|
I think we should go through with the liikenneuudistus in which the government still pays for the roads while the private sector pockets the new tienkäyttömaksu. The govt should be happy that the most efficient private sector is taking over some things. If you don't like my proposal then you're just envious of the successful captains of the industry who get to join the cabal of vampires leeching money from the public. QED
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
lol, politics of envy says the kok.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 11:53
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:I think we should go through with the liikenneuudistus in which the government still pays for the roads while the private sector pockets the new tienkäyttömaksu. The govt should be happy that the most efficient private sector is taking over some things. How do you feel about the government paying for roads but transport companies profiting from using them? What about companies benefitting from our education system through educated workers? I mean your example is dumb as hell because it doesn't save any money, unlike healthcare. In your example, the roads are paid for but the consumer pays something on top. In health care, the govt and people save money. It's pretty incredible that people can be opposed to a solution where people literally pay less because it means that someone else makes money. How petty do you have to be for that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Right, so pure politics of envy, then. For profit motive is anathema to good health care. Private care has long history of overprescribing procedures that are profitable and avoiding ones that aren't. It's also more expensive than public system. (see USA, Switzerland) Healthcare should be a need based system, not want nor profit based one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:03
|
|
|
I'm against this whole sote-privatisation debacle because it'll inevitably lead to the defunding/-commissioning of public healthcare and the transfer of all that money to tax evading private healthcare companies, that will also likely become less efficient and more expensive the moment they have a monopoly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:03
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:I'm not an expert on aviation but I can still pick which airlines to fly. I'm not an expert on car safety, yet somehow I can still decide which car to drive. I'm not a biologist, but I can still pick which foods I want to eat without getting poisoned. that's a lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:How do you feel about the government paying for roads but transport companies profiting from using them? What about companies benefitting from our education system through educated workers? loving lol. OK, buddo, pop quiz: You say that a) people will pay less and b) someone starts making money. That is, if the customer base stays the same, the amount of incoming money will decrease and the extra profit will have to come from somewhere. Now, where exactly will the necessary cuts happen and how will it affect the qulity of care?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
adhuin posted:For profit motive is anathema to good health care. The current proposal mainly pays providers per patient, not per operation. I don't know the details though. The worry has been that private providers get the healthiest patients, not that they will overdo operations. But they will not be allowed to explicitly discriminate at least, so they're worried about discrimination by location choice, but that can be accounted for by varying the payment per region.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:20
|
|
|
I don't know the details, but I'm sure the magic of the Free Market will provide, says the kok.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:21
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:I don't know the details, but I'm sure the magic of the Free Market will provide, says the kok. Having a lower cost per patient and more satisfied patients is bad because someone might make money at some stage, says the teenage communist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
Look at all the examples of good privatized healthcare systems from around the world such as:
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Having a lower cost* per patient and more satisfied* patients is bad because someone might make money at some stage, says the teenage communist. *Not actually true, but lets destroy current system and say it will be better. There is no undo-button for yet another failed privatization.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
adhuin posted:*Not actually true, but lets destroy current system and say it will be better. There is no undo-button for yet another failed privatization. I just linked you a VATT blog post with references to multiple studies that have found both to be the case. The standard of evidence on your side seems to be "HURR BUT U$A."
