# Government Healthcare Disaster in UK



## Nonelitist (Feb 24, 2010)

*"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*


Stafford Hospital caused &lsquo;unimaginable suffering&rsquo; - Times Online



Woooohoooo... we want govt healthcare too!!!!!

Idiot liberals.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2010)

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems

UK  ranked 18

US ranked 37


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 24, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> 
> 
> Stafford Hospital caused &lsquo;unimaginable suffering&rsquo; - Times Online
> ...



every health care system on the planet has its problems.....its funny how the pro-UHC people,mostly only post the good shit from around the world,not mentioning the negative.....and the anti-UHC people usually only post the negative,ignoring the positive shit.....i guess i dont have to ask why this is......do i?....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



RW........Oman is no 8 on that list.....would you go there for really delicate open heart surgery?....just wonderin....


----------



## Nonelitist (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



"The statistics used in WHO reports are also useless because there is no standardization of the data collection. For example, the US has a dismal infant mortality rate compared to European countries. However, *in our country every baby that has a heartbeat is considered a living thing and is counted in the statistics. In Europe, however, it is not considered a live birth unless the infant is a certain size*."

"The WHO is a supporter of socialized healthcare, so their reports and their findings, not surprisingly, tend to favor socialized healthcare. The rankings are based on &#8220;developed&#8221; data and other subjective techniques. For example, one category in which the US does poorly (54th place) is &#8220;fairness.&#8221; Well, sure, that&#8217;s highly subjective, but who doesn&#8217;t want healthcare to be fair?"

"Look at it this way. A healthcare system that allows some people to receive expensive and experimental treatment would not score as well in that category as a system that does not allow anyone to receive that treatment. According to the WHO, it is more fair for no one to receive experimental treatment than for it to be given to some people who are willing to pay for it."

"Not only that, but when compiling numbers for the rankings, the WHO placed *65% of the weight of their study on equality*. Remember that &#8220;equality&#8221; is a buzz word often used in place of socialism. In other words, the WHO does not consider a healthcare system to be legitimate and fair if it is not a socialized healthcare system, and people actually look at the WHO report as if it is an unbiased critique of global healthcare systems."

Myth: The Brits have it figured out. We should follow the UK healthcare model.

"Emergency rooms have gotten so backed up with patients that the government had to mandate that the hospitals see patients admitted to the ER within four hours. In order to meet this requirement, it has become common practice for ambulances to wait outside the hospital for hours before letting the patient into the emergency room, since that four-hour time limit doesn&#8217;t start until they walk through the hospital doors"

"We&#8217;ve all heard the horror stories about people in the UK being on the waiting list for a medical procedure for a few years. Luckily, the government knew they had to do something about it and set a mandate that people *who need surgery would be operated on within 6 short months*. Oh, is that all? That&#8217;s not so long. Not surprisingly, shortening the wait time for some led to a longer wait time for others. *Once the government mandate was passed, wait times in general increased by 20%. Some types of surgery got a lot worse, like orthopedic surgery, which increased by 143%*. "

"Unfortunately, this method of ranking healthcare is no more accurate than the WHO report. Not everyone who dies does so as the result of a disease, and many of those who do die from a disease that could not have been cured with preventive care. One reason for our low life expectancy is our country&#8217;s extremely high homicide rate. We also have *3 times as many people die, per capita,* in car wrecks as in the Netherlands, for example. These are deaths that have nothing to do with a person&#8217;s physical health.

As for the infant mortality rate, there are two things that severely skew those numbers. One thing is that, regardless of socioeconomic status, black people have much higher infant mortality rates than whites and Hispanics. No one knows why this is, but it&#8217;s safe to say that the fact is a contributing factor to our mortality rate being higher than, say, Sweden. The other thing skewing the numbers is how the numbers are tabulated. In the United States, a baby is considered alive if it has a heartbeat. That seems like a pretty good measure of life to me, but other countries have different standards for whether or not a baby is alive. *Austria and Germany only count a baby as being alive if it&#8217;s at least 1 pound, and in much of Europe it has to be at least 12 inches long to be a live birth. In France, it&#8217;s not a live birth if the baby was in gestation for fewer than 26 weeks*. 

So it seems that the infant mortality rate in European countries is lower than here because in Europe there are a whole lot of dead babies that were never counted as being alive. If those European countries counted their live births the same was as us and had the same cultural diversity, I think you&#8217;d find the numbers are drastically different."


Myths of universal healthcare explained: part two


WHO?  haha.. .. only you good little socialists take what they say as meaning anything.


----------



## xsited1 (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



You're using WHO rankings which are biased towards socialist countries?


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2010)

xsited1 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...



Yea.....With a little work the US can beat out Costa Rica


----------



## Nonelitist (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




US has much better healthcare than Costa Rica and you know it.


----------



## driveby (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



How about you go to Singapore ( #6 ) the next time you need major surgery ? 

Hell spray graffiti on a few walls while you're there, fuckin dope ........


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2010)

U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief

In 2007, U.S. health care spending was about $7,421 per resident and accounted for 16.2% of the nation&#8217;s Gross Domestic Product (GDP); this is among the highest of all industrialized countries.

All to provide a healthcare system ranked 37 in the world


----------



## driveby (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief



So government is going to step in and reduce costs........


----------



## Dr Grump (Feb 24, 2010)

driveby said:


> How about you go to Singapore ( #6 ) the next time you need major surgery ?
> 
> Hell spray graffiti on a few walls while you're there, fuckin dope ........



Do you know anything about the Singapore health care system?


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 24, 2010)

driveby said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...



Many Americans already do to obtain affordable healthcare

Medical Tourism Singapore - Discover Medical Tourism


Since Singapore&#8217;s prices are still around half of what US clinics charge for the same procedures, it&#8217;s understandable that some 200,000 visitors flock here every year in search of medical, cosmetic and dental treatment. A reputation for state-of-the-art equipment and the finest surgeons, many of which are trained in the US, is also a major draw card for many would-be patients.


----------



## driveby (Feb 24, 2010)

Dr Grump said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > How about you go to Singapore ( #6 ) the next time you need major surgery ?
> ...



I know comparing theirs to ours is like comparing a lemonade stand to Coca Cola Inc. Now, are you going to Singapore the next time you need major surgery also ?


----------



## jillian (Feb 24, 2010)

driveby said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > driveby said:
> ...



the only people who would come here for surgery are people with enough money to pay for it.

people who have no money and no insurance are NOT well treated by our system.

And you might want to look at the post above yours vis a vis Singapore.


----------



## driveby (Feb 24, 2010)

jillian said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Grump said:
> ...



I actually like their healthcare system and how they handle vandals, how about we adopt both methods in this country ? .........


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief
> 
> In 2007, U.S. health care spending was about $7,421 per resident and accounted for 16.2% of the nations Gross Domestic Product (GDP); this is among the highest of all industrialized countries.
> 
> All to provide a healthcare system ranked 37 in the world



you still havent answered my question RW.....would you have open heart surgery in No 8 OMAN?.......and lets not forget there is a difference between a health care SYSTEM....and the  the health care itself.....and i would be willing to bet Oman is not in the top 10 on the quality issue....Singapore has a good level of a living standard so i would not be surprised if they are up there...........but Oman?.....


----------



## uscitizen (Feb 24, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> 
> 
> Stafford Hospital caused &lsquo;unimaginable suffering&rsquo; - Times Online
> ...



Hmm this is a trait that would most often be found in for profit health care systems.

Jolly old England will just have to settle for less just like we will.


----------



## Meister (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief
> 
> In 2007, U.S. health care spending was about $7,421 per resident and accounted for 16.2% of the nations Gross Domestic Product (GDP); this is among the highest of all industrialized countries.
> 
> All to provide a healthcare system ranked 37 in the world



With all the facts presented to you about WHO, you still insist on using it? 
Sounds like you and the truth will never cross paths, leftwinger.


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 24, 2010)

xsited1 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...



1         France
*2         Italy*
3         San Marino
4         Andorra
5         Malta
6         Singapore
*7         Spain*
8         Oman
9         Austria
10        Japan
11        Norway
*12        Portugal*
13        Monaco
*14        Greece*
15        Iceland
16        Luxembourg
17        Netherlands
18        United  Kingdom
*19        Ireland*

* bold - at the edge of financial collapse


----------



## Baruch Menachem (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



Someone fisked the heck out of this a while ago.  The numbers just don't jibe with reality.  

