| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/01/2009 07:43:40 PM · #726 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
We'll have Walmart healthcare. |
 |
|
|
|
09/01/2009 09:04:51 PM · #727 |
So, what I'm hearing is other developed, 1st and even a few 3rd World Nations, can deliver their citizens comprehensive Health Care...some very well, with a greater life expectancy rate BUT the USA is incapable of providing such a service? It can't be done here...is that correct?
In this thread we've heard a few folks from Britain chime in and they're content with their system and a few Canadians, as well. Personally, I know folks from Holland, Germany, New Zealand and France and they are all content...baring perfection, of course. But again, we here in the USA are incapable of creating or adopting a system that works and executing it?
I've heard people say that we can't do it but based only on conjecture...no concrete arguments, just that they say so.
Anyway, I'm more scared of corporate America than our government. They decide what we listen to, what we watch, they Super-Size us, they add Nicotine to our tobacco, they reward themselves very well for failure, they killed the Electric Car, occasionally they poison us (see: Erin Brockovich). Goldman Sachs offices are a frisbee throw away from the Capitol Building...
They need to be extricated if we ever wish to compete again. I'm willing to back anyone who's willing to take them on no matter how small or how big and rocking the insurance companies might be a good start. I know a few people they let die so I'm not anywhere near being in their corner.
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
All I have to say is WOW spoken like a true New Yorker. |
I don't believe in pride and I'm not religious but I agree with it being a deadly sin. Having said that I am proud of two things, one being my own accomplishments (and my families) the second is being a New Yorker. Nothing to be ashamed of and don't worry we'll keep thinking for you.
Message edited by author 2009-09-01 22:11:12. |
|
|
|
09/01/2009 10:39:34 PM · #728 |
Not to long ago I read an article about life expectancy in the US being lower than other nations with nationalized healthcare. The point of the article was; is it due to the quality of healthcare? The conclusion was US healthcare system was NOT lagging compared with other developed nations with nation healthcare and the reasons for the lower life expectancy had to do with the diverse amount of people in the US and how each ethnic group has vastly different life expectancy. It also touched on the subject of crime. When they removed those variables from the equation they theorized that the US would have an equal or longer life expediency. In addition the concluded that the US healthcare system was not the cause for the lower life expectancy.
Now I'm trying to remember this article and off to see if I can find it so other can see for themselves and draw there own conclusion.
ETA:
Disclaimer: I'm not saying this is true but wanted to mention an article I read. I hope I can find it.
Edit: typo's
Message edited by author 2009-09-02 03:50:17. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 07:01:35 AM · #729 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If government is so "inefficient" then why is the administrative overhead for MediCare about 5% while for the private health insurance industry it runs 20-30%? |
Because you believe what they tell you. |
...and of course, you views you are based on concrete and irrefutable facts.
Ray |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 08:45:32 AM · #730 |
| Just heard a report that there are now six health care industry lobbyists for each member of Congress ... of course I'm sure their only concern the public's health and the nation's solvency ... |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 08:49:18 AM · #731 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
|
I love the pic ken
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 09:20:00 AM · #732 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If government is so "inefficient" then why is the administrative overhead for MediCare about 5% while for the private health insurance industry it runs 20-30%? |
Because you believe what they tell you. |
...and of course, you views you are based on concrete and irrefutable facts.
Ray |
Do you really think the govt can run anything with 5% admin overhead? If that 5% number came from Bush or Fox news would you believe it?
Edit to add:
Didn't take long to find this. It's from a conservative site so i'm sure you won't believe it (or probably even look at it), but the 5% vs 20% is fuzzy math just like the 50 million number.
//www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/wm2505.cfm
Message edited by author 2009-09-02 09:31:55. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 09:24:39 AM · #733 |
One problem with the US is people are still watching th Communist News Network.....(CNN)
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 09:53:32 AM · #734 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
One problem with the US is people are still watching th Communist News Network.....(CNN) |
Yeah...and FOX is the gospel?
CNN's fine but MSNBC on the other hand IS way left.
The one difference between FOX and MSNBC is that FOX's clowns (Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck) take themselves seriously whereas Rachael Maddow and Keith Olbermann do a lot of schtick and present their brand in a joking manor. Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck are so disjointed they way they stretch things and leap to far off conclusions is stunning. Michelle Malkin (a hottie) Anne Coulter, Laura Ingram are pretty unstable and sadly people sop it up. CNN has some far left talking heads but not nearly as unhinged as FOX's Hosts and guests.
If Amnesia were an Olympic event FOX commentators would win the Gold, Silver and Bronze.
Hannity the other night was trying to bait some bimbo actress who was for Health Care reform by lacing words from the Communist Manifesto ("to each according to his need...") into his question. He was trying to be sly and it was incredibly painful to watch. Again, it was a ridiculous stretch but not below him. Nothings below that organization it's an ideologues paradise.