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
adhuin posted:There is no undo-button for yet another failed privatization. That exists and it's called a revolution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:I just linked you a VATT blog post with references to multiple studies that have found both to be the case. Let's see what the VATT blog you linked actually says. quote:Nähdäksemme kritiikki on ollut aiheellista, mutta valinnanvapauden ja kilpailun roolia siinä ei käsitelty kovin syvällisesti. quote:Muista maista saadut kokemukset ja tuoreet tutkimustulokset viittaavat kuitenkin siihen, että yksityisen tuotannon osuuden lisäämisestä voi olla haittojen lisäksi myös hyötyä. "In some cases privatization does not result in an entirely negative outcome in all areas", a strong argument if I ever saw one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
Herman Merman posted:Let's see what the VATT blog you linked actually says. The sentence next the second one you quoted is: quote:Yksityisten yritysten osuuden lisääminen julkisesti rahoitetussa erikoissairaanhoidossa on myös nähty julkisessa keskustelussa ongelmallisena.  "), not a commentary on the evidence. I.e. the Finnish media (and opposition) are just parroting one side of the argument, but the evidence suggests that freedom to choose has positive effects, even in this area where people are discussing it as a one sided thing. So why don't we stick to quoting things in context? quote:Terveystaloustieteen kirjallisuuden vallitseva näkemys on, että valinnanvapausreformeista ja kilpailusta voi olla soveltuvin osin hyötyä myös erikoissairaanhoidossa (ks. esim. Gaynor ja Town, 2011; Gaynor ym. 2012, Gaynor ym. 2016). Suora hyöty saavutetaan, kun potilaat voivat aiempaa paremmin valita omia tarpeitaan vastaavan sairaalan. Tällaiset suorat hyödyt voivat olla sitä suurempia mitä suurempia sairaaloiden väliset erot hoitokäytännöissä ja laadussa ovat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:So why don't we stick to quoting things in context? I'm the wildly differing quality and methods in hospitals in Finland. Anyway, in other news, looks like Länsimetro will be opening for the 100th time again next year: https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9891089
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
The original aims of the SOTE were: 1) More streamlined care, removal of various hallintohimmelit and bureucracy, etc. What is delivered as of the current proposal: 18 different maakunnat of varying size and geographic and the ongoing confusion over their powers, funding and powers over funding. Along with an urban revolt of the largest cities in the country. Adding an entirely new level of government with the additional bureucracy will make things more simple because ??? The bizarre intrepretation of what the SO part of SOTE is supposed to even loving mean, with apparently currently covering only basic social guidance. So this is basically just removing one small part of an already existing institution, leaving it basically intact, and creating another separate place people are supposed to go for their SO-issues. Thus things will be more streamlined despite further splintering a system because ??? Removing of yhtiöittämispakko because it is against the law and the government literally lied about EU forcing us to do it, which the lemmings on the right accepted at face value. Anyway this just means that now you have the own health center of the maakunta, still presumably operating on public principles, then you have the private facilities. So it's once again additive, not reductive. Addition is streamlined because ??? The current asiakasseteli poo poo and the addition of specialized care to this whole thing. I'm still reading over the vaguely defined thing so I'll not elaborate anymore but from the reaction inside the government it did not seem to simplify things. Oh yeah, then there will be the initial confusion and arguments over all the above things and how the gently caress this is supposed to work...well actually the process has already started and it's not going all too well: http://blogit.apu.fi/uuninpankkopoikasakutimonen/tag/siun-sote/ Now, maybe our brilliant politicians and selfless CEO's go against all the abysmal indications and somehow create a simplified, easy and streamlined healthcare system. But there is zero evidence to expect them to do so. 2) Equal healthcare despite where you live Unless SOTE fixes the basic concepts of urbanization and distance, this was and will always be a pipe dream peddled to people who want to live in the middle of nowhere. 3) Save us 3 billion euros in growing costs Even the government doesn't believe this anymore, in Risikko's own words the costs may actually increase short-term. There is literally no indication that this will happen, no actual calculations, no theory besides FREE MARKET IS ALWAYS MORE EFFICIENT. Basically instead of a SOTE-uudistus we have a MAT€ uudistus because the only thing Kepu cares is the maakunnat which are in no way relevant to SO or TE (we don't have 18 university hospitals), a practically nonexistent social services aspect when half of the whole thing was supposed to be about it, and the health aspect has been entirely hijacked by Cock, uninterested in anything except selling a yet another taxpayer built and funded thing to the highest bidder. They basically changed every goal there was for this poo poo and their slack-jawed retard troops just went "sounds great!" So yeah, about par the course these days! DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Oct 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Equal access to health care would be possible if things would be handled by other people than Randian morons and rural inbreds. Kinda like how if we'd really be into cutting health care costs, we'd eliminate up front costs for checkups and poo poo like that entirely, since it teaches low-income people to not see a doctor before they're in unbearable pain. Also, make dental care free too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