Actual quality of care was only one of the measures.  That is, you go in, see a doctor who fixes your problem, and go home.  And it was weighted very low.

equality of care for all persons, even if the quality itself was pathetic, as is the case in Cuba, was valued higher.    So if your health care system didn't do squat for anyone, but everyone suffered pretty much the same way, it gave you a higher ranking than if some folks got very well, some folks did pretty good, some folks did alright, and a small minority got the crumbs off the table, even if the ones who got the crumbs off the table got better care than anybody in the more equal society.

As the saying goes, figures don't like, but liars figure.


----------



## California Girl (Feb 24, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



  Are you seriously using stats supplied by the countries themselves - with no independent review - to back up your stance. Oh well, desperate times call for desperate measures. Carry on. 

Oh, and..... according to the UK Government itself, their NHS (National Health Service) is the 4th largest employer ON THE PLANET. Little tiny country - fucking BIG health service. Imagine that in the US.


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 24, 2010)

Baruch Menachem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...



18 UK
30 Canada

Does anyone believe they have better health care then we do? Then, how US ends up that low?

In UK average waiting time to get MRI and CT scan is 7 weeks - LINK, and in Canada waiting time is 13 weeks (MRI) and 6 weeks (CT) - LINK.

Average waiting time actually dropped for whole three weeks in past two years, and those countries rating improved as well, since people are happier for shorter waiting time. 

And those angry and spoiled Americans are not happy if they have to wait more than a week, and they bitch around how their healthcare system sucks.


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 24, 2010)

driveby said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...



Damn, Driveby, do you research before you post nonsense?

Asia's Medical Tourism Destination #1: Singapore

Asia's Medical Tourism Destination #1: SingaporeBy:Nancy Wee

Singapore is a major medical tourism destination and one of the five hottest spots for medical treatments in Asia. 

Visitors can select from a wide range of services to enhance their health and well being. These include health screening, medical wellness, aesthetic and anti-ageing programmes. 

This island city boast a growing list of number 1 spots under its belt. No. 1 port, airport, mathematical geniuses... and the list goes on. Medical treatments' standard is top notch, and service is uniformly excellent. 

It is therefore no surprise that Singapore is a popular destination for medical tourism as well as medical evacuations in the region. Prices are also generally lower than the West, although may be more expensive compared to its neighbors in the region. Three key agencies, the Economic Development Board, the Singapore Tourism Board and the International Enterprise Singapore have come together under the Singapore Medicine Banner to develop the Republic in one of Asia&#8217;s leading health care destinations. 

Statistics in 2003 showed that 230,000 foreigners sought medical treatments here. Singapore Medicine is aiming to serve one million foreign patients a year by 2012 and generate $3 billion in revenues and create at least 13,000 jobs in the medical tourism industry. 

Singapore provides the complete spectrum of healthcare services from primary care such as health screening, to quaternary care services such as organ transplants. Tourists coming for medical treatments also come to Singapore for a broad range of specialist care including Cardiology, Gynaecology, Orthopaedic Surgery, Oncology, Otorhinolaryngology, Urology, Neurosurgery and Opthalmology, besides General Surgery and General Medicine. 

The country specializes in services for cardiology, ophthalmology, and oncology. Singapore is also a thriving dental hub.


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 25, 2010)

California Girl said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...



*Hmmm............*


https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
Infant mortality rate:    
total: 6.22 deaths/1,000 live births
country comparison to the world: 180 
male: 6.9 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.51 deaths/1,000 live births (2009 est.) 

Life expectancy at birth:    
total population: 78.11 years
country comparison to the world: 49 
male: 75.65 years
female: 80.69 years (2009 est.)


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 25, 2010)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVgOl3cETb4]YouTube - "We're Number 37" - Paul Hipp[/ame]


----------



## California Girl (Feb 25, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




I'm aware of this. We have the same shit put forward from both sides every time the debate comes up. 

Do the CIA undertake their own independent research? I don't think they do. I think they use stats provided..... from the WHO.


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 25, 2010)

California Girl said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > California Girl said:
> ...



And I think you neo-cons use stuff pulled out of your ass.


----------



## driveby (Feb 25, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



How many AMERICANS went there for medical treatment again ? 

How many foreigners come here for medical treatment ?

Exactly, stick to your area of expertise, fake climate science .......


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 25, 2010)

driveby said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > driveby said:
> ...



How many Singaporeans are bankrupted by medical costs?


----------



## driveby (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Americans don't go to Singapore for medical treatment, thanks..........


----------



## California Girl (Feb 25, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



So, your response actually is that you don't know either. Fair enough.


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 25, 2010)

One of the problems the UK NHS faces is chronic under-funding.  Perhaps they've forgotten that it has to be paid for and that could be why there are problems.  Political spin isn't currency.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 25, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> Damn, Driveby, do you research before you post nonsense?
> 
> Asia's Medical Tourism Destination #1: Singapore
> 
> ...



good or bad Rocks....their system sounds like a money making industry.....now whose system does that remind you of?.....


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37



WHO rankings with a bias geared toward socialized medicine debunked many times already...

In terms of advancements, amount of care, quality of care... we have the best health system money can buy... and yes YOUR money for YOUR care


----------



## Meister (Feb 25, 2010)

Diuretic said:


> One of the problems the UK NHS faces is chronic under-funding.  Perhaps they've forgotten that it has to be paid for and that could be why there are problems.  Political spin isn't currency.



Have you looked at our books with SS, Medicare, and Medicaid? Look at our Amtrak while your at it.  Our government fails when it comes to running a business.  Do you think we would do better with obamacare?


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 25, 2010)

Yeah... and 39% of GDP is not NEARLY enough to run a government on  might as well raise it more


----------



## Gadawg73 (Feb 25, 2010)

Take a good look Americans and use your friggin brains.
How many obese and unhealthy Americans are therecompared to Britan and Canada?
We have the best disease care here in America. That is what our system is set up to do.
4% of Americans use 54% of the health care resource dollars here. They are the chronically diseased. 1 or more conditions. Fat lazy unhealthy retirees that do nothing to help themselves makes up almost 90% of that disease care $.
Concerning health care we probably rank about 60th worldwide.
Look around. Who here with a straight face can tell the lie that we are a healthy nation?
We are abunch of pill popping dope heads. They run ads all the time ON FRIGGIN TV. "Can't sleep. Eat some new and improved dope" "Having trouble getting your Johnson hard. eat a pill".
Most Americans are complete fools. America the best health carein the world. That is the funniest whopper I have ever heard.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2010)

Meister said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief
> ...



Show me a valid ranking from someone else. As usual, conservatives discard any study that doesn't match their agenda...

Smoking and cancer?    Left wing nonsense
Global warming?  Silly nonsense
US doesn't have a good healthcare system?   Liberal ramblings


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



hell i cant get you to answer the question i asked in the beginning of this thread Rw....if you had to have delicate surgery on your heart.....would you go to no 8 Oman to have it done cheaper or here in the US?.....


----------



## Dr Grump (Feb 25, 2010)

driveby said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > driveby said:
> ...



No, but if I was in Singapore and needed surgery I wouldn't worry about it..


----------



## driveby (Feb 25, 2010)

Dr Grump said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Grump said:
> ...



fair point .......


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



The reason US healthcare is rated so poorly is not the quality but the availability. Its great healthcare if you can afford it. If not ...you pay the consequences.

We are the only industrialized nation where people go bankrupt because they got sick or injured


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



It's NOT the availability... but because the WHO and the ones like you think it is not just to be available but owed to you at the expense of someone else.. instead of being your personal responsibility for your own personal well being (or the payment of it)


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



Ever been really sick?
Ever been in intense pain?
Ever had to choose between your medications or your mortgage?
Ever had to take a job for the sole reason that it provides healthcare?