Message edited by author 2009-09-02 10:01:03. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 10:28:37 AM · #735 |
All the news stations are horrible. However, FOX does report way more of both sides then the other guys.....
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 10:44:02 AM · #736 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
FOX does report way more of both sides then the other guys..... |
!!! |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 11:14:48 AM · #737 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
All the news stations are horrible. However, FOX does report way more of both sides then the other guys..... |
LOL The sad part is I think you mean it. Fox still argues all of the myths that have been proven wrong about Obama for the last year. Tell us the one about the death panels again? lots of funny stuff |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 11:22:10 AM · #738 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
However, FOX does report way more of both sides then the other guys..... |
Wow
Not that it isn't already obvious, but I'm taking a couple of journalism classes and the general consensus among all of the professors is that FOX is horribly one sided and is unfortunately the most watched not because of its accuracy, but because people generally like the drama and some are actually falling for it. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 11:59:44 AM · #739 |
So in your opinion who has the most unbiased news coverage on TV?????
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 12:13:09 PM · #740 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
So in your opinion who has the most unbiased news coverage on TV????? |
On TV? I really can't think one that's completely unbiased. I watch different ones and form my own opinions. I don't watch FOX at all anymore, though. IMO, they are the worst.
ETA: I also listen to NPR and read the New York Times
Message edited by author 2009-09-02 12:15:54. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 12:15:01 PM · #741 |
Originally posted by cynthiann:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
So in your opinion who has the most unbiased news coverage on TV????? |
On TV? I really can't think one that's completely unbiased. I watch different ones and form my own opinions. I don't watch FOX at all anymore, though. IMO, they are the worst. |
Bill Maher :-)
R. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 12:35:34 PM · #742 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
So, what I'm hearing is other developed, 1st and even a few 3rd World Nations, can deliver their citizens comprehensive Health Care...some very well, with a greater life expectancy rate BUT the USA is incapable of providing such a service? It can't be done here...is that correct? |
Does life expectancy have a direct correlation to Health Care? I'm sure there's some factoring, yes, but I also wonder how much life "style" impacts the general health and life expectancy of Americans? I think overall, we're a bit on the heavy side and could lose a few pounds. Maybe get off the sofa, watch less TV, and play less video games, walk or ride a bike to work - not to mention all the wonderful junk food available to us. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 02:58:46 PM · #743 |
Sure, let's just let those do-gooders in corporate America keep running the health care system ...
Pfizer to pay record $2.3B penalty over promotions
Originally posted by Cited Article:
Pfizer Inc., the world's largest drug maker, will pay a record $2.3 billion civil and criminal penalty over unlawful prescription drug promotions.
Announcing the settlement Wednesday, the Justice Department said that it included the largest criminal fine in U.S. history ΓΆ€” $1.2 billion. The agreement also included a criminal forfeiture of $105 million.
Authorities called Pfizer a repeat offender, noting it is the fourth such settlement of government charges in the last decade. They said the government will monitor the company's conduct for the next five years to rein in the abuses....
Loucks said that even as Pfizer was negotiating deals on past misconduct, they were continuing to violate the very same laws with other drugs. |
Note that even though this included criminal offenses, no one seems to be going to jail ... somehow, I suspect if any of us had accumulated $105 million in ill-gotten gains we'd be on our way at least to our local "Club Fed." |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 03:22:19 PM · #744 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
So, what I'm hearing is other developed, 1st and even a few 3rd World Nations, can deliver their citizens comprehensive Health Care...some very well, with a greater life expectancy rate BUT the USA is incapable of providing such a service? It can't be done here...is that correct? |
Does life expectancy have a direct correlation to Health Care? I'm sure there's some factoring, yes, but I also wonder how much life "style" impacts the general health and life expectancy of Americans? I think overall, we're a bit on the heavy side and could lose a few pounds. Maybe get off the sofa, watch less TV, and play less video games, walk or ride a bike to work - not to mention all the wonderful junk food available to us. |
And those reasons are EXACTLY why health care cannot be a 'right' for every citizen. If you can get American citizens to live a healthy lifestyle, THEN, and only then, should health care be guaranteed. As long as the country sits on its ass, the 'right' to health care is unaffordable. Add to the fact that this entire stupid plan ONLY seeks to give health insurance, not health care and you have one largely stupid, unsustainable, unaffordable plan that is set up for failure before it even hits the ground. Flood the health care market with an additional 47 million patients or so and see how much care all of us really get in the end.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 03:25:57 PM · #745 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Sure, let's just let those do-gooders in corporate America keep running the health care system ...
