Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Hugo Chavez on July 03, 2007, 04:26:58 AM
-
WOW! It's a really good thing Americans have been so thoroughly dumbed down… otherwise Moore’s new movie would have caused a mass exodus out of America.
-
WOW! It's a really good thing Americans have been so thoroughly dumbed down… otherwise Moore’s new movie would have caused a mass exodus out of America.
You just want free health care to deal with your crack and cock addictions. That's your motive isn't it? :-*
-
You just want free health care to deal with your crack and cock addictions. That's your motive isn't it? :-*
Gee Nordic, I sure missed you ::)
-
Just say no to universal health care!
-
You just want free health care to deal with your crack and cock addictions. That's your motive isn't it? :-*
Again with the out-of-left-field references to male genitalia?
I see a definite pattern here. :-X
-
free health care.. lol why not free everything? dont stop there.
You mean like public schools, police and fire services, city and county services, postal services, etc etc... yea, what a rare freakin concept... Clearly as soon as we had free health care in some form the red commie flags and Marx statues would rise up overnight ::)
-
Nothing is free. Everything comes from taxes. Money the gov't gets to decide what's best to throw it at. If you want %50 of your check to line the gov'ts pockets then please go somewhere else.
-
Nothing is free. Everything comes from taxes.
nobody said free and in poof, its free... ::) of course taxes come into play to pay for these things. It's not a new concept is my point,... we have taxes all the time to meet the most basic needs of the community... The more things become privatized, the more the people get fucked in the ass; overall, every single time, the people pay more to the corporation, than they doto a system that collects taxes and provides a common service. 100% privatized is more money out of the wallets of the people then taxes pull for the same services period.
-
nobody said free and in poof, its free... ::) of course taxes come into play to pay for these things. It's not a new concept is my point,... we have taxes all the time to meet the most basic needs of the community... The more things become privatized, the more the people get fucked in the ass; overall, every single time, the people pay more to the corporation, than they would to a system that collects taxes and provides a common service. Privatized is more money out of the wallets of the people then taxes pull for the same services.
You're way off. Privitazation has to deal with competition and the consumers. You're thinking of what happens when gov't starts meddling in free market and nationalizing everything.
-
You're way off. Privitazation has to deal with competition and the consumers. You're thinking of what happens when gov't starts meddling in free market and nationalizing everything.
I'm way off? ::) lol....
-
Brixton is right.
The real issue is that no one has the right to demand service from someone else. No body has the right to health care these people work just like everyone else and they have a specialized skill that they should be paid for.
If you had the chance of taking one other person (excluding loved ones etc) who would you take? your cashier? your banker? your mechanic? no fucking way you would take your Doctor in one second. They are the most valued people in our lives and they should be paid accordingly for what they do and taxing for " free health care" is not going to do it.
You can not continously tax someone else to fit the bill of another- not only will it make the mds paychecks go down the toillet it will completely destroy quality care. The governement will have to start rationing out limitations to service down the road because its free for everyone. The hospitals wont have an unlimited tab that the govt will bill( which in reality the govt is not paying ofcourse its the people) they will put a limitiation on the types of procedures that are under the budget.
Eat it BF. And study free market so we won't have this misunderstanding again.
-
LOL... misunderstanding ::) yea, yours! You made a post suggesting people wanting more taxes taken out of their pockets take a hike. You noted nothing is free, everything comes from taxes. Thus enters my address of "Privatization" as in the transfer of service X from government(taxes) to the private sector. My point being that overall more money will leave the wallets of the people for services provided by the private sector than services provided by the gov paid by taxes. My reply was spot on to your point. The misunderstanding is yours, not mine brix. And BF is against universal health care, I'm not... another misunderstanding?
For the record Brix, you said, "Privitazation has to deal with competition and the consumers." which is lacking the main points of defining the word... bigtime...
-
Brixton is right.
The real issue is that no one has the right to demand service from someone else. No body has the right to health care these people work just like everyone else and they have a specialized skill that they should be paid for.
