Would that be the report the Commonwealth Fund posted here, Jay?

Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries. … Compared with five other nations — Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom — the U.S. health care system ranks last or next-to-last on five dimensions of a high performance health system: quality, access, efficiency, equity, and healthy lives. The U.S. is the only country in the study without universal health insurance coverage, partly accounting for its poor performance on access, equity, and health outcomes. The inclusion of physician survey data also shows the U.S. lagging in adoption of information technology and use of nurses to improve care coordination for the chronically ill.
…
Among the six nations studied—Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States—the U.S. ranks last, as it did in the 2006 and 2004 editions of Mirror, Mirror. Most troubling, the U.S. fails to achieve better health outcomes than the other countries, and as shown in the earlier editions, the U.S. is last on dimensions of access, patient safety, efficiency, and equity.

Congratulations. Had you actually provided a link you’d be at SaveFarris level for providing disproof of what you claim.

http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/rates39.html

Obviously, this isn’t perfect either, as cancer rates vary by country due to genetic, dietary, and other factors, but it’s pretty clear that all our trillions spent aren’t resulting in a low cancer mortality rate.

Prostate cancer is a perfect example of the flaws of the US health care system – we treat the HELL out of it. Lots of PSA screens, lots of surgical/radiation treatments (with a ton of horrible side effects, ranging from incontinence to ED), billions spent every year. Does screening result in more cases being identified? Yes. Does it result in more money being spent? Yes. Does it lower death rates? No:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/142879.php

So Jay has inadvertently given us the ultimate case study in how NOT to run a health care system while producing bogus metrics that scream SUCCESS!! (in this case, look at the great 5-year survival rates!!). This is not a surprise.

But, re: the “tea party” thing? The current movement is nothing like what was done in Boston all those years ago. The people of Boston were protesting against a tax that they had no say in, and gained no benefit from, while at the same time was ruining the local markets. The British government reacted by closing the harbor and demanding repayment.

These people are protesting against a raise in the marginal rate which few of them would even notice, made by their local representatives who were properly voted in, which would have been spent on infrastructure that they use and profit from. The American government reacted by… letting them complain on TV and radio. Upon which all these fine folk ran home on April 15th and paid their taxes.

It’s sort of a stark comparison, if you ask me.

Whites and blacks in the USA saw differences in cancer survival between 7 and 14% – favoring whites. Specifically, white women had a 14% higher survival for breast cancer than black women, and white men had a 7% higher survival for prostate cancer than black men. What are the reasons for these racial disparities? The researchers suggest that white and black people receive diagnoses in different stages of the disease, have unequal access to health care, and are different in complying with treatment.

In the international comparison, the researchers saw the highest survival rates for breast and prostate cancer in the USA. They also noted Japan as having the highest survival for colon and rectal cancers in men and France as having the highest survival for colon and rectal cancers in women. Canada and Australia also ranked relatively high for most cancers,

The health care system in all of those other countries is far less expensive than ours. How is it they can get results as good or better than the U.S. some of the time?

I hope he keeps it real. It’s kind of jarring to see a senator of either party that doesn’t speak in cliches. They’re typically as interesting an interview as the average football coach.

Fixed that for you!

Seven. That first year didn’t go so well.

accused our government of being complicit in the murder of over 3,000 Americans and that it was done in order so that Bush and others in the CIA could profit from the aftermath

and in another you accuse Mr. Clinton of this:
military operations were limited to air raids that were used to steer attention away from his domestic troubles and his impeachment.

Good thing you’re not a Presidential advisor, Jay. You’d have to rant against yourself.

clean up the mess left by the administration that preceded him
True, Bush did end our long nightmare of peace and prosperity.

I defend a President who actually went out and killed terrorists
Well, except for the one who killed Americans on 9/11.

He took out a man that killed more than 300,000 people and who used his money to help finance terrorism and has brought about stability in the Middle East that we haven’t seen in a long time.
And in the process let thousands of Americans and Iraq die for no reason for no threat for weapons that did not exist. Heck of a guy.

That’s what I defend.
You defend the worst president in history. You defend a legacy of lies. You defend death for no reason.

Say, you got a twin brother? There was a guy here earlier who was all upset about naughty language. Looked just like you.

Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries.

found that the U.S. was #1 in preventive care
… for the people that can get it. Which you guys refuse to understand because you’re so busy talking about death panels and how much you hate medicare.

No. You know what I defend Quaker? I defend a President who didn’t dither for 8 years fighting terrorism and had to clean up the mess left by the administration that preceded him that did nothing but talk about “bringing people to justice” and handing out jail sentences while military operations were limited to air raids that were used to steer attention away from his domestic troubles and his impeachment. I defend a President who actually went out and killed terrorists, squeezed their money supplies and took out terrorist leaders and camps and kept this country safe for 8 years. He took out a man that killed more than 300,000 people and who used his money to help finance terrorism and has brought about stability in the Middle East that we haven’t seen in a long time. That’s what I defend.

9/11 Truthers didn’t want Congress to “ask more questions” you blithering idiot. These were people who accused our government of being complicit in the murder of over 3,000 Americans and that it was done in order so that Bush and others in the CIA could profit from the aftermath.

“Ask more questions.” Kindly stuff it.