#1 country have long way to go regarding personal freedoms though. Do you know what kind of health care plan they offer their citizens? And how do they treat their gay birds?
Hong Kong Marijuana Laws
Hong-Kong_marijuana_lawsIn Hong Kong, the possession, cultivation, and trafficking of cannabis is illegal and punishable under The Dangerous Drug Ordinance (Chapter 134 of the Law of Hong Kong). Cultivation of cannabis or opium poppy is punishable to a fine of HK$ 100,000 and imprisonment for 15 years. Smoking marijuana or other dangerous drugs is punishable to a fine of HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 3 years. The distribution of cannabis and other dangerous drugs is punishable to a fine of HK$ 5,000,000 and imprisonment for life.
Whether marijuana is legal or not in any given jurisdiction is such a trivial matter that it doens't rank in the top twenty policy concerns of any serious American
From time to time I do run into interesting items having to do with weed and public policy. For instance, yesterday, Hot Air had some cogent observations on a recent shouting match between Mary Katherine Ham and Bill O'Reilly over it. I considered doing a post / link about it, but several other far more important stories took up all the time I could devote to blogging just then.
Oops, my bad, so many stories out there about the legalization of pot these days I just had to post one. Since you did not answer my question about Hong Kong's healthcare arrangement for its people, I will.
"There is no comparison, by the way, with the healthcare that China is able (or rather, unable) to offer its people. If you don't have the money to pay for treatment, hospitals won't take you in. Medical bankruptcy is also a huge problem there as in the US. But even China has now committed to 90% coverage for basic universal healthcare by 2011, and 100% by 2020. If this was really about capitalism, then would we look at Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Australia, which are all ranked as even more fiscally conservative than the US, and all have UHC, and see that there is no ideological barrier to having UHC. We might even say UHC is a hallmark of sound social policy in capitalist countries. But we all know this isn't really about capitalism. Or socialism. This is about crazy versus sane. This is about stupid Rethuglican power plays, and it is probably about racism too. But don't let any of that fool you, or distract you. Don't let the crazies get to you. We must stay focused. We must get UHC and a strong public option done in this country. History and future generations of Americans will judge us by it."
Read more at http://www.apaforprogress.org/hong-kong-healthcare-reform-not-socialist
South Korean model: bad news. It involves redistribution (subsidies) and rationing. And doctors don't make much money, leading to declining interest in that career path.
By favoring breadth over depth, its system ensures that nobody is left behind. Importantly, low-income families benefit the most from the low costs of basic and emergency healthcare. This is because without subsidies, low-income individuals are equally likely to fall sick as high-income individuals, but end up spending a larger portion of income on healthcare. As a result, the redistributive effect of healthcare in South Korea is therefore very high, and helps close the widening income gap.
However, no system is without its drawbacks. To begin with, the low price of healthcare in South Korea has caused Korean doctors to earn a fraction of what their counterparts in the US and Europe do. This has led to a decline in the interest in the medical profession. This phenomenon can pose several long-term problems. In fact, one emerging problem I read about was the problem of doctors carrying out extremely quick consultations in the hope of covering more patients. This is because with the shortage of medical graduates, doctors are paid based on the number of patients they see. The lack of sufficient attention as such invariably increases the propensity for error, thereby putting patients at risk. (Still, one may argue that quick and cheap consultations are better than no consultations at all)
Next, the medical coverage is strong, but limited. While South Koreans pay very little for standardized treatment, they face serious financial difficulties when dealing with advanced diseases like cancer. This is because a lot of the treatments required are considered ‘electives’ and therefore not covered under the state’s medical insurance scheme. Without Singapore’s method of mandatory savings, South Koreans without private insurance are in an extremely vulnerable position.
Hong Kong? Looks like that's a case of people paying good old cash for most of their health care, which is what us pro-freedom folks here in America advocate: "Hong Kong has (a) one of the smallest public sectors (government spends only 55% of the total), (b) very little health insurance (only 12% of spending) and (c) the highest amount of out-of-pocket spending among developed countries (one out of every three dollars)."
- See more at: http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hong-kong-health-care-system-is-number-one/#sthash.aboggcu7.dpuf
Tell that to these 12 countries that supposedly exceed us in economic freedom, there's not a one of them that does not offer universal health coverage to their citizens. It is social insurance. That's all.
#1 country have long way to go regarding personal freedoms though. Do you know what kind of health care plan they offer their citizens? And how do they treat their gay birds?