If you had the chance of taking one other person (excluding loved ones etc) who would you take? your cashier? your banker? your mechanic? no fucking way you would take your Doctor in one second. They are the most valued people in our lives and they should be paid accordingly for what they do and taxing for " free health care" is not going to do it.
You can not continously tax someone else to fit the bill of another- not only will it make the mds paychecks go down the toillet it will completely destroy quality care. The governement will have to start rationing out limitations to service down the road because its free for everyone. The hospitals wont have an unlimited tab that the govt will bill( which in reality the govt is not paying ofcourse its the people) they will put a limitiation on the types of procedures that are under the budget.
Good points. We've had this discussion on the board before, but I think the lack of healthcare is grossly overstated. No one in the United States can be denied emergency health care. There are a number of federal and state programs that provide preventive health for poor people. Most communities have clinics that offer free immunization for kids. Most employers offer health care plans. Hawaii requires all employers to provide healthcare to employees who work at least 20 hours a week. I think there are relatively few people who fall completely outside the safety net and wind up with no health care.
That said, I do think the quality of care is a legitimate issue.
-
wow, no exuse for this:
Quality of Health Care: Of the 191-country ranking, here are the top 50:
Top 10 quality care nations: France, Italy, San Marino, Andorra, Malta, Singapore, Spain, Oman, Austria, Japan.
2nd 10: Norway, Portugal, Monaco, Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, England, Ireland, Switzerland.
3rd 10: Belgium, Columbia, Sweden, Cyprus, German, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Israel, Morocco, Canada.
4th ten: Finland, Australia, Chile, Denmark, Dominica, Costa Rica, United States, Slovenia, Cuba, Brunei.
5th ten: New Zealand, Bahrain, Crotia, Qatar, Kuwait, Barbados, Thailand, Czech Republic, Malaysia, Poland.
(reported 21 June 2000, Bradenton Herald-Tribune).
-
Good points. We've had this discussion on the board before, but I think the lack of healthcare is grossly overstated. No one in the United States can be denied emergency health care. There are a number of federal and state programs that provide preventive health for poor people. Most communities have clinics that offer free immunization for kids. Most employers offer health care plans. Hawaii requires all employers to provide healthcare to employees who work at least 20 hours a week. I think there are relatively few people who fall completely outside the safety net and wind up with no health care.
That said, I do think the quality of care is a legitimate issue.
I sure wouldn't argue you if we're only talking about bumps, bruises, colds, algergies, etc... but as soon as the problem becomes serious, your outlook on the system is dead ass wrong. But for minor shit, you're right, we're all covered well.
-
Interesting...
(http://mwhodges.home.att.net/health-others.gif)
For another view of international comparison,
the left chart shows total health care spending by various nations.
Note the U.S. spent 14.2% of its economy on healthcare at the date of this chart. The above update reports 2003 spending significantly higher, at 15.3% of GDP. and the above reported Sept. 2006 report shows U.S. costs increased to near 16% of GDP - - approximately 60% more than other nations.
Spending much more than nations covering all citizens via national health insurance.
(Data Source: OECD data published The Economist magazine 10/24/98)
(Source: the 2006 report, commissioned by the non-profit and non-partisan Commonwealth Fund - http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20060921/bs_bw/tc20060921053503)
-
LOL... misunderstanding ::) yea, yours! You made a post suggesting people wanting more taxes taken out of their pockets take a hike. You noted nothing is free, everything comes from taxes. Thus enters my address of "Privatization" as in the transfer of service X from government(taxes) to the private sector. My point being that overall more money will leave the wallets of the people for services provided by the private sector than services provided by the gov paid by taxes. My reply was spot on to your point. The misunderstanding is yours, not mine brix. And BF is against universal health care, I'm not... another misunderstanding?
For the record Brix, you said, "Privitazation has to deal with competition and the consumers." which is lacking the main points of defining the word... bigtime...
