to be seen. I guess colonoscopies and blood tests don't bring in as much as a colon resection and bypass surgery. At the same time, I work in a school where young children come in with rotting teeth because their parents don't have healthcare. My mom, who has Medicare and a secondary insurance plan, gets sick over billers sending her bills! What's wrong with this system? Everything. And our elected officials don't care. Their rhetoric doesn't impress me. It's the reason why I practice alternative medicine, eat right, and exercise. That's what "healthcare" professionals should be focusing on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» MOM had a bill?? Posted by: gellero
» She does pay for something Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: MOM had a bill?? Posted by: halg
Building a Free Market Disneyland
Posted by: eddie torres on Jul 28, 2007 9:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Far from being a sector in crisis, the US Healthcare Industry is instead a model of swashbuckling enterprise.

If the real estate sector could add hundreds of thousands of jobs denying homes to families who had already made mortgage payments, the right people (Wall Street) would have the money they need to build a private 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea ride.

If the defense sector could add hundreds of thousands of jobs denying weapons to government departments who had already paid for the R&D, the right people (Wall Street) would have the money they need to build a private Big Thunder Mountain Railroad ride.

If the fast food sector could add hundreds of thousands of jobs denying food to people who had already paid for it, the right people (Wall Street) would have the money they need to build a private Rocket To The Moon ride.

If the information technology sector could add hundreds of thousands of jobs denying internet access to people who had already paid for it, the right people (Wall Street) would have the money they need to build a private Pirates of the Caribbean ride.

This Pinto ain't explodin', it's building a Three-Card-Monty economy the likes of which the world has never seen. "Behold the unedifying spectacle of the sucker economy." (Simon Schama)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't Get Duped: Hospitals
Posted by: LeaderofMen on Jul 28, 2007 9:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't get duped about the so-called 'high profits' they get.

Get yourself educated about hospital costs. The majority of hospitals operate at a loss. Only some of them are operating a little in the black. Only a FEW.

Take a look at Chicago, for instance. This is the 3rd largest city in the US. The majority of he hospitals here get the majority of their profit margin from PREVIOUS INVESTMENTS. They do NOT get their 'profit margin' from YOU the sick person. They do not get their 'profit margin' from the insurance companies. Remember, the ins. co's are in business to DENY claims. They have no interest whatsoever in feeding the so-called profits of a hospital's bottom line. No way, no how.

Hospitals are regulated out the ass. They have to follow some of the strictest guidelines handed down from the fed and from the state. If they don't follow them to a T, they are hugely fined. The industries that are NOT regulated are the equipment manu's and the pharma industry. Their revenues go up and the hospitals MUST pay their extortion rates or else the hospital can't compete. If the hospital can't compete, there are no patients. No patients - the hospital closes.

Note this, too. Hospitals constantly lose money because they are BY LAW required to service everyone that comes in an emergency room. If the person can't pay, guess who eats that cost? Not you. Not me. The hospital eats it. BY LAW. Don't tell me that Michael Moore's film, where the woman's daughter died, is contradictory to this because SHE HAD HEALTHCARE. I'm talking about those who DON'T. Those people who don't have healthcare get serviced and if they don't pay, they simply don't pay. Period.

In addition, let's say you're on Medicare. You need a hip replacement. The hospital must pay, say $2000 for the titanium hip for YOU. Medicare pays the hospital $790 for your stay. THE HOSPITAL JUST LOST ALL THAT MONEY. Never mind that the hip replacement for YOU is a fixed cost that can't be negotiated by ANYONE, the hospital just lost money because of you. Hospitals are NOT huge dramatic profit centers sucking the system dry. Not by a longshot.

Don't just rip on hospitals. They're victims in this healthcare debacle just as the rest of us are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't Get Duped: Hospitals Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Don't Get Duped: Hospitals Posted by: bornxeyed
BUT IT TASTES SO GOOD............
Posted by: picket on Jul 28, 2007 11:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People of means should have household help that shop and help prepare nutritious meals for their family. If they subsist on fast food they are stupid OR if their cook is uneducated in nutrition they are double stupid..........

Now for the middle class..hope grandma is retired and knows how to cook nutritious meals and can give some good advice. Otherwise.....I'm so sorry.

United States Dept of Agriculture [ USDA ] has too much political pressure from Food Production Associations and other Wall Street markets to really care about the health of
middle Americans. Check out the controversy re the old Food Guide Pyramid and the new 2005 MyPyramid @ Harvard School of Public Health..Dept of Nutrition...Nutrition Source.

"Aside from not smoking the most important determinants of good health are what we eat and how active we are."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BUT IT TASTES SO GOOD............ Posted by: vultureculture
Capitalism is Dying: Prognosis Bad
Posted by: BobbyGreyFriar on Jul 28, 2007 1:50 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Death of Capitalism: Should it be Welcomed?