I can get to THE best hospital in the country, one of the best in the world, in flat seven minutes from the ambulance arriving. This hospital is right next to the best medical teaching institution in the country. My local health station, even closer, is larger then the hospital in my hometown, better and more staffed, and thanks to the increased possibility of stabbings/overdoses happening in near vicinity, probably far better equipped too. I haven't even gone into the private poo poo. You can provide everyone with good healthcare, but equal just ain't happening if you're unfortunate enough to live somewhere in the intact arm of the maiden. It's why rural white America is hosed right now while the cities are like *sigh* "Another drug crisis, huh." EDIT: just in case one needs a reminder of that nobody actually has a clue where the savings this schizophrenic chimerafuck of a "reform" are supposed to come from: https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9710362 https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9695194 http://blogit.apu.fi/uuninpankkopoikasakutimonen/2017/02/01/valinnanvapauden-kupla/ https://www.hs.fi/paivanlehti/08012017/art-2000005036608.html DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Oct 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:The sentence next the second one you quoted is: LOL @ terveystaloustiede, must be just as rigorous as standard economics. Also all the references being to one author's work, must be a huge consensus if you're forced to only refer to them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
bloom posted:Look at all the examples of good privatized healthcare systems from around the world such as: Elective healthcare in Sweden.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
Bensa posted:LOL @ terveystaloustiede, must be just as rigorous as standard economics. Also all the references being to one author's work, must be a huge consensus if you're forced to only refer to them. The funny thing is that the point of the entire VATT blog post is "in addition to the well-known numerous downsides, there may be some limited advantages of using private health care services, if they are strongly regulated and restricted to operating only in certain specific areas of healthcare", yet it's probably the strongest "expert" endorsement GP was able to find.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:The original aims of the SOTE were: quote:2) Equal healthcare despite where you live quote:3) Save us 3 billion euros in growing costs Kemper Boyd posted:Equal access to health care would be possible if things would be handled by other people than Randian morons and rural inbreds. Or I mean we could just link Emma Kari or Paavo Arhinmäki's twitter feeds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
Literally every time they make actual studies comparing the healthcare systems in different countries it turns out that the British NHS is the most efficient system by far (even though the Tories are doing their best to gut it on the sly), but on the other hand I have this randroid blog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 10:06
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:18 maakunnat is better than 200+ kunnat. Of course it's not ideal, but we live in Finland where every government will be a compromise. Yeah, this is what you get when you just parrot what your side tells you without any critical thinking. Mouthing off Kepu propaganda like a champ. Meanwhile in the real word, kunnat aren’t going anywhere. They will still cover apparently 99% of SO-services AND have their own non-yhtiötetty health centers, which a large majority of people will choose because they are familiar with it, because of ideological reasons or because it is just near. Real world: My 90-year old grandma will still take a taxi to the local health center because she knows the doctor and has left the borders of her home county maybe three times in my lifetime. Real world: Dementia-ridden people will still be carted to the nearest convenient location in ever growing masses, aka. The local health center. Real world: Rural areas are big on supporting local institutions because their friends and family work there, they know it and it vitalizes their local economy. So even if given an option to travel 50 miles to a fancy private center, they might still pick the one the closest to them...the local health center. So all that infrastructure, administration and employees will be retained in the vast majority of cases. You’re adding in another layer of government, splintering existing entities and adding privatization to the mix while still maintaining virtually all of the existing public organizations. Then we have of course all the political additions: new elections, new fights over money, more Kepu horse trading... There is no streamlining. There is a deal with the devil that has resulted into new complexities in addition to the old ones. The fact that you are unable to intellectually acknowledge the simple mathematical principle of more poo poo = more poo poo is pretty telling, all in all. quote:You've completely missed the point. While they might have said some blahblah about making areas more equal, the equality here is coming from poorer people in certain areas who don't have private insurance getting access to private providers in those areas, i.e. lowering gaps between people who can afford better care now and people who can't. And guess what? It's literally impossible to make poor people worse off here: If poor people currently live in areas with bad healthcare that private companies don't want to enter, they lose nothing, the government remains the provider. If they live in areas where private companies will enter (or already exist), they get access to these companies if they want to use them. So again, streamlining is a pipe dream. You can admit that the government lies, like you admit it lies about equal healthcare instead of acknowledging