Millions of Americans do


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Nope, as I paid for my medical coverage
4) Nope but actually would if I had to rather than thinking my personal responsibilities and the payment of them was owed by someone else

Does not take away from the fact that the WHO rankings, and your assertion, try and shine a negative light on the most advanced and available health care in the world... nor from the fact that you and ONLY YOU are responsible for your personal responsibilities, your personal well being, and the payment of your personal wants and needs... nor does it take away from the fact that he concept of freedom comes with both positives AND negatives inherent to that freedom


----------



## Gadawg73 (Feb 25, 2010)

For dumbass Americans:If you work as a teacher or some other government entity and they pay your benefits you have:
GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE
Ask them if they like it or not.
DUH.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



The consequences of not being able to afford health coverage is pain, suffering and death.

A simple stay in the hospital runs over $100,000, it is not a case of merely personal responsibility.  More and more companies are dropping health coverage...they can't afford to be the provider. 

The US is the wealthiest country on earth...there is no reason we can't take care of our people


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Consequences of your own stupidity and choices can also lead to death.. government does not exist to make up for such things either... 

There is no reason people cannot VOLUNTARILY give of themselves to help those less fortunate... hence CHARITY... but nobody who is free to provide for themselves is obligated to have the expenses for taking care of themselves paid for by someone else by force of the government


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 25, 2010)

Working Americans are not looking for charity. They are looking for affordable healthcare. If you are self employed, if you work for a small business, if you or a family member has a pre-existing condition you are forced to choose between your financial well being or your health. Pay the light bill or pay the pharmacist. Pay the mortgage or pay the emergency room

Americans pay more of their income for healthcare than any other country...and we have less to show for it


----------



## rdean (Feb 25, 2010)

You could always point to a "case" or "cases".  How about the heath care official who flips bird at mother of dying 17 year old girl whose insurance was cut.  Hint - it was in this country.

Flipped the Bird: You Can Sue; Health Insurer Kills a Loved One: You're Out of Luck -- Consumer Watchdog Calls On Congress To Close Loophole With "Nataline's Law"

Flipped the Bird: You Can Sue; Health Insurer Kills a Loved One: You're Out of Luck -- Consumer Watchdog Calls On Congress To Close Loophole With "Nataline's Law" - Consumer Watchdog

Most Republicans love this stuff.  They just love it.  Insurance companies have to make a big profit.  The bigger it is, they happier they are.


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 25, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Working Americans are not looking for charity. They are looking for affordable healthcare. If you are self employed, if you work for a small business, if you or a family member has a pre-existing condition you are forced to choose between your financial well being or your health. Pay the light bill or pay the pharmacist. Pay the mortgage or pay the emergency room
> 
> Americans pay more of their income for healthcare than any other country...and we have less to show for it



Affordable heathcare provided for or subsidized by the taxation from others... BIG difference from 'affordable healthcare'

And what makes things affordable or drop in price?? I'll give you a hint, it is not governmental control or being provided by the government

As for less to show for it?? Hardly... we pay more for the most advanced and best available care in the entire world... but nice try at your myth making once again

Not to say that there are not things to be improved in terms of competition, tort reform, etc.... but the answer is government control or subsidization 

And again, with your continual use of 'pay the mortgage or pay the hospital bill'... both are your PERSONAL responsibility, not the responsibility of someone else as forced by the government


----------



## beowolfe (Feb 25, 2010)

Meister said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief
> ...



Facts?  I take it that you didn't read the information that he supplied.  It's a opinion piece with links that lead to information that either doesn't back up his conclusions or his conclusions represent such an ignorance of how the insurance works.  For instance, he states that 'many' of the uninsured are 18 to 34 who are healthy enough to choose to take the risk of not having insurance.  *THAT* is one of the *HUGE* problems with our system.  The ponzi scheme that is healthcare insurance *REQUIRES* a large number of people who ARE healthy and in all likelihood will NOT need a doctor or a hospital.  That's the only way it can work!!  Who do you think pays for all of the sick people?  No one person's premiums will pay the actual costs of their healthcare!!


----------



## beowolfe (Feb 25, 2010)

But I have a question to GOP supporters.  Why do you expect, with only 41% of the senate, to be able to force your POV?  There are parts of the healtcare bill that I don't like.  But I see the cliff at the end of the healthcare road we're currently on is heading; and I'm all for an alternate route.  Even one where I'm not 100% sure where it's going to lead.


----------



## beowolfe (Feb 25, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...



"All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated...As therefore the bell that rings to a sermon, calls not upon the preacher only, but upon the congregation to come: so this bell calls us all: but how much more me, who am brought so near the door by this sickness....No man is an island, entire of itself...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."


----------



## Maple (Feb 25, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> 
> 
> Stafford Hospital caused &lsquo;unimaginable suffering&rsquo; - Times Online
> ...



What everyone forgets is Canada has a population of 30 million, we have a population of 300 million, it does not work well up there, I can guarantee you it won't work well down here. Less is easier to manage and they can't manage their system well, you can only imagine what would happen here with a similar system. Disaster from the get-go.


----------



## Meister (Feb 25, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> But I have a question to GOP supporters.  Why do you expect, with only 41% of the senate, to be able to force your POV?  There are parts of the healtcare bill that I don't like.  But I see the cliff at the end of the healthcare road we're currently on is heading; and I'm all for an alternate route.  Even one where I'm not 100% sure where it's going to lead.



I'm not a GOP supporter, but one just needs to looks at any poll about the subject as they choose.  On just needs to look at the early elections, Americans have spoken.  This isn't the bill that the dems should hang their hat on.....even if it is just a foot in the door.  The cost only goes up from there, and the people know it.


----------



## B L Zeebub (Feb 25, 2010)

When I travel to the US, my travel insurance is double that of anywhere in the world. I also have the right to free medical care in any other E.U. member nation.


----------



## beowolfe (Feb 25, 2010)

Gadawg73 said:


> For dumbass Americans:If you work as a teacher or some other government entity and they pay your benefits you have:
> GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE
> Ask them if they like it or not.
> DUH.



Can you imagine the rate cut if there were only four insurance pools in the country?


----------



## beowolfe (Feb 25, 2010)

B L Zeebub said:


> When I travel to the US, my travel insurance is double that of anywhere in the world. I also have the right to free medical care in any other E.U. member nation.



I think we Americans are just at a stage where enough of us see healthcare not completely as just another commodity, but as a necessary service sort of like police and fire services; something that everyone should have access to and as something that should be provided for communally.  We still have enough who look still look at is as simply another commodity to make for spirited discussions and politics.


----------



## beowolfe (Feb 26, 2010)

Meister said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > But I have a question to GOP supporters.  Why do you expect, with only 41% of the senate, to be able to force your POV?  There are parts of the healtcare bill that I don't like.  But I see the cliff at the end of the healthcare road we're currently on is heading; and I'm all for an alternate route.  Even one where I'm not 100% sure where it's going to lead.
> ...



Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't think this bill is great, but when I think about the entire process, from beginning to end (even before there was a a bill) it just seems to me that the GOP was willing to do anything to not get a bill.  That's what I meant be seemingly expecting that have 41% control entitled them to having it their way.


----------



## B L Zeebub (Feb 26, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> B L Zeebub said:
> 
> 
> > When I travel to the US, my travel insurance is double that of anywhere in the world. I also have the right to free medical care in any other E.U. member nation.
> ...


I think you are probably right, social care is very expensive, non of my family has begrudged our tax burden, I was in the 40% bracket.

My mother is 94 yrs old in march thanks to the NHS, her state pension is about £180 per wk (she never worked) my dead fathers private pension takes it up to £400 a week, his investments do not provide much interest at present.

She gets all sorts of free grants, her house has had free wall and loft insulation, draught exclusion and security locks, she also gets a one off payment of £400 each year in Dec(non means tested) to help with heating.

The NHS is not perfect but it is a damn sight better than 20yrs ago. I have no complaints.


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 26, 2010)

B L Zeebub said:


> When I travel to the US, my travel insurance is double that of anywhere in the world. I also have the right to free medical care in any other E.U. member nation.



Same for Australia BL - you're covered here, we're covered there.


----------



## DiamondDave (Feb 26, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> DiamondDave said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




And that quote does not change the fact that your personal housing, your personal well being, and providing for your person needs is nobody's responsibility but your own

idiot


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 26, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



i wasnt asking to see you dance Rw.....Oman is #8....would you go there to have heart surgery?.....the WHO is saying their medical system must be a hell of a lot better than the US....so i take it you would rather go there and have it done then here....because its cheaper there.....