I just finished Barbara Ehrenreich’s Bait and Switch, was not surprised by anything in it although it is apparent that the outlook is bleak indeed for those who wish remain employed at middle-class income levels, let alone expect to have any kind of job security or health coverage. But her conclusion suggests, what I’ve suspected for a while now (and has been anticipated at least since Marx in the 19th century), that capitalism, or what we call capitalism at any rate (the market economy, i.e.), is moribund. This raises a question: If this is indeed the case, will the whole thing collapse completely or will it transmutate into something else, a kind of tyranny ruled not be the truncheon but perpetual underemployment and the fear of unemployment? Perhaps one that transcends the need even for laws? One where compliance is technically voluntary but where dissent is practically impossible; reliant not on the Thought Police but inanity? It is impossible for me to see how “business as usual” can continue, the economy is increasingly unable, for nothing that has to do with lack of materiel or human resources, to take care of the population.* At present many signs suggest that the economy is self-destructing, that whole edifice will just collapse in a heap under its own weight; but if it is not, if the overall power structure can survive, it seems there is every reason to believe that will shortly find ourselves in a Dark Age bleaker than crude totalitarian world of 1984.

But what if instead the capitalism just self-destructs, as it almost did once? In the short run this will be a catastrophe for everyone and could even precipitate a nuclear war. But could it advantageous in the long run, once the rubble has been cleared? A cathartic event wringing in the millennium? I believe that this hope is widely held, but I think it is a dangerously complacent one. The reality, I believe, will be that scores of people who have hitherto been relatively prosperous will be trust to the bottom and won’t know what to do—the shock of such a radical descent would be beyond what most people could sustain. Therefore, if there is hope, it has to lie in us at last taking responsibility for ourselves. Deciding what aims are political and socially desirable and single-mindedly pursuing them, being fully prepared to confront whatever obstacles the forces of reaction will create to stop us. Idealism coupled with a hard eye on reality and the willingness to change strategy at once when a change of strategy is called for (Liberal support for the Democratic Party, who have failed to do anything other than support Republican policy, such as continuing the war on Iraq, comes to mind as an example of failed strategy. I think that creating a “third party” that takes a principled stand would be a logical next, but if that doesn’t work more “direct” forms of activism may turn out to be what’s required.).

*”And we have to find [long-term] solutions, because there is a level of macro-irrationality here that does beyond the micro-insanity of individual hiring and firing decisions: That is a massive, sickening, ongoing waste of talent, as exemplified by the taxi-driving engineer, the idle teachers and techies, the still employed people who are too crushed by anxiety to express their creativity (Ehrenreich, Bait and Switch).”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Watercolors
Posted by: Watercolors on Jul 28, 2007 3:57 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well maybe some think it's a good thing to shore up the economy by ignoring primary causes of poor health: toxic air from industrial and automotive sources, toxic processed foods, chlorinated toxic agricultural run-off in water supplies, plastics now found in our bodies. Basic requirements for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are clean oxygen rich air, clean mineral rich water, nutricious clean food. With those basic requirements met, we could have the potential to create a healthy society.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Three Levels of Health Care
Posted by: dayahka on Jul 28, 2007 4:41 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are actually three levels of health care: prevention, accidental, and voluntarily-caused. Preventive health care should be the principal focus of any rational health-care system, but you cannot have prevention without the full cooperation of the food industry and the environmental system. You cannot do prevention where the principal focus of the food industry is to sell tasty (but nutritionally poor) junk, nor can you do it where the environment is littered with thousands of toxins.

Second, a rational health-care system needs to protect people against the costs of accidents (broken bones, etc.) and other sudden illnesses, like a ruptured appendix.

The first two levels should be the focus of any reform.

It's the third level that is killing the health-care system for the rest of us (who aren't insured or aren't wealthy). A lot of the cost of health-care insurance and hospitalization comes from elective surgeries for health conditions caused by voluntary and preventable conditions. This includes heart surgeries of all kinds, surgeries and medical attention that are necessary because of smoking, drinking, and otherwise doing things that are known to cause serious health problems. This level should NOT be covered by a national health insurance system: if someone wants to smoke or drink themselves sick, then they can spend their own money to buy private insurance to cover the costs of the inevitable illnesses. It is because this level is now included in insurance and medicare costs that makes the whole system so unaffordable and wasteful.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

how I stay healthy and able
Posted by: eosrk on Jul 28, 2007 5:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
by seeing how sorry American healthcare is, that's an incentive for me to stay healthy, fit, and the hell away from them crooks. I know there's worser out there, but we're talking about the richest country in the world, as being compared with the best of the third world nation....they're running neck in neck, with the third world running ahead by a nose, sometimes by a horsehead, at most an neck-length.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Uh, the dot-com bust began in 1998 ...
Posted by: halg on Jul 28, 2007 10:52 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's just that it wasn't noticed until later by the venture capitalists (1999?), wall street (2000?), and the rest of the country (I guess 2001, based on your timekeeping).

I was living in Seattle.com while all this bullshit was going on. In 1998, I was looking for work and had a hard time finding