the impossibility of the concept. That’s two out of three of the original aims tossed in the trash. How about those savings? quote:Luckily most people understand that the market is more efficient in almost all cases and that efficiency improvements have even been delivered in market-oriented healthcare reforms (you ignore the linked evidence anyway, so no point in reposting it), so I can just dismiss this as inconsequential whining. *sigh* No, you can’t, for the Nth time, that is not how debate works. Instead of appealing to ambiguous authority like “most people” (because most people don’t support this government according to all available data, moron), grow the gently caress up and show me some widely acknowledged, peer reviewed studies where market-based approach to healthcare has shown to be the best system. Or shut the gently caress up, you know, either. Because in real life, there will be no savings: https://www.hs.fi/politiikka/art-2000005416491.html https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9878638 Just more political infighting and further complications, because neither Kepu nor Cock are fighting for better healthcare and anyone without ideological blinders is able to see it clear as sunshine. Personally I don’t think they will pass it, because this is the shittiest, most incompetent government in the history of modern Finland and it perfectly reflects it’s base of support, people like you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
I don't see why these new maakunnat will help when we just had a study on the merging of municipalities into bigger units confirm that it didn't save any money either. It's been treated as an axiom for far too long.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 12:13
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:I don't see why these new maakunnat will help when we just had a study on the merging of municipalities into bigger units confirm that it didn't save any money either. It's been treated as an axiom for far too long. I can't wait for the next year, when Oulu can jettison people who have had 5 year irtisanomissuoja from mergers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Yeah, this is what you get when you just parrot what your side tells you without any critical thinking. Mouthing off Kepu propaganda like a champ. Let me get this right before I respond - you think the problem with SOTE is not that there are too many regions, but instead that any reorganization on top of the current municipality-structure will just add costs? related: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMbbBoPWkAArYuG.jpg quote:So again, streamlining is a pipe dream. You can admit that the government lies, like you admit it lies about equal healthcare instead of acknowledging the impossibility of the concept. quote:*sigh* I've linked a blog post that summarizes peer-review studies here. I posted studies in the train track discussion. Your response there was to continue to post Yle/HS articles and to argue that "there is only one track." There is no study that shows "market based systems are the best" or whatever that means. There are studies (see the VATT post) showing that choice can lead to better patient outcomes and satisfaction for similar costs, even for special procedures. Before I bother linking you to another one you won't read: READ THEM. STOP REPLYING TO THEM WITH LINKS TO NEWSPAPERS. I'm telling you what the scientific consensus is. You're ignoring it and keep posting newspaper articles (and often columns by Saku Timonen). That's why there's no point in having this discussion with you, because you keep saying "the experts" support you, I post actual links to studies which have been done on these things in other countries and you continue to just wave the experts-card because you have an HS-article that has the word "expert" there somewhere. Here's a challenge for you: go here: http://vatt.fi/blogit, ctrl+fe SOTE, or terveydenhuolto, and read what the actual experiences on competition in healthcare have been. Yes, they also highlight the downsides in many posts. His Divine Shadow posted:I don't see why these new maakunnat will help when we just had a study on the merging of municipalities into bigger units confirm that it didn't save any money either. It's been treated as an axiom for far too long. Geriatric Pirate fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Oct 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:I don't see why these new maakunnat will help when we just had a study on the merging of municipalities into bigger units confirm that it didn't save any money either. It's been treated as an axiom for far too long. Doing it for savings is stupid, agreed. How it should be done: parasitic behavior by municipalities surrounding (or in case of Kauniainen, inside) major cities should be addressed by either tax reform or just eliminating those municipalities entirely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:So your first complaint was that Kepu managed to get too many maakunnat created, now you're complaining that there are too few and that it will be unnecessary on top of the municipalities? Adding new structures on top of others will just add cost, yes. Stop avoiding the fact that they are creating something NEW while retaining the old in all but name. Do you think all the endless Kepu kuntapeople just want to lose their jobs or move to the largest city in the maakunta en-masse or something? You seem to think this is a noble attempt in centralization, and ignore the hundred-year old history of our beloved agrarian party that represents the antithesis of that. But anyway, I guess my complaint is that the maakunta-uudistus is a naked attempt at political cronyism apparent to everyone except apparently starry-eyed libertarians who in this particular case weirdly believe that adding yet another level of taxation is awesome. quote:related: While it's adorable you think it's just going to be that neat to change a decades long system, you've fallen into