The only thing I'm confused about is the garbage flowing from your fingertips. People want to pay less taxes for better care... privatization! The Gov't is a monopoly if left responsible for health care. Privatization, free market, competition, is the only thing that will drive down the cost of health care in this country. The less the gov't is involved, the cheaper it will be (same as any other market!). People need to be given the choice.. that choice is what FORCES the private sector companies to compete. OVERALL, the gov't will take what they want when they want it versus people choosing one company/doctor/hospital/ins over another and ultimately deciding how much they pay THEMSELVES.
Clear?
-
I sure wouldn't argue you if we're only talking about bumps, bruises, colds, algergies, etc... but as soon as the problem becomes serious, your outlook on the system is dead ass wrong. But for minor shit, you're right, we're all covered well.
My outlook is pretty accurate. The number of people with no access to healthcare is grossly overstated.
People with serious, ongoing health problems who have no insurance probably qualify for Medicaid, Medicare, and/or their state equivalents. Does this mean everyone has access to good quality care? No. But it also doesn't require the federal government to take over the system. I think it would be a disaster.
-
wow, no exuse for this:
Quality of Health Care: Of the 191-country ranking, here are the top 50:
Top 10 quality care nations: France, Italy, San Marino, Andorra, Malta, Singapore, Spain, Oman, Austria, Japan.
2nd 10: Norway, Portugal, Monaco, Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, England, Ireland, Switzerland.
3rd 10: Belgium, Columbia, Sweden, Cyprus, German, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Israel, Morocco, Canada.
4th ten: Finland, Australia, Chile, Denmark, Dominica, Costa Rica, United States, Slovenia, Cuba, Brunei.
5th ten: New Zealand, Bahrain, Crotia, Qatar, Kuwait, Barbados, Thailand, Czech Republic, Malaysia, Poland.
(reported 21 June 2000, Bradenton Herald-Tribune).
Says the World Health Organization. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4196/is_20000621/ai_n10601004
Part of their criteria was longevity, which really has more to do with lifestyle choices than the healthcare system.
-
The only thing I'm confused about is the garbage flowing from your fingertips. People want to pay less taxes for better care...<==tell that to the ones who won't get any care at all, and the well off would still have all the options they now have so now what? privatization! The Gov't is a monopoly if left responsible for health care.<==as apposed to all the corporate monopolies around the country huh? Privatization, free market, competition, is the only thing that will drive down the cost of health care in this country.<==WRONG, Socializing the system will drop it pretty dang quick ;D The less the gov't is involved, the cheaper it will be<==WRONG, enter profit motive, it get's more expensive and prohibitive, all the people right out turned down for coverage... (same as any other market!). People need to be given the choice..As if the well off wouldn't have a choice ::) Oh brother, gimme a break... that choice is what FORCES the private sector companies to compete. OVERALL, the gov't will take what they want when they want it versus people choosing one company/doctor/hospital/ins over another and ultimately deciding how much they pay THEMSELVES.<== Nothings going to be the perfect solution for everyone, but one thing is for sure, the poor need this, this rich will always have more options at their disposal, the poor and lower class far outweigh the upper middle class and wealthy. Logical to side with the system that fits the need.
Clear?
melt baby melt... Thanks for covering the righty stance on healthcare, which we're all well versed on over and over and over... oh yea, nice try diverting from my being way off on talking about privatization in reply to your taxation comment... I'd rather of had an "oh oops, my bust" but I'll take your meltdown with equal satisfaction ;D
-
My outlook is pretty accurate. The number of people with no access to healthcare is grossly overstated.
People with serious, ongoing health problems who have no insurance probably qualify for Medicaid, Medicare, and/or their state equivalents. Does this mean everyone has access to good quality care? No. But it also doesn't require the federal government to take over the system. I think it would be a disaster.
No it's not ::) Almost 50 million uninsured is not grossly overestimated and you did indeed lay out services that only cover people for minor problems to make your point.
-
Says the World Health Organization. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4196/is_20000621/ai_n10601004
Part of their criteria was longevity, which really has more to do with lifestyle choices than the healthcare system.
you're nullifying it on that :-\ come on ::) The healthcare systems in these other countries are very active in preventive medicine, which you're right, brings into play lifestyle, just as it should. Here, a doctor can get shut down for their preventive medicine practices if they're not careful. So yea, you are much more likely to have a doc in France address your lifestyle and practice preventative than you will here, where they seem more interested in dealing with the problem only after it happens rather than preventing it.
