Daily Archives: 02/25/2011

Epic #NewsCorpFail

John Quiggin

via Epic #NewsCorpFail.

Ms. Regan had once been involved in an affair with Mr. Kerik, the former New York City police commissioner whose mentor and supporter, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, was in the nascent stages of a presidential campaign. The News Corporation executive, whom she did not name, wanted to protect Mr. Giuliani and conceal the affair, she said.

Now, court documents filed in a lawsuit make clear whom Ms. Regan was accusing of urging her to lie: Roger E. Ailes, the powerful chairman of Fox News and a longtime friend of Mr. Giuliani. What is more, the documents say that Ms. Regan taped the telephone call from Mr. Ailes in which Mr. Ailes discussed her relationship with Mr. Kerik.

Enough with the (Canadian) wait times, already

I added the parenthetical as the argument is made in favor of status quo health system in the US based on shorter wait times than in Canada.  Seems its not even always true. 

Other things to consider are that Canada is ranked higher on economic freedom than the US by some reckonings.

I’m not necessarily in favor single payer, but I think it is a fact that the US health care system doesn’t compare favorably with that of many other nations.  The obama reform may need a lot of fixes and replacement of portions, but let’s not just go  back to the pre 2010 status quo.

Enough with the wait times, already
Aaron Carroll
Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:23:01 GMT

It constantly amazes me how entrenched many people get in opposing health care reform. I’ve been getting a strange number of emails defending the health care spending seen in my post yesterday. Please understand, that spending is what’s bankrupting us. You can hate the PPACA, you can hate single payer, you can hate any form of government regulation at all, and stil recognize that we spend too much on health care.

But forget that for a second. Many of you are defending the high costs of our health care with the usual “wait times” meme. You defend our very, very high level of spending by accusing other systems of having long wait times. You believe that we are buying “no wait times” with our spending.

No.

First of all, what do you mean by wait times? Perhaps it’s “do you have to wait to see a doctor when you’re sick”?

alt

Let’s own something right up front. We beat Canada. Let me say that again: WE BEAT CANADA. There’s a reason people always cherry pick Canada to talk about wait times. But many, many other countries do better in terms of getting people in to see the doctor when they are sick.  We also do better in terms of getting people in to see specialists (although we’re not #1), and we do better in how long people need to wait to get elective surgery (which is ELECTIVE), but that’s not the same.

Here’s another telling metric, however:

alt

People in the US feel like their doctors don’t know them. Why could that be?

alt

One reason is that more people feel like they don’t get enough time with the doctor. Since we’re so obsessed with wait times (even though we don’t do very well in winning that battle), doctors are forced to see more patients every day in order to avoid them. So, yes, you might not wait as long to see your doctor, but when you get there, he or she won’t have much time for you.

One of the reasons for this is that we have so few doctors in this country:

alt

And that’s after spending way, way, way more money than anyone else.

How is this defensible? We’re failing. We really are. I have no problem with disagreement on how to fix the system, but it’s hard to believe some many of you want to defend the status quo.

UPDATE (from Austin): Colleague and occasional co-blogger Steve Pizer has co-authored (with Julia Prentice) a recently published paper on wait times and diabetes care. They conclude, “Decreasing wait times has the potential to reduce A1C levels by 0.18 percentage point for patients with baseline A1C levels exceeding 8%. This effect is roughly one-third of what is achieved with the most successful existing quality improvement strategies.” I will encourage Steve and Julia to write a blog summary of their paper.

Twitter Facebook Digg Delicious Google Buzz Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon Share


Software picked, likely related articles at The Incidental Economist:

Why Wisconsin?

TheMoneyIllusion

via Why Wisconsin?.

 

Keep in mind that almost all generalizations about Wisconsin are slightly inaccurate, as it’s hard to make generalizations about highly average places.  For instance Wisconsin does have some professional jobs in insurance, biotech, etc.  But Wisconsin is un-average enough in one dimension to make at least a few generalizations possible.  And that dimension isn’t dairy farming, it’s lots of cities with 50,000 people that make things.  It’s easy to convince foolish rich people in West LA to waste $300,000,000 on boondoggle high schools, they even think teachers are poorly paid.  But in a community of 50,000 people, most folks pretty much know what’s going on, and they accurately perceive that the public employees are currently doing better than they are.  In the end the GOP may over-reach, as Wisconsin still has that strong Northern European social democratic tradition.  It’s still a Democratic state.  But the fact that the battle in Wisconsin is even this close should be a wake-up call that there are some internal contradictions in modern liberalism that are a long way from being resolved.