Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Lol at Lynard Skynardand Rush fan dittoheads, no wonder you all are so twisted.
Thanks for making my day! I needed a big laugh.
List off some of your favorite bands so we can laugh right back.
I wouldn't expect you to have any clue whatsoever, so I will not waste our time.
Must be some obscure no talent titless wonders then.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: eskimospy
How many times are people going to have the same argument over universal health care? By any objective standard universal health care offers more care at lower cost then our current system does. This has been linked to dozens of times. This is not news. Complain about the role of government if you want, complain about lack of choice for you, but don't say that it doesn't work... because it's been proven to work time and time again.
People have a tendancy to ignore information that they find unpleasant or information that contradicts their world views.
If it's been linked dozens of times, then link it again. The fact is, if what you are saying were true, then those you claim oppose your own world view and agenda would jump on this faster than flies on sh!t. So obviously there's something a little deeper here, dontcha think?
Originally posted by: Me
So I guess that every other country that has socialized or universal healthcare is on the brink of bankruptcy? Can you link me to the national debts of those countries and then compare them to ours? K, thnx.
Also, as for the gripes with the quality of national healthcare compared the the great and wonderful Oz....er....system that we have now....
USA ranked 16/20 behind many, many countries with national plans
University of Maine study: US Healthcare...most expensive and least effective
Look at the chart on page 4 of that PDF.....USA....highest cost per capita, highest cost per GDP, highest infant mortality rate, last in fairness of financial contributions, last in overal performance.
The health of U.S. children is worse in virtually all categories when compared to children in other industrialized countries, according to new research from a Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health researcher.
Johns Hopkins University's Center for Hospital Finance and Mangement, Baltimore, USA.
In 1997 the United States spent $3,925 per capita on health or 13.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), while the median Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) country spent $1,728 or 7.5 percent. From 1990 to 1997 U.S. health spending per capita increased 4.3 percent per year, compared with the OECD median of 3.8 percent. The United States has the lowest percentage of the population with government-assured health insurance. It also has the fewest hospital days per capita, the highest hospital expenditures per day, and substantially higher physician incomes than the other OECD countries. On the available outcome measures, the United States is generally in the bottom half, and its relative ranking has been declining since 1960.
The United States spent the most resources on health care of all the twenty-nine industrialized countries in 1996 by a wide margin. Managed care and other recent initiatives have been credited with slowing the rate of increase in the U.S. health care spending in recent years. Although the rate of increase slowed, it was still more rapid than the rate in most other industrialized countries between 1990 and 1996. Among the twenty-nine industrialized countries, the United states had the lowest percentage of its population eligible for publicly mandated insurance in 1995. Since 1960 Greece, Korea, and Mexico have surpassed the United States on this measure. AMong the twenty-nine industrialized countries, only the United States had less than half of its population eligible for publicly mandated health insurance in 1995. The United States appears to be comparable to the other G7 countries in terms of access to physicians, in-patient hospital services, and pharmaceuticals. However, on outcomes indicators such as life expectancy and infant mortality, the United States is frequently in the bottom quartile among the twenty-nine industrialized countries, and its relative ranking has been declining since 1960.
Originally posted by: dmw16
I can't believe a person of the right wing leanings would ever say that people DONT have a right to medical treatment. What happened to sanctity of life?
Also, Im not sure that it's as bad as people say it is in Canada. I have a friend of the family who is from Canada and swears if he ever gets really sick he wants to be in Canada and not the states.
No, you're not. My personal ideal healthcare plan would be to have free health and dental care (with the usual minimal co-pays to prevent abuse of the system) for children ONLY. I am strongly in favor of such a system.Also, can I be the only one that thinks that if healthcare were accessible to everyone when they were younger, conditions might be detected earlier and the cost of treatment would go down significantly?
Originally posted by: DVK916
They need to do what California democrats proposed and eliminate private insurance companies. Healthcare should not be in the hands of dirty companies.
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DVK916
They need to do what California democrats proposed and eliminate private insurance companies. Healthcare should not be in the hands of dirty companies.
Right, much better in the hands corrupt and dirty politicians :disgust:
Originally posted by: DVK916
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DVK916
They need to do what California democrats proposed and eliminate private insurance companies. Healthcare should not be in the hands of dirty companies.
Right, much better in the hands corrupt and dirty politicians :disgust:
Many politicians (democrats) would do what is right for the people of this country. It was a sad day when Arnold vetoed the bill to allow a single payer government run health care system in California. It would have immediately shut down all private health insurance companies in the state. In the end everyone in our state would have been insured and we would be saving billions in the end. Doctors re pushing for this, despite what you hear.
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DVK916
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DVK916
They need to do what California democrats proposed and eliminate private insurance companies. Healthcare should not be in the hands of dirty companies.
Right, much better in the hands corrupt and dirty politicians :disgust:
Many politicians (democrats) would do what is right for the people of this country. It was a sad day when Arnold vetoed the bill to allow a single payer government run health care system in California. It would have immediately shut down all private health insurance companies in the state. In the end everyone in our state would have been insured and we would be saving billions in the end. Doctors re pushing for this, despite what you hear.