-
No it's not ::) Almost 50 million uninsured is not grossly overestimated and you did indeed lay out services that only cover people for minor problems to make your point.
Wrong. Here is what I said:
1. "No one in the United States can be denied emergency health care." Anti-patient dumping laws require hospitals to treat anyone who shows up. They don't treat people with "minor problems" in the ER.
2. "There are a number of federal and state programs that provide preventive health for poor people." This allows poor people with health problems to have access to health care, from check-ups to surgery.
3. "Most communities have clinics that offer free immunization for kids." This doesn't deal with "minor problems" or problems at all. Immunization is about prevention.
4. "Most employers offer health care plans." Again, has nothing to do with "minor problems."
5. "Hawaii requires all employers to provide healthcare to employees who work at least 20 hours a week." Didn't say anything about "minor problems."
So how exactly did I "lay out services that only cover people for minor problems to make [my] point"?
50 million uninsured? ::)
-
you're nullifying it on that :-\ come on ::) The healthcare systems in these other countries are very active in preventive medicine, which you're right, brings into play lifestyle, just as it should. Here, a doctor can get shut down for their preventive medicine practices if they're not careful. So yea, you are much more likely to have a doc in France address your lifestyle and practice preventative than you will here, where they seem more interested in dealing with the problem only after it happens rather than preventing it.
I didn't say I was nullifying the opinion of the WHO. Just providing some context. Doctors don't know squat about prevention. They primarily treat. They don't really study nutrition in medical school. They're trained to treat people after they get sick, not prevent them from getting sick.
-
I didn't say I was nullifying the opinion of the WHO. Just providing some context. Doctors don't know squat about prevention. They primarily treat. They don't really study nutrition in medical school. They're trained to treat people after they get sick, not prevent them from getting sick.
exactly my point, the doctors that do go that route in earnest can find themselves getting into hot water. I know of one doctor who not long after starting preventive and alternative medicine quickly got targeted by the state medical board. She's lucky to be practicing today and had to fight them in court, so yea, with a treat the illness, not prevent it policy, it's no wonder Doctors in America don't know shit about it. The ones who do have to fight the system every step of the way. and insurance companies, yup, won't touch that... No wonder they do go there... Now, it's my understanding that some of these other countries embrace preventive medicine. their system, good for us... Our system, good for the pharmaceuticals :-\
-
I don't have much to add to this thread but...
Doctors = Pill Pushers
8)
-
Wrong. Here is what I said:
1. "No one in the United States can be denied emergency health care." Anti-patient dumping laws require hospitals to treat anyone who shows up. They don't treat people with "minor problems" in the ER.
2. "There are a number of federal and state programs that provide preventive health for poor people." This allows poor people with health problems to have access to health care, from check-ups to surgery.
3. "Most communities have clinics that offer free immunization for kids." This doesn't deal with "minor problems" or problems at all. Immunization is about prevention.
4. "Most employers offer health care plans." Again, has nothing to do with "minor problems."
5. "Hawaii requires all employers to provide healthcare to employees who work at least 20 hours a week." Didn't say anything about "minor problems."
So how exactly did I "lay out services that only cover people for minor problems to make [my] point"?
50 million uninsured? ::)
Yes, almost 50 million, it's your guess over the census bureau's facts:
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/007419.html
And you know full well you're leaving out a big part of the picture... Go into the emergency room with a spurting vien and yes, you're going to get patched up, go in with a serious medical condition, cancer, heart, liver, brain, your ass isn't getting treatment and you know it.
-
I don't have much to add to this thread but...
Doctors = Pill Pushers
8)
;D, yup, clueless pill pushers...
-
Wrong. Here is what I said:
1. "No one in the United States can be denied emergency health care." Anti-patient dumping laws require hospitals to treat anyone who shows up.
They don't treat people with "minor problems" in the ER.
2. "There are a number of federal and state programs that provide preventive health for poor people." This allows poor people with health problems to have access to health care, from check-ups to surgery.