ReplyDeleteHong Kong Marijuana Laws
Hong-Kong_marijuana_lawsIn Hong Kong, the possession, cultivation, and trafficking of cannabis is illegal and punishable under The Dangerous Drug Ordinance (Chapter 134 of the Law of Hong Kong). Cultivation of cannabis or opium poppy is punishable to a fine of HK$ 100,000 and imprisonment for 15 years. Smoking marijuana or other dangerous drugs is punishable to a fine of HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 3 years. The distribution of cannabis and other dangerous drugs is punishable to a fine of HK$ 5,000,000 and imprisonment for life.
Whether marijuana is legal or not in any given jurisdiction is such a trivial matter that it doens't rank in the top twenty policy concerns of any serious American
ReplyDeleteFrom time to time I do run into interesting items having to do with weed and public policy. For instance, yesterday, Hot Air had some cogent observations on a recent shouting match between Mary Katherine Ham and Bill O'Reilly over it. I considered doing a post / link about it, but several other far more important stories took up all the time I could devote to blogging just then.
ReplyDeleteOops, my bad, so many stories out there about the legalization of pot these days I just had to post one. Since you did not answer my question about Hong Kong's healthcare arrangement for its people, I will.
ReplyDelete"There is no comparison, by the way, with the healthcare that China is able (or rather, unable) to offer its people. If you don't have the money to pay for treatment, hospitals won't take you in. Medical bankruptcy is also a huge problem there as in the US. But even China has now committed to 90% coverage for basic universal healthcare by 2011, and 100% by 2020. If this was really about capitalism, then would we look at Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Australia, which are all ranked as even more fiscally conservative than the US, and all have UHC, and see that there is no ideological barrier to having UHC. We might even say UHC is a hallmark of sound social policy in capitalist countries. But we all know this isn't really about capitalism. Or socialism. This is about crazy versus sane. This is about stupid Rethuglican power plays, and it is probably about racism too. But don't let any of that fool you, or distract you. Don't let the crazies get to you. We must stay focused. We must get UHC and a strong public option done in this country. History and future generations of Americans will judge us by it."
Read more at http://www.apaforprogress.org/hong-kong-healthcare-reform-not-socialist
South Korean model: bad news. It involves redistribution (subsidies) and rationing. And doctors don't make much money, leading to declining interest in that career path.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.sacbee.com/2014/01/14/6072075/obama-to-congress-were-not-waiting.html
By favoring breadth over depth, its system ensures that nobody is left behind. Importantly, low-income families benefit the most from the low costs of basic and emergency healthcare. This is because without subsidies, low-income individuals are equally likely to fall sick as high-income individuals, but end up spending a larger portion of income on healthcare. As a result, the redistributive effect of healthcare in South Korea is therefore very high, and helps close the widening income gap.
However, no system is without its drawbacks. To begin with, the low price of healthcare in South Korea has caused Korean doctors to earn a fraction of what their counterparts in the US and Europe do. This has led to a decline in the interest in the medical profession. This phenomenon can pose several long-term problems. In fact, one emerging problem I read about was the problem of doctors carrying out extremely quick consultations in the hope of covering more patients. This is because with the shortage of medical graduates, doctors are paid based on the number of patients they see. The lack of sufficient attention as such invariably increases the propensity for error, thereby putting patients at risk. (Still, one may argue that quick and cheap consultations are better than no consultations at all)
Next, the medical coverage is strong, but limited. While South Koreans pay very little for standardized treatment, they face serious financial difficulties when dealing with advanced diseases like cancer. This is because a lot of the treatments required are considered ‘electives’ and therefore not covered under the state’s medical insurance scheme. Without Singapore’s method of mandatory savings, South Koreans without private insurance are in an extremely vulnerable position.
Hong Kong? Looks like that's a case of people paying good old cash for most of their health care, which is what us pro-freedom folks here in America advocate: "Hong Kong has (a) one of the smallest public sectors (government spends only 55% of the total), (b) very little health insurance (only 12% of spending) and (c) the highest amount of out-of-pocket spending among developed countries (one out of every three dollars)."
- See more at: http://healthblog.ncpa.org/hong-kong-health-care-system-is-number-one/#sthash.aboggcu7.dpuf
It is immoral for government to forcibly seize money from Citizen A to address the particular needs of Citizen B.
ReplyDeleteTell that to these 12 countries that supposedly exceed us in economic freedom, there's not a one of them that does not offer universal health coverage to their citizens. It is social insurance. That's all.
ReplyDelete