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 26, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> 
> UK  ranked 18
> 
> US ranked 37




The News story just proves what everyone knows- that the UN stats are crap



World Health Organization ranking biased, not reliable 

WHO&#8217;s FoolingWho? TheWorld Health Organization&#8217;s Problematic Ranking of Health Care Systems 


With the UN system, both countries equal, the one with socialized medicine would still get a higher score (no wonder the left loves to use these bogus numbers)

Isn't Cuba higher in those numbers? Did you know numbers are self reported

Explain how we are to trust self-reported numbers from Cuba? 
I seem to remember the USSR reporting to the UN everything was great in their country as well

Funny how that works




Of course, facts don't matter with the MSM and the left; truth is their worst enemy


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 26, 2010)

Gadawg73 said:


> For dumbass Americans:If you work as a teacher or some other government entity and they pay your benefits you have:
> GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE
> Ask them if they like it or not.
> DUH.



i work for the government and i have Blue Shield......it aint nothing like the Govt shit i have been hearing about......i also know a machinest who does not work for the govt. who has Blue Shield.....very comparable to mine.....Blue Shield is not Govt. run or owned.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 26, 2010)

rdean said:


> Most Republicans love this stuff.  They just love it.  Insurance companies have to make a big profit.  The bigger it is, they happier they are.



Rdean....look down between your legs.....see that appendage there?....its called a Dick....if you look closely at it....you will see your face on it....


----------



## namvet (Feb 26, 2010)

Woman gives birth on pavement 'after being refused ambulance' (UK)

A young mother gave birth on a pavement outside a hospital after she was told to make her own way there.
Mother-of-three Carmen Blake called her midwife to ask for an ambulance when she went into labour unexpectedly with her fourth child.
But the 27-year-old claims she was refused an ambulance and told to walk the 100m from her house in Leicester to the city's nearby Royal Infirmary.
Woman gives birth on pavement 'after being refused ambulance' | Mail Online

from the OP post:


> Staff shortages at Stafford Hospital meant that patients went unwashed for weeks, were left without food or drink and were even unable to get to the lavatory. Some lay in soiled sheets that relatives had to take home to wash, others developed infections or had falls, occasionally fatal. Many staff did their best but the attitude of some nurses left a lot to be desired.



that's a concentration camp


----------



## Chris (Feb 26, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> 
> 
> Stafford Hospital caused &lsquo;unimaginable suffering&rsquo; - Times Online
> ...



Actually, you are the idiot.

Britain has socialized medicine which doesn't work very well.

National health insurance is not socialized medicine because the doctors and the hospitals are still privately owned, and national health insurance works better than our system.

That is why every other industrialized nation in the world has it, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare.


----------



## driveby (Feb 26, 2010)

Chris said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> ...



polly wanna cracker ? .....


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 26, 2010)

> National health insurance is not socialized medicine because the doctors and the hospitals are still privately owned, and national health insurance works better than our system.
> 
> That is why every other industrialized nation in the world has it, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare



Which is why the Republicans should be outraged. Why do we pay so fucking much for healthcare and receive such bad results?


----------



## Meister (Feb 26, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> > National health insurance is not socialized medicine because the doctors and the hospitals are still privately owned, and national health insurance works better than our system.
> >
> > That is why every other industrialized nation in the world has it, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare
> 
> ...



We have without a doubt the best healthcare in the world, leftwinger.  What the hell are you talking about? 

If you want to complain that it's not UHS, and not all have insurance, that would be one thing, but to say we have bad results?


----------



## Meister (Feb 26, 2010)

Chris said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> ...



Quit your whining and buy your own damn insurance, ya parasite!


----------



## Misty (Feb 26, 2010)

Diuretic said:


> One of the problems the UK NHS faces is chronic under-funding.  Perhaps they've forgotten that it has to be paid for and that could be why there are problems.  Political spin isn't currency.



Medicaid and medicare are under funded in the US also.


----------



## Misty (Feb 26, 2010)

Those who support the public option should say it straight out 

you want other people to pay for your insurance.


----------



## Misty (Feb 26, 2010)

jillian said:


> the only people who would come here for surgery are people with enough money to pay for it.
> 
> people who have no money and no insurance are NOT well treated by our system.
> 
> And you might want to look at the post above yours vis a vis Singapore.



so because I have enough money to pay for my own insurance, I have to pay for everyone else's too?


----------



## Some Guy (Feb 26, 2010)

Misty said:


> Those who support the public option should say it straight out
> 
> you want other people to pay for your insurance.


Exactly.  I simply cannot wrap my head around the arguments of the left wingers in this thread.  Their argument boils down to "i shouldn't be responsible for paying for my health care."  It's mind boggling to me.

The "choose between paying for your mortgage and paying for health care" is just stupid.  Is it fair that some people get sick and some don't?  Absolutely not.  Is life fair at all?  Nope, not one bit.  The argument that because something happens to me means you should be forced to help me fix it is just simply *un*fair. 

Even dumber is the idea that government can administer health insurance cheaper than insurance companies do now.  Look at Medicare for your closest example of government run health insurance.  If Medicare was a business that had to make a profit or even broke even to stay alive, meaning it actually had to be an efficient operation, it would've been gone a long while ago.  Besides, having the government or insurance companies control who pay for health insurance does absolutely nothing to target the costs is requires for doctors to provide health care.  The ONLY way you'll cut health care costs or prices (which often get confused) is by cutting the overhead that doctors have in order to provide their service.


----------



## Baruch Menachem (Feb 26, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



It is the business of the opposition to oppose.  This is not news.   Read Federalist #10.    This is what Madison, who wrote the draft of the constitution, was aiming for.

What we have is a set of corrupt and incoherent bills that are little more than logrolling at the citizens expense.   There is nothing good for healthcare in any of them.  No benefits accrue until 2018 at the earliest.  Expenses start immediately.


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 26, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > beowolfe said:
> ...



I agree, GOP will do anything not to pass THIS bill. Can we blame them for it if you said yourself that bill is not great. However, Liberals had 60 needed votes to pass that bill as is, and they haven't. Why not? Maybe because they don't agree in between themselves that bill is that good. And if true, why to blame GOP for not passing it, especially when GOP votes were irrelevant.


----------



## Nonelitist (Feb 26, 2010)

Gadawg73 said:


> For dumbass Americans:If you work as a teacher or some other government entity and they pay your benefits you have:
> GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE
> Ask them if they like it or not.
> DUH.



Let me tell you a story about a Teachers insurance.  

My wife is a teacher.  I got laid off last February from my job that provided insurance for myself and my son.  Why didn't I have insurance through my wife at her job?  Cause it would have cost me $600 (US) per month.  

So, when I got laid off, I had to pay that... every month.  This was without me having a job and having an added expense of $600 per month.  Did it suck?  You betcha!!!   Did I whine and expect somenoe else to pay for it?  Absolutely not.  I paid it by cutting back on other stuff... mainly pleasures.  

You liberals are nothing but parasites... well ... actually you are a few other things like Socialists, Anti-American and just pretty darn angry people.  And you can't see that America is turning against you in large numbers because they are tired of hearing your whining and dishonesty.

Take some responsibility for yourselves. You will actually enjoy your life much more when you do things on your own and quit expecting others to do it for you or fix it for you or pay for it for you or stroke your ego for you or not offend you .. blah blah blah

My god,  you are everything I am training my child not to be.


----------



## rdean (Feb 26, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Most Republicans love this stuff.  They just love it.  Insurance companies have to make a big profit.  The bigger it is, they happier they are.
> ...



I notice you left out the rest of the quote:

You could always point to a "case" or "cases". How about the heath care official who flips bird at mother of dying 17 year old girl whose insurance was cut. Hint - it was in this country.

Health Care companies made 12 billion last year by cutting 2.7 million policies.  Now we have to pay for those people at 10 times the cost.  Why is that OK for Republicans?

Hey, if it smells like poop, feels like poop, then it's poop and that's what Republicans do to this country by working against the Americans best interests just so corporations could have "more".


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 26, 2010)

Misty said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> > One of the problems the UK NHS faces is chronic under-funding.  Perhaps they've forgotten that it has to be paid for and that could be why there are problems.  Political spin isn't currency.
> ...