3. "Most communities have clinics that offer free immunization for kids." This doesn't deal with "minor problems" or problems at all. Immunization is about prevention.
4. "Most employers offer health care plans." Again, has nothing to do with "minor problems."
5. "Hawaii requires all employers to provide healthcare to employees who work at least 20 hours a week." Didn't say anything about "minor problems."
So how exactly did I "lay out services that only cover people for minor problems to make [my] point"?
50 million uninsured? ::)
Too bad that "requirement" wasn't a "requirement" when Mrs Edith Rodriguez (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19207050/?GT1=10056) went there. ::)
It's only been 3 weeks (21 days) and already it's been conveniently shoved down the memory hole?
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=154653 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=154653)
-
Too bad that "requirement" wasn't a "requirement" when Mrs Edith Rodriguez (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19207050/?GT1=10056) went there. ::)
It's only been 3 weeks (21 days) and already it's been conveniently shoved down the memory hole?
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=154653 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=154653)
The movie also shows hospitals dumping patients. caught on video, being dumbed after having their medical tags removed, still in their hospital gowns. hmmmm....
-
The movie also shows hospitals dumping patients. caught on video, being dumbed after having their medical tags removed, still in their hospital gowns. hmmmm....
Ya, but I didn't want to go there... as it boils my blood. Imagine that... hospitals maintaining an account with a cab company to routinely pick up dazed, disoriented, heavily medicated patients, some senior citizens, ...and dump them on the streets of downtown LA on skid row, still in their hospital gowns... with no knowledge of where they are, or even what planet they are on. :'(
As bad as that is, apparently there were some medical insurance horror stories that were too painful, and too horrific to include in the movie, ...like the case of the woman who had a "wonderful policy". It covered EVERYTHING! ...including mental health as well. Well, one night she was viciously and horrifically raped. The trauma was so severe, she needed psychological counselling and therapy to deal with what happened to her. Her insurance company denied her. Since the therapy was needed as a consequence of the rape that previously occurred, ...the rape was classified as a "pre-existing condition" and on that basis, her claim for therapy was denied.
Then there was the rape victim who was denied coverage, because she was raped. Rape is a crime, and as such, her condition stemmed from an act of crime. Claim denied. That means if you get stabbed, it doesn't matter how long you've paid your insurance premiums or taken care of yourself, ...if you get stabbed or shot, or catch a stray bullet from some driveby, your insurance won't cover the operation to take the bullet out. Your poor health came about from an act of crime. CLAIM DENIED!
-
melt baby melt... Thanks for covering the righty stance on healthcare, which we're all well versed on over and over and over... oh yea, nice try diverting from my being way off on talking about privatization in reply to your taxation comment... I'd rather of had an "oh oops, my bust" but I'll take your meltdown with equal satisfaction ;D
You have got to be the dumbest poster on this thread.. at least Jag is just off in her own world. Socializing isn't going to drive the the prices down .. it's going to take MORE from the pockets of the individual. (How you see that as an improvement is testament to your lack of understanding). The rich or "productive" in society have no obligation to care for the poor or "unproductive" in the free world. That's socialism and it's already a proven failure. Prices have to go down based on what the market determines and nothing else. Everyone in this county receives medical care regardless of what they can afford already.. go much past that and it's an Orwell novel. And I liked your comment about "need".. "from each his ability, to each his need" . sound familiar?
You can choose to continue crying about a system you obviously don't understand or you can keep making me laugh with you absurd, illogical opinions.. ; D
-
Yes, almost 50 million, it's your guess over the census bureau's facts:
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/007419.html
And you know full well you're leaving out a big part of the picture... Go into the emergency room with a spurting vien and yes, you're going to get patched up, go in with a serious medical condition, cancer, heart, liver, brain, your ass isn't getting treatment and you know it.
The point I am trying to make is numbers like "50 million" uninsured implies that there are 50 million without access to healthcare. The numbers (and I looked at the link) don't clarify what kind of healthcare those without health insurance actually get, including the items I've already mentioned.