Pfizer to pay record $2.3B penalty over promotions
Originally posted by Cited Article:
Pfizer Inc., the world's largest drug maker, will pay a record $2.3 billion civil and criminal penalty over unlawful prescription drug promotions.
Announcing the settlement Wednesday, the Justice Department said that it included the largest criminal fine in U.S. history ΓΆ€” $1.2 billion. The agreement also included a criminal forfeiture of $105 million.
Authorities called Pfizer a repeat offender, noting it is the fourth such settlement of government charges in the last decade. They said the government will monitor the company's conduct for the next five years to rein in the abuses....
Loucks said that even as Pfizer was negotiating deals on past misconduct, they were continuing to violate the very same laws with other drugs. |
Note that even though this included criminal offenses, no one seems to be going to jail ... somehow, I suspect if any of us had accumulated $105 million in ill-gotten gains we'd be on our way at least to our local "Club Fed." |
...and Ted Kennedy killed a girl without ant repercussions. Your point?
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 03:40:56 PM · #746 |
It's been shown that one of the most effective ways to change adverse "lifestyle choices" (such as tobacco use) is for people to hear about it from their health care provider ... which many don't have access to. Doesn't it occur to you that one of the reasons we have problems with obesity, hypertension, diabetes, smoking, etc., is precisely because so many of the people affected haven't had access to health care, especially preventive care? That and the unregulated marketing of unhealthful products? Ever listen to an ad for ARCO's AM/PM mini-markets? They go something like
Originally posted by Ad Paraphrase:
"I've already got two hot dogs and fries and a 64oz soda -- what do I need a candy bar for?"
"You can never have too much of a good thing." |
Note that 64 ounces of typical soda (I'm looking at a Squirt bottle) will comprise approximately 800 calories (about 40% of the "standard" allowance), totally derived from the 200 grams (over 50 teaspoons) of sugar it contains, with no other nutritional value.
Message edited by author 2009-09-02 15:41:40. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 03:44:13 PM · #747 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
...and Ted Kennedy killed a girl without ant repercussions. Your point? |
So one (perceived) miscarriage of justice concerning one individual's conduct excuses the rape of America in the name of corporate profiteering? Otherwise, your point is completely non-germane. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 03:55:46 PM · #748 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
And those reasons are EXACTLY why health care cannot be a 'right' for every citizen. If you can get American citizens to live a healthy lifestyle, THEN, and only then, should health care be guaranteed. As long as the country sits on its ass, the 'right' to health care is unaffordable. Add to the fact that this entire stupid plan ONLY seeks to give health insurance, not health care and you have one largely stupid, unsustainable, unaffordable plan that is set up for failure before it even hits the ground. Flood the health care market with an additional 47 million patients or so and see how much care all of us really get in the end. |
You have a wonderful point. There are approx 880,000 registered doctors in the US. This is for all fields. According to my brother (hes a doctor) he has more patient than he know what to do with right now. Add a ton more and then who is really getting hurt here. If this bill passes and goes into effect, expect extremely long line at every doctor office and hospital. Also expect hospital beds to be full. Obama has also said that part of his plan is to train / hire more doctors to fill the void. The only thing that he has not mentioned is depending on the field, medical school takes around 15 years. So what do we do between now and then...I guess we could just not get sick or injured. We will end up bleeding out on the sidewalk...
Message edited by author 2009-09-02 15:57:13.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2009 03:56:34 PM · #749 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
It's been shown that one of the most effective ways to change adverse "lifestyle choices" (such as tobacco use) is for people to hear about it from their health care provider ...
... Doesn't it occur to you that one of the reasons we have problems with obesity, hypertension, diabetes, smoking, etc., is precisely because so many of the people affected haven't had access to health care |
That's making a HUGE assumption that many people in the group that are excessively overweight, etc... are going to get their tail off the sofa, make an appointment, and physically go to a doctor.
Personally, I think we (Americans) have gotten soft, overweight and lazy. The numbers are crazy. Even kids are overweight and not getting enough exercise. I'm active in scouting and a recent study of kids & adults showed that over 50% are overweight and many near obese. One thing that BSA is implementing is that kids and adults that want to attend national BSA adventure camps must meet weight guidelines (based on height/weight scale).
Anyway, a person must have a desire to help themself before they're going to seek out assistance. It's not from a lack of health care in many cases, that unhealthy lifestyle choices are being made. |
|
|
|
09/02/2009 04:00:30 PM · #750 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
...and Ted Kennedy killed a girl without ant repercussions. Your point? |
Are you suggesting that we get complety rid of the justice systenm, because one [insert negative word here] got away way too easily, we can't prosecute anyone else? Ted Kenedy got away, so we have to let everybody else get away? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 09:15:38 PM EDT.