A poor state of affairs all round.  Governments should be forced to properly fund such programmes.  If they're good enough to be in place then they should be funded so that they can deliver what they promise.


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 26, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> > For dumbass Americans:If you work as a teacher or some other government entity and they pay your benefits you have:
> ...



Is it a good thing that if you lose your job you lose your health insurance?  I would have thought that to have a system in place that guarantees health insurance regardless of employment conditions that it would be beneficial not just not to the individual but to the nation.


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 26, 2010)

The oft-repeated assertion that "I'm paying for someone else's health care" is fatuous.  You're not.  You're paying taxes, the same taxes that fund things such as defence.


----------



## Valerie (Feb 26, 2010)

Diuretic said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > Gadawg73 said:
> ...





Yes, why don't our political leaders go fight for THAT in their new bill, I wonder.....?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 26, 2010)

rdean said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Rdean....look down between your legs.....see that appendage there?....its called a Dick....if you look closely at it....you will see your face on it....
> ...



Rdean i just made that up as i was typing....it was not a Quote....so how could i have left out anything?.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 26, 2010)

Diuretic said:


> The oft-repeated assertion that "I'm paying for someone else's health care" is fatuous.  You're not.  You're paying taxes, the same taxes that fund things such as defence.



Di...i believe the big sticker here is .....no one wants the US Govt. sticking their nose in this.....Regulating the Ins Co's is one thing, the Govt attempting to run it is another....we have seen how they run things.....i work for one of the entities....its not run very well....wasting money is a fact of life with these guys.....and when your Spokespersons are the 2 stooges (Reid and Pelosi).....it just makes you shutter.....thats my take...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 26, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> > National health insurance is not socialized medicine because the doctors and the hospitals are still privately owned, and national health insurance works better than our system.
> >
> > That is why every other industrialized nation in the world has it, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare
> 
> ...



why the hell wont you answer my question RW?....is it too fucking tough for you or what?.....if we have such "bad results" would you go to no 8 Oman...."The Jewell Of The Desert"....for critical surgery?......or would you rather gamble and have it here?....


----------



## driveby (Feb 26, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> > National health insurance is not socialized medicine because the doctors and the hospitals are still privately owned, and national health insurance works better than our system.
> >
> > That is why every other industrialized nation in the world has it, and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare
> 
> ...




So the CEO's can have the same perks as the Pelosi's of the world ? ......


----------



## namvet (Feb 26, 2010)

YouTube - Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural rights Patriot Act - Part 3 of 3​


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Feb 26, 2010)

There is no reason to think  the USA wont  fall into the same  malaise .


----------



## rdean (Feb 26, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> > For dumbass Americans:If you work as a teacher or some other government entity and they pay your benefits you have:
> ...



And yet, there you are, *living off your wife.  And your wife's insurance.*  You are a parasite.  How does it feel bloodsucker?  Take some responsibility.  Get a job.  Don't take your wife's insurance paid for by tax payers who don't want to support a blood sucking parasite.  Don't tell us you are training your kid to be a parasite like you.  I wonder if that could be called "child abuse".  So now you're living off your wife and abusing your child.  That's just "sick".  Shame on you.


----------



## rdean (Feb 26, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...



If you go back to #68, you will see that you quoted only half of what I wrote.  You are like a pair of children's scissors, cute, colorful, not too sharp.


----------



## Conspiracist (Feb 26, 2010)

rdean said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > Gadawg73 said:
> ...



I hope that was an attempt at humor,


----------



## jeffrockit (Feb 26, 2010)

beowolfe said:


> But I have a question to GOP supporters.  Why do you expect, with only 41% of the senate, to be able to force your POV?  There are parts of the healtcare bill that I don't like.  But I see the cliff at the end of the healthcare road we're currently on is heading; and I'm all for an alternate route.  Even one where I'm not 100% sure where it's going to lead.



Don't want the GOP plan either. Most want market based solutions as the govt can't run entitlement programs efficiently. The GOP did however, have some ideas that would help with the market based solutions such as the ability to buy insurances across state lines, tort reform and etc. 
The one question that I have is that if there is so much fraud, waste and abuse in medicare and medicaid, why not address it in all of the years the Dems have been pushing HC. Why does it have to appear be one of the ways to pay for this bloated HC legislation. Why does it have to be in this bill. They could have been working on this at any time including the past year that the 2400 page bill has been concocted. Just more idiotic politics from idiotic politicians.


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 27, 2010)

Diuretic said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > Gadawg73 said:
> ...



Why should anyone be entitled for anything that someone else is paying?

What's wrong with earning it on your own?

Having system in place that guarantees heatlh insurance regardless of your employment will be beneficial only to those who aren't working and will give them another excuse not to work.


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 27, 2010)

jeffrockit said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > But I have a question to GOP supporters.  Why do you expect, with only 41% of the senate, to be able to force your POV?  There are parts of the healtcare bill that I don't like.  But I see the cliff at the end of the healthcare road we're currently on is heading; and I'm all for an alternate route.  Even one where I'm not 100% sure where it's going to lead.
> ...



Although idea of buying insurance across the state lines could bring insurance price down, it's still unconstitutional since it's interfering with states rights.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Feb 27, 2010)

jeffrockit said:


> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > But I have a question to GOP supporters.  Why do you expect, with only 41% of the senate, to be able to force your POV?  There are parts of the healtcare bill that I don't like.  But I see the cliff at the end of the healthcare road we're currently on is heading; and I'm all for an alternate route.  Even one where I'm not 100% sure where it's going to lead.
> ...


Yeah if they were going to  due it  they would be doing now.
Like a teen ager who promises to  clean their room tomorrow if you give them the car and 100 bucks tonight.


----------



## rdean (Feb 27, 2010)

Conspiracist said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Nonelitist said:
> ...



It was more like I was "mocking him".  Sometimes people need help.  We are a nation that helps each other.  Republicans seem to have forgotten that.  

More than half Americans want the public option.

More than half Americans want expanded Medicare.

Our current health care system is unsustainable.

Yet, Republicans, the obstructionist party, has managed to remove both the Public Option and Expanded Medicare.  They don't care what Americans want.

They are "conservatives".  They want things to "remain the same".  But things are falling apart.  They won't remain the same.  They need to be fixed.  

Worse, all the loons and goofballs are now in the Republicans party.  Anti eduction, anti American, anti everything.  They are just unhappy.  This is where you get this, "We need to take our country back".  Because they just want to "make things better".  The truth is, they don't know how.  I honestly believe many are hoping "Gawd" will "step in" and make things "better".

Worst of all, Republican leaders and Fox have stoked people's fear to make money or for political gain.  If you hold the tail of a rattler, don't be surprised if it turns and bites you.

Finally, Democrats have been way too slow to respond because they can't believe that anyone would be stupid enough to believe "death panels", "kill grandma" and all that other nonsense Republicans have been saying.  Unfortunately, the majority of Republicans do believe it.  Because their fear and terror helps them to believe it.  We can't underestimate the power of fear.


----------



## Conspiracist (Feb 27, 2010)

rdean said:


> Conspiracist said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Dems had a super majority in Senate and a majority in congress and Repubs put the brakes on the public option?  Geddafugoutta here!

The Dems have proved themselves impotent on this and if you cannot at least acknowledge that then you need to go back to school, (not that that would hurt any of us).

As far as republicans not believing there needs to be a change I agree with you there. There does need to be a change but my problem with the proposed change is that the same people that run an easily profitable postal system and lose our tax money EVERY SINGLE YEAR will be running our healthcare too? No fucking thank you.


----------



## Meister (Feb 27, 2010)

rdean said:


> Conspiracist said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



I'm just going to respond to a couple of your "points" rdean.  You have no idea what your talking about, and every one of your posts prove it.
America is a giving nation to those that need it, and it is the republicans that are more charitable than your democratic party, that is a fact.

Another one of your "half facts" is that America does want a public option, the point you fail on is that they don't want to pay for the public option.
Why not try and give the whole story and not just the part that backs your pathetic yarn.


----------



## Meister (Feb 27, 2010)

Conspiracist said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Conspiracist said:
> ...



You forgot, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and Amtrak, Seems the only thing that government does well is the military.

