From: Jack Hollis on
On 08 Sep 2009 06:27:14 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)>

>On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:49:10 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote:
>> On 07 Sep 2009 16:21:09 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)>
>> wrote:
>>> If everyone in the US has access to the world's best healthcare, why
>>> is the average life expectancy so much lower than Canada's? Hmmm?
>> Life expectancy is a lifestyle issue. You can have the best health
>> care but if most the population have unhealthy lifestyles, that's not
>> the fault of health care. My doctor tells me to lose weight and stop
>> smoking cigars every time I see her. I admire her persistence.
>Uh huh. You're actually suggesting that lifestyle differences between
>the US and Canada are so radically different that they alone account the
>dramatic difference in life expectancy? Because that seems like quite a
>stretch in a continent with similar language, culture, diet, etc.
>Especially when all you offer in support is bullshit anecdotal evidence.

2003 figures

Obesity Rate (Male) US 31.1 % Canada 17.0 %
Obesity Rate (Female) US 32.2 % Canada 19.0 %

Any more questions?

You're not doing too well with this one. May I suggest infant
mortality rate?
From: Jack Hollis on
On 08 Sep 2009 06:28:03 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)>

>> No doubt that the cost of treating the uninsured is passed on to the
>> rest of us one way or the other.
>Which (obviously) is why it's cheaper to just give everyone health
>insurance and be done with it.

Not that simple. Out of the 47 million uninsured 43% could afford
health insurance but choose not to buy it. I certainly wouldn't want
to pay for their health insurance. About one-third of the remainder
are immigrants. I don't want to pay for them either. That leaves
around 12 million or so people who are in need. However, some of
those people already qualify for Medicaid and/or their kids qualify
for SCHIP but they haven't applied. Add to that the fact that this is
not a stable group because some of the uninsured find work and get

In reality, the number of people in real need is not nearly as high as
people let on. Here's an excellent study conducted by the Employment
Policy Institute by two Baruch College (CUNY) researchers. It's quite
extensive but worth reading.

You see Carbon, this is not really about the uninsured, this is about
the government's desire to control 17% of the US economy which will
allow them to create a huge government bureaucracy of union workers.
From: Jack Hollis on
On 08 Sep 2009 06:30:26 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)>

>> His SAT and LSAT scores would be very interesting. You can get a
>> pretty good idea of IQ from both of those scores. I wonder why he
>> hasn't released them.
>For the same reason that he didn't release his birth certificate to
>those birther loons: there is no upside to pandering to retards.

Actually he did release his birth certificate.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on
On Sep 7, 1:30 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)> wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:26:46 -0700, Dinosaur_Sr wrote:
> > On Sep 6, 2:31 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 11:19:19 -0700, Dinosaur_Sr wrote:
> >> > On Sep 6, 1:09 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)> wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:34:34 -0700, Dinosaur_Sr wrote:
> >> >> > Right now, insurance companies, individuals, health care
> >> >> > providers and the sick people themselves make the decisions.
> >> >> > What I really don't like about the system in Canada is it's a
> >> >> > govt only thing.  Even if you have the money to pay for the
> >> >> > treatment, you can't get it in Canada if the govt says no. Right
> >> >> > now a Canadian could go to the Us, but that could change.......
> >> >> How do imagine that would happen? Armed guards at the borders?
> >> > The facility simply will no longer be available
> >> How do you imagine the facility simply will no longer be available?
> > "Eliminate the waste"! The empty beads and unused facility will be
> > eliminated, just as it has been in Canada. there will be enough to
> > serve Americans...nothing for Canadians though. Sorry!
> So, you're actually suggesting that wealthy Canadians, with wallets
> open, would be turned away by hospitals in the US?
> Rob, the secret to good trolling is to maintain some element of
> believability. FYI.

IMHO, you are the one trolling here. Your line of reasoning makes no
sense at all. Maybe you aren't aware that Canadian hospitals regularly
turn overflow to the US. In that case you are just uninfoemed I
From: Dinosaur_Sr on
On Sep 7, 7:00 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)> wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:01:49 -0600, Howard Brazee <how...(a)>
> wrote:
> >On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 12:03:59 -0400, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)>
> >wrote:
> >>This is incorrect.  Millions in the US don't have health insurance.
> >>Everyone in the US has access to health care.
> >And we pay through the nose when the uninsured get treated.   But some
> >people would rather pay more, as long as they can avert their eyes
> >from the fact that the wrong people are getting help.
> No doubt that the cost of treating the uninsured is passed on to the
> rest of us one way or the other.

How is health care reform going to cause the costs of emergency room
treatment for *anyone* to be reduced...unless you ration care?