the same trap as our beloved government - not giving a poo poo beyond your myopic focus on either political power/privatization. Again, Kepu does not want to LOSE power or political positions. In REAL LIFE if you take a look at any of the systems they are deciding to flippantly overhaul, the clusterfuck that is most likely going to ensue is readily apparent. And no, this is not some pinko commie opinion in case you missed Vapaavuori and co., here is an example of just one small part of the greater thing from very much non-commies: https://www.yrittajat.fi/yrittajat/a/statement/543306-maakuntien-valtakunnalliset-palvelukeskukset-yhteishankintojen-palvelukeskus quote:Sure, if you're just going to ignore the biggest benefits, there are no big benefits. Amazing how that happens. The lovely parts way, way, outstrip the benefits. quote:I've linked a blog post that summarizes peer-review studies here. I posted studies in the train track discussion. Your response there was to continue to post Yle/HS articles and to argue that "there is only one track." Nah, your "studies" on the train track issues were just as vague as your posts or your studies on this issue. Until you OR them is able to make one valid, concrete measure in words, supported by actual numbers and data, that the private companies do to cut costs that is 100% attributed to only them and will happen while retaining equivalent quantity and quality of service...it's just FREE MARKET HAS MONOPOLY ON ALL IMPROVEMENT. I'm not going to support overhauling one of the best healthcare systems in the world based on your religious faith in an economic system that has poo poo the bed more times then I can count in my lifetime alone. You ignoring the news articles doesn't mean they don't make valid, sourced points that refer and link to the studies made on the issue. They are there to support the main argument anyway, the argument that you keep dancing around and which really is the overarching theme of these talks - you and other lovely, naive capitalist fanatics seem to think that everything that has improved in the world is 100% credit of the global free market and not the credit of that and a SHITLOAD of other things. You refuse to recognize the existence of those things (say, in the case of trains, improvement in technology, population growth and government infrastructure for few) and get mad as hell when someone points out that everything cool and good in the world doesn't come from Mother Rand. It's funny as poo poo! quote:There is no study that shows "market based systems are the best" or whatever that means. There are studies (see the VATT post) showing that choice can lead to better patient outcomes and satisfaction for similar costs, even for special procedures. Before I bother linking you to another one you won't read: READ THEM. STOP REPLYING TO THEM WITH LINKS TO NEWSPAPERS. "Can lead" is not "DOES lead". The VATT study makes no loving certain claims and is nothing compared to the fact that throughout the entire globe public systems are ridicolously superior to market systems. That's the thing about paying attention to the real world alongside the overwhelming consensus on the issue - you don't really have to prove much when the entire reality is on your side. quote:I'm telling you what the scientific consensus is. You're ignoring it and keep posting newspaper articles (and often columns by Saku Timonen). That's why there's no point in having this discussion with you, because you keep saying "the experts" support you, I post actual links to studies which have been done on these things in other countries and you continue to just wave the experts-card because you have an HS-article that has the word "expert" there somewhere. The articles and blog posts refer to multiple studies, including countless statements from the Parlamentarian specialist group on the reform. The fact that you have this insane conspiracy about the left-wing media or whatever your brain has cooked up doesn't mean that HS and Yle (or virtually any Finnish publication - their opinion on sote is pretty similar) are not widely acknowledged to represent the mainstream public AND in the case of the studies in those articles, scientific and professional consensus that all agree that the sote is unlikely to streamline anything or cut costs in it's past or current form. Maybe you got dyslexia or something, I don't know. But step out of the Alex Jones Zone for a moment and read some loving news for once you baby. Widen your horizons. You got no place whining about others being biased or having people ignore your vague VATT best case scenario hypotheticals if you ignore 95% of all published content on the issue (this or trains). How is it that I always end up arguing from the centre here, anyway? quote:Here's a challenge for you: go here: http://vatt.fi/blogit, ctrl+fe SOTE, or terveydenhuolto, and read what the actual experiences on competition in healthcare have been. Yes, they also highlight the downsides in many posts. Here's a challenge for you - which countries in the world are generally considered to have the best healthcare systems and are these systems largely public or private? They do highlight the downsides and the downsides have been largely documented to be MUCH more likely to happen then whatever maybe benefits the VATT refers to. Why are you unable to understand that they make very little certain claims, and you probably should base a huge governmental overhaul on something else then a vague assertion that THIS time market-based solutions on healthcare will work when in the vast majority of cases they don't? The VATT's argument is that is everything goes perfectly things are going to be great and you'll trust this cabinet of morons to pull that off? Has their track record in handling the issue filled you with much confidence thus far? We don't even have a clue what is going to be in the final bill! I commend your faith and I am sure it brings you great comfort in life but...nah. quote:They also didn't find any increased costs (monetary or social) from municipality mergers. Tbh they should just merge all of non-pk-seutu into one big kunta. Cool. How many municipalities are going to be merged in sote-uudistus again? Because I could swear the number is a flat loving zero. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Oct 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