We have an 80% stake in AIG, and after the billions we invested in them, they are now crying for more money. Yeah, I want to invest in government healthcare.....NOT


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 27, 2010)

Ame®icano;2047412 said:
			
		

> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> > Nonelitist said:
> ...



Yea!

Like a public school education.

When YOUR house is on fire...Why should I have to pay for saving it?


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 27, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2047412 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





School vouchers help poor minorities- ask Papa Obama - some use to go to his kid's school



Don't poor home owners pay property taxes-?


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 27, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2047412 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Are you saying that public schools and firefighters are paid by federal taxes?


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 27, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> > The oft-repeated assertion that "I'm paying for someone else's health care" is fatuous.  You're not.  You're paying taxes, the same taxes that fund things such as defence.
> ...



Fair enough Harry, it's always useful to read some specific objections.  And those dangers do exist, I'll admit that.  However if that's the main objection - incompetence or waste (under heading "negligence") then it should be addressed.  This is where I have to leave the issue alone because my own views and experience are from a member of a nation of only 21m people which isn't a very complex society and in a country that is naturally blessed, so much so that even our incompetent boofhead politicians can't stuff it up, no matter how hard they try.  It's evident to me that what works in my country won't necessarily work in the US, which is why I try and stay away from being prescriptive on the details.


----------



## Diuretic (Feb 27, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2047412 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Which is why publicly funded firefighting agencies were formed in Britain, because those owned by insurance companies would turn up at a burning structure, check the plate on the front, see that it didn't have their company name on it and promptly return to base to let the structure burn down!  They worked out pretty soon that it was against the public interest.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 27, 2010)

Ame®icano;2048688 said:
			
		

> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano;2047412 said:
> ...



Why does it matter what pocket it comes from?

It still comes out of your pocket. Your taxes pay to save your neighbors house if it is on fire. By your argument, should't he be billed the thousands of dollars to fight it? Why is he "entitled to what you are paying for"?


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 27, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2048688 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It comes out of neighbor pocket too, therefore he IS entitled for those services.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 27, 2010)

rdean said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



thats because Rdean i have no problem when you post actual happenings....but that last sentance of yours .....more Rdean biased bullshit....you know the story...if you dont agree with me....your a fucking low life Republican....if you dont agree with me,there is no way possible your a Democrate.....if you dont agree with Rdean....your just wrong period.....so i did not leave anything out Dean.....you just cant see how you come off to many on this board.....but thats your problem....not mine or anyone elses.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 27, 2010)

rdean said:


> It was more like I was "mocking him".  Sometimes people need help.  We are a nation that helps each other.  Republicans seem to have forgotten that.
> 
> More than half Americans want the public option.
> 
> ...



this post has probobly made you an even bigger asshole than Midcant Dean....and he is a big asshole.....if more than half the country wants this or that....then that means there are a lot of Republicans in those figures....and yet you then lump ALL Republicans as being this that and all those other bullshit things you throw in there....for now on Dean i am going to refer you and your far left buddies as the "SMEGMA" party.....the party under the foreskin of America.....sooner or later you assholes and the Queen of Smegma,Pelosi, will get washed away....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 27, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Yea!
> 
> Like a public school education.
> 
> When YOUR house is on fire...Why should I have to pay for saving it?



RW.....when are you going to answer my fucking question?....Oman....heart surgery....yay or nay?....


----------



## Meister (Feb 27, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Yea!
> ...



he doesn't have the nads to answer that one, Harry.  You would expose him as a hypocrit


----------



## Harry Dresden (Feb 27, 2010)

Diuretic said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Diuretic said:
> ...


you think it would be Di.....but it never seems to be....it just goes on....the State of California is a shining example of this.....their motto"if it did not work then lets spend more money....if that dont work....lets spend more money.....if that dont work.....lets spend even more money....and if that dont work well we are just going to keep spending money until it does".....Damit....


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2048740 said:
			
		

> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano;2048688 said:
> ...



It would be the same with healthcare. Some would receive more than they pay in, some would receie less.
Same way it works with insurace companies


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Yea!
> ...



I answered where you originally asked in the "#37" thread. My answer was..

_I have never been to Oman. I do know they are a fairly wealthy country, so I would not be so quick to condemn their healthcare.
What I did find was..

As of 1999, there were an estimated 1.3 physicians and 2.2 hospital beds per 1,000 people. In 1993, 89% of the population had access to health care services. In 2000, 99% of the population had access to health care services.. During the last 3 decades, the Oman health care system has demonstrated and reported great achievements in health care services and preventive and curative medicine. In 2001, Oman was ranked number 8 by the World Health Organization.

It appears that Oman is a wealthy country that cares about the well being of its citizens. It has invested heavily in its healthcare system and covers 99% of its population. I would guess that if you were to visti Oman, you would find hospitals and equipment acquired in the last 20 years. The only problem is you would find the hospital staffed with foreign doctors.....

Wait a minute...US hospitals are staffed with foreign doctors too.

So I guess the answer you have been waiting for is that I would not have a problem using a hospital in the #8 healthcare country ...Oman _


----------



## Nonelitist (Feb 28, 2010)

rdean said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > Gadawg73 said:
> ...



Dumbass.... I did get a job.  So that part of your argument shows you to be nothing but an idiot that jumps to conclusions.  Also, I wasn't a parasite because I paid the total amount of my insurance.  My wife's employer didn't pay a dime.

Tell me where I lived off anybody stupid fuck.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Nonelitist said:
> ...



But why did you choose to leech off your wifes policy?  Why not just go on the insurance open market like other unemployed Americans do?

That is what you are advocating for other unemployed Americans


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2048740 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It would be the same if *everyone* is paying in. We both know that is not the case here.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2050078 said:
			
		

> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano;2048740 said:
> ...



Everyone does not pay in for fire protection either....but all are protected

Why the obsession with poor people?  Don't they have it bad enough as it is? So what if they don't pay in for healthcare? Does this mean they deserve to suffer if they get sick or injured? Look at the working poor, barely making enough for food and housing for their family...throw a $15,000 medical bill at them and see what it does to them.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2050078 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





In NY, they, "working poor" are covered already by the system

So a $15,000 medical bill does nothing to "them"

Try another story- like Rep  Slaughter (NY) and her story at the summit of a woman who couldnt afford her own dentures, and so had to use a second-hand set from her deceased sister. 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkJByadebXY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkJByadebXY[/ame]

Oh wait, Papa Obama care won't cover dental anyway
Liberals really need better fake tales to get this boondoggle passed



Try the Pelosi story that this is a jobs bill
I am still laughing at that one


Of course, since the majority of Americans are happy with their health care, the left is constantly making up bogus stories. But, please make up ones that at least sound like they can work 

So your dilemma is understood


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2050078 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



@ bold - I can't blame you for not knowing. Everyone is paying for fire protection thru the city/property taxes. If you rent the property, you still pay for it thru the rent, since your renter is paying property taxes.

@ rest - Here is an example from place I work for. They offer health insurance and possibility to opt out from it. Those who opt out are getting close to $100 more on their paycheck. Some of those are insured thru their spouses, some of them are taking risk of being uninsured, mostly young people and without families. They chose $100 on their paycheck over being insured, so why should be my problem if they get sick? They made their choice, let them live with it.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2050331 said:
			
		

> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano;2050078 said:
> ...



Come on...we are talking about the GOPs favorite class here...the poor people...the ones who can't afford healthcare. Their rent is subsidised by the government. So they really receive "free" fire protection and free school while they are at it.

The problem with your opting out is just why we need everyone to be covered. People should not have to play craps with their life


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Ame®icano;2050331 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Since subsidizing the rent haven't pull them out of their poverty, why do you think subsidizing their healthcare will? More entitlements will just encourage them to stay in poverty.


----------



## Rozman (Feb 28, 2010)

And the Libs also think Cuba has a better health care system then we do...that sort of tells you something 
I hope.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Rozman said:


> And the Libs also think Cuba has a better health care system then we do...that sort of tells you something
> I hope.




And they like to use UN stats based on self reporting from countries like Cuba that report their health care is even better than ours.