What was it about the conservatives being sheeple?
Originally posted by: DVK916
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DVK916
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: DVK916
They need to do what California democrats proposed and eliminate private insurance companies. Healthcare should not be in the hands of dirty companies.
Right, much better in the hands corrupt and dirty politicians :disgust:
Many politicians (democrats) would do what is right for the people of this country. It was a sad day when Arnold vetoed the bill to allow a single payer government run health care system in California. It would have immediately shut down all private health insurance companies in the state. In the end everyone in our state would have been insured and we would be saving billions in the end. Doctors re pushing for this, despite what you hear.
What was it about the conservatives being sheeple?
Democrats do have their flaws, and are probably aren't the most honest people. But I have more trust that they will do what is best for the people when it come to health care than I do for big government. We elect our officials so if they aren't doing what is best for us, then we can remove them from office. Can't say the same for the CEO of an insurance company.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: sandorski
Hehe, "screw us". The lack of such a thing is screwing you over a whole lot more.
Why should I be financially for someone else's health problems?
By the way, I've had about $300,000 in back surgeries over the past couple years and I think I paid $20 in co-pay once because my mom didn't have $20 on her.
Someone else Paid for your Surgery. Those Else's Paid a whole lot more than if it was Paid through a Universal Program. As part of a Co-Pay you are already Paying for someone elses health problems and are financially responsible(believe you missed this word ) for them.
In short, you already are.
Please prove the bolded. Thank you.
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
OOOHHHH NOESSSSSS!!! FREE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL?!? WHATEVER SHALL I DO?
It will be anything but free. Enjoy the higher taxes.
Bush will veto it if it ever passes.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: sandorski
Hehe, "screw us". The lack of such a thing is screwing you over a whole lot more.
Why should I be financially for someone else's health problems?
By the way, I've had about $300,000 in back surgeries over the past couple years and I think I paid $20 in co-pay once because my mom didn't have $20 on her.
Someone else Paid for your Surgery. Those Else's Paid a whole lot more than if it was Paid through a Universal Program. As part of a Co-Pay you are already Paying for someone elses health problems and are financially responsible(believe you missed this word ) for them.
In short, you already are.
Please prove the bolded. Thank you.
Simple Math, think about it.
Originally posted by: eskimospy
According to health affairs in 2002 (sorry it's not more recent, but I think the comparison holds) americans spent 5,267 per capita on health care. That was 53 percent more then any other country. Our life expectancy and other standards are lower then other western countries as well.
If you want to think that we spend 150% as much as other countries and still live less because we're fat, that's up to you. From any objective standard however, our obesity problem does not account for this massive disparity, or come close to closing the overwhelming advantage that socialized medicine has over our system.
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Originally posted by: eskimospy
According to health affairs in 2002 (sorry it's not more recent, but I think the comparison holds) americans spent 5,267 per capita on health care. That was 53 percent more then any other country. Our life expectancy and other standards are lower then other western countries as well.
If you want to think that we spend 150% as much as other countries and still live less because we're fat, that's up to you. From any objective standard however, our obesity problem does not account for this massive disparity, or come close to closing the overwhelming advantage that socialized medicine has over our system.
I read that a large part of the cost of increase in health care spending in the US compared to otheres countries is due to the purchasing of new equipment.
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: sandorski
Hehe, "screw us". The lack of such a thing is screwing you over a whole lot more.
Why should I be financially for someone else's health problems?
By the way, I've had about $300,000 in back surgeries over the past couple years and I think I paid $20 in co-pay once because my mom didn't have $20 on her.
Someone else Paid for your Surgery. Those Else's Paid a whole lot more than if it was Paid through a Universal Program. As part of a Co-Pay you are already Paying for someone elses health problems and are financially responsible(believe you missed this word ) for them.
In short, you already are.
Please prove the bolded. Thank you.
Simple Math, think about it.
If it was that simple, I would think some country would have used that by now.
What about those who can't afford to pay into the system? According to you there already is such as system, but it's obivious that not everyone can afford it.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: sandorski
Hehe, "screw us". The lack of such a thing is screwing you over a whole lot more.
Why should I be financially for someone else's health problems?
By the way, I've had about $300,000 in back surgeries over the past couple years and I think I paid $20 in co-pay once because my mom didn't have $20 on her.
Someone else Paid for your Surgery. Those Else's Paid a whole lot more than if it was Paid through a Universal Program. As part of a Co-Pay you are already Paying for someone elses health problems and are financially responsible(believe you missed this word ) for them.
In short, you already are.
Please prove the bolded. Thank you.
Simple Math, think about it.
If it was that simple, I would think some country would have used that by now.
What about those who can't afford to pay into the system? According to you there already is such as system, but it's obivious that not everyone can afford it.
More People in the system, the more an Individuals Health Expense gets spread around.