health care
in [Golf]
|
From: BAR on 21 Feb 2010 08:21 In article <c25cede8-f26f-4fe0-b9de-5587f383cb03 @t42g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > On Feb 20, 7:12�pm, assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: > > On 20-Feb-2010, "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Every industrialized country on earth offers universal health care > > > > > except the U.S., yet the U.S. is the only one of them that's embroiled > > > > > in a debate about health care. > > > > > > so since every one else jumped off the bridge we should too? > > > > > > -- > > > > bill-o > > > > > The fact that other OECD countries are not having a civil war about > > > health care the way we are kind of suggests that they don't think > > > they've jumped off a bridge. > > > > What they think about their situation is irrelevant. > > > > -- > > bill-o > > And I thought you were smart. The French built the Maginot Line. Should England and Canada done the same thing after WWI?
From: BAR on 21 Feb 2010 08:32 In article <9p01o5lhceo0fs5tcljk0moihhhke141tv(a)4ax.com>, xsleeper(a)aol.com says... > > On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 06:43:42 -0800 (PST), "John B." > <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >The fact that other OECD countries are not having a civil war about > >health care the way we are kind of suggests that they don't think > >they've jumped off a bridge. > > In the UK 11% of the population has private health insurance. Why do > you think they choose to pay for something that they can already get > for free? Rich Canadians, including government ministers, come to the > US for health care. Why do you suppose they do that? Because the system in the UK does not function as intended. People get sick and need medical attention now, not at a time when it is cost effective for the government. The same for the rich Canadians.
From: Carbon on 21 Feb 2010 09:08 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 06:02:15 +0000, assimilate wrote: > On 20-Feb-2010, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>>> Year in and year out, Americans pay more for healthcare per capita >>>> than citizens of any other first world country, thanks in no small >>>> part to a massive bureaucracy designed to weed out the unentitled. >>>> The joke is that it costs more to run than just giving healthcare >>>> to the poor to start with. Like the war on drugs, the war on >>>> healthcare is an ill-considered policy that has always done much >>>> more harm than good. >>> >>> But there are lots of people who are willing to pay the costs of >>> these two battles, even without any hope of success. It is the >>> Righteous way. >>> >>> Others are willing to pay for a similar losing war against obesity. >>> Spend the money and ignore the results. >> >> I guess it must be freeing to allow all of your decisions to be made >> based on some canned ideology or other. But where money and lives are >> involved, I will take reason over misguided righteousness any day. > > What you call reason smells of ideology to me. Reality disagrees with you. You've been to France, correct? They spend 11% of their GDP on healthcare and have the 8th best average life expectancy in the world, at 80.98 years. The US? 15.3% GDP (highest in the world) and an average life expectancy of 78.11, ranked 49th in the world according to the CIA's world fact book. Same for Canada. Germany. The UK. Sweden. Switzerland. Et cetera. Average life expectancy: http://goo.gl/fZQW Cost of healthcare as percentage of gross GDP: http://www.who.int/entity/whosis/whostat/EN_WHS09_Table7.pdf Now you're trying to figure out how to dispute these well-established facts. Maybe you should ask yourself why you're doing it.
From: Carbon on 21 Feb 2010 09:13 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:44:01 -0500, BAR wrote: > In article <4b801ced$0$4882$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >> On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:57:59 -0500, BAR wrote: >>> In article <4b800fe6$0$4861$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >>> nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:25:27 -0500, BAR wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am horrified that anyone gets anything for free except the air >>>>> they breath. The only way someone gets something for free is that >>>>> something has to be taken from someone else. >>>> >>>> You fool, you're already paying for them in higher insurance >>>> premiums. >>> >>> And you believe that giving them free health care, which they >>> already have, is going to change what I am paying? You are the fool. >>> >>> What I want is for them to get jobs and pay for their own health >>> care. >>> >>> This will cause my health care costs to go down. >>> >>> There is a parallel. Those who receive free health care are like >>> shoplifters. They cause the price of all of the other good to rise. >>> Stop the shoplifting and the prices go down. >>> >>> What are shoplifters prosecuted for stealing and people stealing >>> health care services not prosecuted? >> >> Here's a parallel that makes sense. The war on healthcare is a lot >> like the so-called war on drugs. The US has spent trillions of >> dollars over the years incarcerating a higher percentage of its >> population than any other first world country. And for what? For a >> drug problem is at least as bad here as in countries like Denmark, >> where you can get pretty much any drug you want without fear of going >> to jail. The whole thing is a ridiculous waste of money and has been >> for the past 40 years at least. >> >> Year in and year out, Americans pay more for healthcare per capita >> than citizens of any other first world country, thanks in no small >> part to a massive bureaucracy designed to weed out the unentitled. >> The joke is that it costs more to run than just giving healthcare to >> the poor to start with. Like the war on drugs, the war on healthcare >> is an ill-considered policy that has always done much more harm than >> good. > > Thank you comrade Carbon. I win.
From: Carbon on 21 Feb 2010 09:15
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 05:53:04 +0000, assimilate wrote: > On 20-Feb-2010, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>>>>> I am in favor of universal healthcare mainly because it is >>>>>> cheaper, >>>>> >>>>> no matter how often you say this, it will never be true. >>>> >>>> The US spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country >>>> in the world. Average life expectancy in other first world >>>> countries with universal healthcare is much better than the US. >>>> Both of these stats can easily be verified. I can only wonder at >>>> the strength of your fanaticism. >>> >>> sorry but you need to mesure true cost. The real advantage of UH >>> (for the govt) is that it hides the real costs, much like your >>> co-pay hides the real cost of care. >> >> That is the true cost, in raw dollars and as a percentage of gross >> GDP. Since it's so easily verified, sane people generally accept >> that the US has the most expensive healthcare in the world. Generally >> the ideologues respond with the "if it's the most expensive it must >> be the best" argument. Of course that argument is also highly suspect >> in light of other easily verified stats, such as average life >> expectancy by country. > > you will never get beyond stage 1 thinking it is clear. Oh, stage 1 is it? My, aren't we smug today! |