Where have we heard this before- oh yes the Soviet Union use to tell the world everything was great in the USSR. We see how true that proved to be


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Neotrotsky said:


> Rozman said:
> 
> 
> > And the Libs also think Cuba has a better health care system then we do...that sort of tells you something
> ...



Once again....please provide a credible independent ranking of healthcare that show the US is better than #37

Do you think the US is in the top 5?    Based on what criteria?


----------



## Meister (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > Rozman said:
> ...



I'm waiting for a credible independent ranking that has the *same reference point for ALL*  Until I see that happen, who cares what WHO states


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > Rozman said:
> ...



No your probably right- anyone with brains knows that the Cuban system is better than ours



I did find this interesting article

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

Fact No. 1:  Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1]  Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom.  Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway.  The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2:  Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2]  Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3:  Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3]  Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease.  By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them. 

 Fact No. 4:  Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4]  Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).

Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.

More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).

Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5:  Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.  Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent).  Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]


see rest click here
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I noticed you left out these links from the prior post; must have been an oversight 



World Health Organization ranking biased, not reliable 

WHOs FoolingWho? TheWorld Health Organizations Problematic Ranking of Health Care Systems


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

Nonelitist said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > xsited1 said:
> ...


Tell us how you know that the US has better health care than Costa Rica?


----------



## The T (Feb 28, 2010)

Neotrotsky said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Neotrotsky said:
> ...


 

And HOW ABOUT THAT _CUBAN FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM_? 

All that is New an approved BY the _Prolitariat_ with a beard? Bravo!


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

driveby said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...


You *are* aware that medical tourism is very big business, aren't you?


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

driveby said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > U.S. Health Care Costs:*Background Brief
> ...


Yes, just as Medicare has a miniscule profit margin compared to private insurance.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





Because the UN tells him so


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





Private insurance has a minuscule profit compared to other industries (beverages have larger profit margin)

US NEWS: Why Health Insurers Make Lousy Villains

Overall, the profit margin for health insurance companies was a modest 3.4 percent over the past year, according to data provided by Morningstar. That ranks 87th out of 215 industries and slightly above the median of 2.2 percent. By this measure, the most profitable industry over the past year has been beverages, with a 25.9 percent profit margin. Right behind that were healthcare real-estate trusts (firms that are basically the landlords for hospitals and healthcare facilities) and application-software (think Windows). The worst performer was copper, with a profit margin of minus 56.6 percent.


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

Baruch Menachem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
> ...


Wow, you base your belief on something that someone said awhile ago?


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Baruch Menachem said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




No of course not. In the UN system two countries equal in everything but one has socialist medicine- is weighted in their favor and they get a higher rating.

Makes sense to me, everyone knows the Cuban system is better than ours


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

driveby said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > driveby said:
> ...


Of course Americans do go to Singapore, as well as India, Costa Rica, and many others.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Sure, a lot of it elective.

Just like Danny Williams the Canadian Provincial Premier (the equivalent of a Governor) who came to the U.S. for a heart procedure..

Funny, does not Canada have a single payer system ?  


They scored higher in the UN reports as well

Funny how that works


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 28, 2010)

I sure hope that UN officials are going to Costa Rica, Cuba or Singapore for their health problems.


----------



## The T (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2051092 said:
			
		

> I sure hope that UN officials are going to Costa Rica, Cuba or Singapore for their health problems.


 


Bravo! Anyone with any good sense knows they stay here to get it done.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Neotrotsky said:


> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> > Baruch Menachem said:
> ...



It goes beyond whether you have a socialist system. It looks at measurable factors like life expectancy and infant mortality....both of which the US has abysmal rankings.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > Political Junky said:
> ...



Thanks for reminding me

In those stats as well as being self reported, the US counts 
premature deaths in their infant mortality rate. Other countries don't or they count them as miscarriages only. So, in other countries premature deaths don't factor in their rates at all. 

So, all of the hand-wringing over this statistic is useless, because it is really a difference in terminology, and nothing more (plus, the UN stats being useless as a true measure of any value)


The left should keep using the "denture story" from the health summit by Rep Slaughter (NY) the  woman who couldnt afford her own dentures, and so had to use a second-hand set from her deceased sister. 
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkJByadebXY[/ame]

Papa Obama care won't cover dental anyway
However, it is a better, fake and entertaining tale for the liberals to use in trying to get their boondoggle passed


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 28, 2010)

The T said:


> Ame®icano;2051092 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't hear them complaining about the cost neither.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Neotrotsky said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Neotrotsky said:
> ...



Have any facts to back up your rant?


Health Care Statistics in the United States

-The *United States ranks 43rd in lowest infant mortality rate*, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990. Singapore has the lowest rate with 2.3 deaths per 1000 live births, while the United States has a rate of 6.3 deaths per 1000 live births. Some of the other 42 nations that have a lower infant mortality rate than the US include Hong Kong, Slovenia, and Cuba. Source: CIA Factbook (2008)
-Approximately 30,000 infants die in the United States each year. The* infant mortality rate, which is the risk of death during the first year of life, is related to the underlying health of the mother, public health practices, socioeconomic conditions, and availability and use of appropriate health care for infants and pregnant women. *Sources: CDC and National Center for Health Statistics
Life Expectancy
-Life expectancy at birth in the US is an average of 78.14 years, which *ranks 47th in highest total life expectancy compared to other countries. *Source: CIA Factbook (2008)

With horific life expectancies, infant mortalities and low availability of healthcare it is surprising we finished 37th


----------



## Meister (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Why do you always use a ultra bias source, leftwinger?
PLEASE, show us a source that uses the same criteria for all the countries being monitored, not different strokes for different folks.
Until you can do that, all of your information is no more than just bunk, dude.


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Meister said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Neotrotsky said:
> ...



Show me a link that show different criteria are being used. Just because you do not like the results does not disprove them. 
Show another study that you feel is unbiased

Your rants do not prove anything....post facts


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Meister said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Neotrotsky said:
> ...



Plus the CIA factbook use the UN stats as well
Maybe he thinks the CIA is collecting all the data themselves

It is just the same failed argument packed a new way- like Hope and Change

Of course, he might be saying if the CIA uses it then it must be true

Wait, Pelosi says they lie all the time to her

Funny how that works


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Rants- liberals are too sensitive

Do you think the majority of Americans are happy with their health care means anything
or are you of the liberal mind set that people are too stupid to know what is good for them?
As some have argued on your side 

or like Klein Too Dumb to Thrive


So the majority of Americans don't want Papa Obama care -they must be all stupid bastards!

(liberals are such elitists)

Again, the lefts needs some new stories and fake facts because the old ones have not seemed to have worked on the American people- like global warming er,,, climate change



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
We already posted:


10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them. 

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).

Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.

More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).

Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Nice try...but none of your facts relate to infant mortality or life expectancy

Nice data on the Canadians....what about the other 35 countries that rank better than us?


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Nice try...but none of your facts relate to infant mortality or life expectancy
> 
> Nice data on the Canadians....what about the other 35 countries that rank better than us?



Based on the biased; flawed; self-reported data from countries like Cuba?

I told you I agree. If Cuba says they have a good system then I believe it

Just like the USSR use to report to the UN


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2051299 said:
			
		

> The T said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano;2051092 said:
> ...


Because they're rich.


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

DiamondDave said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > DiamondDave said:
> ...


Socialism would be that the government owns hospitals and doctors work for the government.
What is being proposed here, as in most of Europe, doctors and hospitals are private enterprises. The government acts as an insurance company, writing checks, only with a fraction of the overhead.
This really puts those who rely on wingnut talking points on the defensive.


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

Maple said:


> Nonelitist said:
> 
> 
> > *"An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. "*
> ...


Population has nothing to do with it. It's a per capita thing.

*"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
John Kenneth Galbraith*


----------



## Ame®icano (Feb 28, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Ame®icano;2051299 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not cause they're rich. It's because they are not paying for it out of their pockets.


----------



## Meister (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



Reread this thread, because it has been posted to you.  But, try to read with some comprehension this time.  I'm not going to do all the work for your lazy ass.


----------



## Political Junky (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2045523 said:
			
		

> beowolfe said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


The Blue Dogs are on the take from the insurance companies, just as 100% of republicans are.
Therefore, Democrats don't have 59 votes. I hope you already knew that.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

Ame®icano;2051457 said:
			
		

> Political Junky said:
> 
> 
> > Ame®icano;2051299 said:
> ...