I've found it funny that Kepu has been the primary motor for killing off the countryside as a thriving environment. Turns out that people who are essentially kleptocrats don't have a lot of interest in developing anything. poo poo like decent public transporation in rural regions would be entirely feasible (never ofc as good as what you can get in an urban setting, but better than what we have now) but since Kepu's been against public transportation (apart from bus monopolies), that's never going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 07:09
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Adding new structures on top of others will just add cost, yes. Stop avoiding the fact that they are creating something NEW while retaining the old in all but name. Do you think all the endless Kepu kuntapeople just want to lose their jobs or move to the largest city in the maakunta en-masse or something? You seem to think this is a noble attempt in centralization, and ignore the hundred-year old history of our beloved agrarian party that represents the antithesis of that. Please, try to catch up on the basics of what's actually going to happen before commenting. And I'm quite sure even Kepu will want to centralize the many terveysasemat around the country that are struggling to get doctors and are essentially almost useless. Your complaints are almost the opposite of what most people are complaining about : Most people are worried that the reform will lead to lack of service in small municipalities which are currently getting it. quote:Nah, your "studies" on the train track issues were just as vague as your posts or your studies on this issue. Until you OR them is able to make one valid, concrete measure in words, supported by actual numbers and data, that the private companies do to cut costs that is 100% attributed to only them and will happen while retaining equivalent quantity and quality of service...it's just FREE MARKET HAS MONOPOLY ON ALL IMPROVEMENT. I'm not going to support overhauling one of the best healthcare systems in the world based on your religious faith in an economic system that has poo poo the bed more times then I can count in my lifetime alone. Let's just take one example, linked in the VATT blog: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20121532 This is a study around a reform, where pre-reform patients had no choice over their doctor in certain cases and post-reform they had a choice. They a) look at a tight period around the reform, b) control for areas where the reform had no effect (because of availability of hospitals) and c) control for operations (emergency vs elective) where the reform had no effect and still find that choice improved patient outcomes. You, lazily: "well uhhh HS said choice is bad, so that study probably doesn't control for technological change" Like I said: READ THE PAPERS. Your dumb, lazy commenting isn't worth responding to because you assume that somehow these top researchers are not accounting for obvious things. The even dumber thing is that after dismissing those studies without reading them, you then assume that your view (that the government can run trains more efficiently than the private sector, or that patients do not know how to choose) is the correct one without a shred of evidence. Ok, sorry, you normally back up your views with an anecdote about your grandmother or a link to a blog post by Saku Timonen. quote:Here's a challenge for you - which countries in the world are generally considered to have the best healthcare systems and are these systems largely public or private? See, here we go again. Carefully done studies looking at natural experiments of privatization are wrong according to you because they don't control for technological change or whatever, but your argument is: "HURRR DURR U$A NHSSS"
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
Prime minister Sipilä wants Paavo Väyrynen to resign or kicked out of the party because of his bipartisan shenanigans: he's not only a member of the Center Party, but also the founder and member of Citizen Party. According to Sipilä, it is against party rules to be in two different parties at the same time, but according to Väyrynen:Paavo Väyrynen posted:Kansalaispuolueen kannalta asia on selvä, koska sen jäsen voi olla jäsen myös toisessa puolueessa.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
Näytä niille Väykkä 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
onks ligur vielä kahleissa vai voiko tietäjä kertoa oliko mansesterissa hyvä meininki?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Ligur is always here, in our hearts
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
HerraS posted:onks ligur vielä kahleissa vai voiko tietäjä kertoa oliko mansesterissa hyvä meininki? Näyttäis siltä, että pekan ehdonalainen päättyy viikon päästä, mutta siinä on alla myös porttikielto, joten nähtäväksi jää investoiko hää taas 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:Prime minister Sipilä wants Paavo Väyrynen to resign or kicked out of the party because of his bipartisan shenanigans: he's not only a member of the Center Party, but also the founder and member of Citizen Party. According to Sipilä, it is against party rules to be in two different parties at the same time, but according to Väyrynen: The best thing is that Sipilä needs the Keminmaan paikallisyhdistys to kick Paavo out, but turns out Paavo is the Keminmaa kepu chairman. quote:"Sääntötulkintahan on niin kuin Sipilä siinä sanoi. Paikallisyhdistyksen pitäisi erottaa, mutta Keminmaan keskustaseuran puheenjohtajana en aio ryhtyä toimenpiteisiin.”
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 19:47
|
|