So now I'm talking about spurting veins and not "minor problems"? I'm actually talking about all kinds of health care. I neglected to mention county and state hospitals that don't charge for their services.
People with Medicare, Medicaid, state equivalents, etc. can indeed get treated for serious medical conditions. By failing to include these people in the alleged "50 million" in uninsured, the number is grossly misleading.
-
Too bad that "requirement" wasn't a "requirement" when Mrs Edith Rodriguez (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19207050/?GT1=10056) went there. ::)
It's only been 3 weeks (21 days) and already it's been conveniently shoved down the memory hole?
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=154653 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=154653)
The hospital screwed up. This wasn't patient dumping. It was malpractice.
-
The point I am trying to make is numbers like "50 million" uninsured implies that there are 50 million without access to healthcare. The numbers (and I looked at the link) don't clarify what kind of healthcare those without health insurance actually get, including the items I've already mentioned.
So now I'm talking about spurting veins and not "minor problems"? I'm actually talking about all kinds of health care. I neglected to mention county and state hospitals that don't charge for their services.
People with Medicare, Medicaid, state equivalents, etc. can indeed get treated for serious medical conditions. By failing to include these people in the alleged "50 million" in uninsured, the number is grossly misleading.
No it's not... The number of people who will be refused treatment do to a serious illness is about 50 million. I'm going with the census data over your guesswork.
-
No it's not... The number of people who will be refused treatment do to a serious illness is about 50 million. I'm going with the census data over your guesswork.
Where exactly does the census data say 50 million people "will be refused treatment" due to a "serious illness"? Sounds like guesswork to me.
-
Where exactly does the census data say 50 million people "will be refused treatment" due to a "serious illness"? Sounds like guesswork to me.
In "sicko" of course!
-
Again with the out-of-left-field references to male genitalia?
I see a definite pattern here. :-X
are you saying nordic craves more wang than Liberace and Richard Simmons combined?
-
Where exactly does the census data say 50 million people "will be refused treatment" due to a "serious illness"? Sounds like guesswork to me.
Come on, there is no guess work in knowing an unisured person is shit out of luck with with a serious illness. You're the only person doing any guesswork here.
-
In "sicko" of course!
;D
-
Come on, there is no guess work in knowing an unisured person is shit out of luck with with a serious illness. You're the only person doing any guesswork here.
I am sort of guessing. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think those numbers include people on Medicare, Medicaid, and state programs (like Quest in Hawaii)? Assuming they don't, then a person with no health insurance, but Medicaid can still be treated for a serious illness.
-
The only thing I'm confused about is the garbage flowing from your fingertips. People want to pay less taxes for better care... privatization! The Govt is a monopoly if left responsible for health care. Privatization, free market, competition, is the only thing that will drive down the cost of health care in this country. The less the govt is involved, the cheaper it will be (same as any other market!). People need to be given the choice.. that choice is what FORCES the private sector companies to compete. OVERALL, the govt will take what they want when they want it versus people choosing one company/doctor/hospital/ins over another and ultimately deciding how much they pay THEMSELVES.
Clear?
The concept that any service will be cheaper if supplied by the private sector instead of the government is seriously flawed. Private companies, and especially insurance companies, have the desire to monopolize. This idea was first recognized decades ago by Adam Smith. I live in the Netherlands, where since 2006 they introduced a form of competition between insurance companies with the idea that this will drive down insurance costs. What we have seen is that numerous of insurance companies were either part of a merger or takeover. Now we have only a few big companies, where we had dozen of ones. Basis economic theory, and practice!, tells us that the less companies the less competition. A clear example is that we have a small insurance company who offers next year an insurance for a lower price than the big companies. The result, the big companies were furious and tried to influence the smaller company!
Insurance is a complex product with a lot of barriers that leads automatically to lower competition. If you don't like your coffee at starbucks you can buy one at McDonald's. If you don't like a domestic supplier you can choose a foreign one. With insurance, the switching costs are super high. I am fairly educated but i can't make sense of the numerous small letters of different insurance companies.
In the end, only the shareholders will benefit and not the consumer