He forgets it is because they are politicians as well.

Contrary to the stated claims of the left, does anyway believe the President is going to have the same medical as the people?

He won't even allow poor minorities to go to the same school as his kids by taking away their school vouchers


----------



## rightwinger (Feb 28, 2010)

Neotrotsky said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Nice try...but none of your facts relate to infant mortality or life expectancy
> ...



Oh I get your point now....

All thirty six nations that rank higher than us are lying


----------



## Neotrotsky (Feb 28, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> Neotrotsky said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



The communist and socialist ones sure
The non-democratic ones sure
Most of the non-western countries- sure


If you factor in those countries and the faulty weighting system the UN uses
Where does that really put the US now?

But again it is moot. 
Do you think the majority of Americans are happy with their health care means anything or are you of the liberal mind set that people are too stupid to know what is good for them?

It must be so; the US has it so terrible, according to the UN,  but Americans are too stupid to know it


As some have argued on your side 

or like Klein Too Dumb to Thrive


So the majority of Americans don't want Papa Obama care -they must be all stupid bastards!

Maybe it is a North American thing?

After all, Danny Williams the Canadian Provincial Premier (the equivalent of a Governor) came to the U.S. for a heart procedure..

Canada has a single payer system and they scored higher than the US

He must be too stupid to know how good he has it
Funny how that works


----------



## Chris (Mar 1, 2010)

When Canadians were asked in a national poll to name the greatest Canadian in history, they chose the man who developed their healthcare system, Tommy Douglas.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greatest_Canadian


----------



## Political Junky (Mar 1, 2010)

Chris said:


> When Canadians were asked in a national poll to name the greatest Canadian in history, they chose the man who developed their healthcare system, Tommy Douglas.
> 
> 
> The Greatest Canadian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Tommy Douglas's grandson is Kiefer Sutherland who stars in _"24"_ as Jack Bauer. Also a proponent of health care for everyone.


----------



## Ame®icano (Mar 1, 2010)

```

```



Chris said:


> When Canadians were asked in a national poll to name the greatest Canadian in history, they chose the man who developed their healthcare system, Tommy Douglas.
> 
> 
> The Greatest Canadian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



You should read few books and/or learn the history.

The idea of Canadian healthcare did NOT come from Tommy Douglas, but from Claude Castonguay of Quebec, where the socialized healthcare covering citizens through tax levies actually started. Castonguays Quebec success triggered a domino effect across Canada, until eventually his ideas were implemented in whole country.

Interesting thing is that the same man who started idea of nationalized healthcare today disowns the system, and wants private sector involvement back into the healthcare to save it from crisis.

Father of Canadian health care disowns system, wants private sector involvement
Father of Canadian Health Care Wants to Kill His Child!


----------



## Political Junky (Mar 1, 2010)

Ame®icano;2051937 said:
			
		

> ```
> 
> ```
> 
> ...


Nice balanced site, "Crush Liberalism". LOL


----------



## Ame®icano (Mar 1, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Ame®icano;2051937 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why don't you search it yourself, smart ass.


----------



## Neotrotsky (Mar 1, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > When Canadians were asked in a national poll to name the greatest Canadian in history, they chose the man who developed their healthcare system, Tommy Douglas.
> ...




Whoa if Kiefer Sutherland wants it, then I am convinced


I still like the  "denture" story better

The left should keep using the "denture story" from the health summit by Rep Slaughter (NY) the woman who couldnt afford her own dentures, and so had to use a second-hand set from her deceased sister. 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkJByadebXY]YouTube - Teeth[/ame]

Papa Obama care won't cover dental anyway
But it is just as relevant as the the "Sutherland" approach


----------



## Meister (Mar 1, 2010)

sharing....about an old man and his lovely wife,
The old man ordered one hamburger, one order of French fries and one drink. He unwrapped the plain hamburger and carefully cut it in half.. He placed one half in front of his wife. He then carefully counted out the French fries, dividing them into two piles and neatly placed one pile in front of his wife.

He took a sip of the drink, his wife took a sip and then set the cup down between them. As he began to eat his few bites of hamburger, the people around them kept looking over and whispering. You could tell they were thinking, 'That poor old couple - all they can afford is one meal for the two of them.'

As the man began to eat his fries a young man came to the table. He politely offered to buy another meal for the old couple. The old man said they were just fine - They were used to sharing everything.

The surrounding people noticed the little old lady hadn't eaten a bite. She sat there watching her husband eat and occasionally taking turns sipping the drink.

Again the young man came over and begged them to let him buy another meal for them.. This time the old woman said 'No, thank you, we are used to sharing everything.'

As the old man finished and was wiping his face neatly with the napkin, the young man again came over to the little old lady who had yet to eat a single bite of food and asked 'What is it you're waiting for?'

She answered . .. . . ... 









'THE  TEETH'.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 1, 2010)

rightwinger said:


> It goes beyond whether you have a socialist system. It looks at measurable factors like life expectancy and infant mortality....both of which the US has abysmal rankings.



Rw....explain something to me....how does having a tremendous health care system increase life expectancy?.....if you dont take care of yourself,which many Americans dont,i dont give a dam if you have Dr. Leonard McCoy as your physician....if you dont take of yourself there is only so much he or ANYONE else can do for you....


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 1, 2010)

Harry Dresden said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > It goes beyond whether you have a socialist system. It looks at measurable factors like life expectancy and infant mortality....both of which the US has abysmal rankings.
> ...



30 years ago Canada's and the USA's statistics were the same. Then Canada went to a universal health system. Now they are ahead of us in longevity, infant mortality, and way ahead on early childhood mortality. 

And none of their citizens goes bankrupt because of medical bills. Versus a few hundred thousand families here in the US.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 1, 2010)

political junky said:


> population has nothing to do with it. It's a per capita thing.



bull fucking shit.....


----------



## Meister (Mar 1, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rSRJsjiBdY]YouTube - Aerosmith- Same Old Song & Dance[/ame]


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 1, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> The Blue Dogs are on the take from the insurance companies, just as 100% of republicans are.
> Therefore, Democrats don't have 59 votes. I hope you already knew that.



EVERY Republican?....you are a stupid individual....your in the same catagory as Rdean...a moron who is so FAR left that you consider liberal Democrats to be Right Wingers...i suppose to your CORRECT way of thinking Democrats just dont take from any Corporations at all...let me ask you a question Junky,because your buddy Rdean refused to answer this when he made basically the same statement as you have....we know the Republicans are owned by some Corporations......is the Democratic Party owned by any Corporations?....take your time....i know you will have to find a way to put a spin on this to make it look like ..."well yes the Dems are...but its not as bad as the Republicans....so its alright if they are"......take your time....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 1, 2010)

Chris said:


> When Canadians were asked in a national poll to name the greatest Canadian in history, they chose the man who developed their healthcare system, Tommy Douglas.
> 
> 
> The Greatest Canadian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



so who else are they going to name?....William Shatner?.....in a poll on South Park they picked him ....big deal....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 1, 2010)

Political Junky said:


> Tommy Douglas's grandson is Kiefer Sutherland who stars in _"24"_ as Jack Bauer. Also a proponent of health care for everyone.



oh ...no shit....im going to start watching 24 now....Mas Putos....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Mar 1, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Rw....explain something to me....how does having a tremendous health care system increase life expectancy?.....if you dont take care of yourself,which many Americans dont,i dont give a dam if you have Dr. Leonard McCoy as your physician....if you dont take of yourself there is only so much he or ANYONE else can do for you....
> ...



cant answer the question Rocks?....well no surprise i have asked you this same question at least twice....and here you are again dancing around it again like Fred Astaire....


----------



## Neotrotsky (Mar 2, 2010)

Old Rocks said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





Speaking of same old story.........

No Canadians?- Survey research commissioned by the Canadian government found
that that despite having a government-run health system, medical reasons (including uninsured expenses), were cited as the primary cause of bankruptcy by approximately 15 percent of bankrupt Canadian seniors (55 years of age and older).

See:
The Medical Bankruptcy Myth

Highly Questionable Medical Bankruptcy Figures from Fraser Institute

The left is really running out of new fake stories to use. 

Maybe the "denture" story is all they have left


----------

