Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

 

2009-03-12 21:32:57
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7077|Noizyland

Vax wrote:

Tiny Cuba is at 5 and the united states at 6.

OMG faulty healthcare !
No-one is putting anything that simply - even Moore. However a measure of how successful a country's healthcare system is, average life expectancy and the infant mortality rates are always used. Remember; the difference between the 50th and first best countries in terms of infant mortality rates is only five which means that a difference of one between the United States and Cuba is a considerable amount. Also this is Cuba, the fact that the United States is worse off is reason enough to take notice.

And Moore may be a biased one-sided hack but he makes a point. The fact that he's fat and he's looking more and more like an old lady for some reason has nothing to do with that.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2009-03-12 21:37:01
specialistx2324
hahahahahhaa
+244|6992|arica harbour
its funny, we have the most advanced technology, the best health professional schools and our health care system is crap compared to countries like Japan and Sweden.  health care is about 3 things

burecracy, money and politics
2009-03-12 21:39:31
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6851|San Diego, CA, USA
"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."
-- François Guizot


Surely its not 'free' when you pay taxes.  Mind you do you want a government to run your healthcare when they can barely run the DMV?

At least with a private hospital you can sue if something goes wrong...you can't sue the government.
2009-03-12 21:47:39
Vax
Member
+42|6155|Flyover country

Ty wrote:

Vax wrote:

Tiny Cuba is at 5 and the united states at 6.

OMG faulty healthcare !
No-one is putting anything that simply - even Moore. However a measure of how successful a country's healthcare system is, average life expectancy and the infant mortality rates are always used. Remember; the difference between the 50th and first best countries in terms of infant mortality rates is only five which means that a difference of one between the United States and Cuba is a considerable amount. Also this is Cuba, the fact that the United States is worse off is reason enough to take notice.

And Moore may be a biased one-sided hack but he makes a point. The fact that he's fat and he's looking more and more like an old lady for some reason has nothing to do with that.
Fair enough..I have taken notice. And I already mentioned I think things need improvement here (looks at topic title) for one, it's massively overpriced. 

My point though, again, is that the usa is gigantic compared to many of these countries and has many more issues involved..vastly more diverse populations at all levels of financial means. Comparing that to small fairly homogeneous, controlled, socialist systems isn't looking at the whole picture.
2009-03-12 21:55:12
Ty
Mass Media Casualty
+2,398|7077|Noizyland

Agreed. Does that mean I can stop monitoring this thread now? This D&ST-ing is very time consuming.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
2009-03-12 21:59:23
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6708|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

That matters more for the average person than the other.
You're speaking for the average whole now? I do not accept the idea that it has to be one or the other.
Kerry, what has more impact on you?  Having cutting edge medical advances or having affordable basic care?

I don't know about you, but I just need basic care that isn't so fucking expensive.  Affordable preventive care would be especially helpful.

One of the main reasons most Americans wait till things get bad before seeing the doctor is that regular checkups aren't cheap.  If they were, we'd do them more often.  And if we did them more often, our health would generally be better as a result.
2009-03-12 22:03:13
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

That matters more for the average person than the other.
You're speaking for the average whole now? I do not accept the idea that it has to be one or the other.
Kerry, what has more impact on you?  Having cutting edge medical advances or having affordable basic care?

I don't know about you, but I just need basic care that isn't so fucking expensive.  Affordable preventive care would be especially helpful.

One of the main reasons most Americans wait till things get bad before seeing the doctor is that regular checkups aren't cheap.  If they were, we'd do them more often.  And if we did them more often, our health would generally be better as a result.
You have to consider how we got here in the first place Brian. It's a convenient excuse to exclude the driving force behind innovation.

You know I've admitted we desperately need reform. I just feel a national universal plan is just not the logical response. I consider the scale of management/funding needed and I base it on history (not just US history).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-03-12 22:04:36
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6708|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

You're speaking for the average whole now? I do not accept the idea that it has to be one or the other.
Kerry, what has more impact on you?  Having cutting edge medical advances or having affordable basic care?

I don't know about you, but I just need basic care that isn't so fucking expensive.  Affordable preventive care would be especially helpful.

One of the main reasons most Americans wait till things get bad before seeing the doctor is that regular checkups aren't cheap.  If they were, we'd do them more often.  And if we did them more often, our health would generally be better as a result.
You have to consider how we got here in the first place Brian. It's a convenient excuse to exclude the driving force behind innovation.

You know I've admitted we desperately need reform. I just feel a national universal plan is just not the logical response. I consider the scale of management/funding needed and I base it on history (not just US history).
What about a national health insurance plan?  We can have the same everything else, but just get the damn HMOs out of there.
2009-03-12 22:06:58
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Kerry, what has more impact on you?  Having cutting edge medical advances or having affordable basic care?

I don't know about you, but I just need basic care that isn't so fucking expensive.  Affordable preventive care would be especially helpful.

One of the main reasons most Americans wait till things get bad before seeing the doctor is that regular checkups aren't cheap.  If they were, we'd do them more often.  And if we did them more often, our health would generally be better as a result.
You have to consider how we got here in the first place Brian. It's a convenient excuse to exclude the driving force behind innovation.

You know I've admitted we desperately need reform. I just feel a national universal plan is just not the logical response. I consider the scale of management/funding needed and I base it on history (not just US history).
What about a national health insurance plan?  We can have the same everything else, but just get the damn HMOs out of there.
No problem so long as it is elective. That is how we ensure quality.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-03-12 22:09:28
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6708|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

No problem so long as it is elective. That is how we ensure quality.
Deal
2009-03-12 22:16:30
nickb64
formerly from OC (it's EXACTLY like on tv)[truth]
+77|5914|Greatest Nation on Earth(USA)

Harmor wrote:

you can't sue the government.
I believe you actually can, not that it would get anywhere.
2009-03-12 22:19:27
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

No problem so long as it is elective. That is how we ensure quality.
Deal
See, I'm not so unreasonable..
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-03-12 22:53:53
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|7009
In order to come anywhere near improving the health care system in America, you first need to fix the illegal immigration problem.  They don't pay taxes and they are Killing our hospitals.
2009-03-13 01:44:58
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6884|SE London

So, let me get this right...

The concensus seems to be that; the US healthcare system is exceedingly wasteful, free at point of use healthcare works better than the American system and does so in a vast range of countries across the globe, these other countries have no problem treating immigrants (and somewhere like Britain has a lot of immigrants) under their systems.

BUT, the American people do not trust the government to run the system up to a standard that the rest of the world manage to achieve (either because they are too incompetent, too greedy or simply perceived to be one or both of these), do not want to pay into a system where some of their money may be going towards immigrants and the unemployed or do not want to be paying out for those who do not take care of their health (i.e smokers, the obese etc.).

So what it comes down to seems to be an issue of trust and/or greed/selfishness. Trust in the government and selfishness in being unwilling to pay into a combined system for everyones benefit. Either that or the government truly is incapable of putting a universal healthcare plan into practice - which would really indicate an incredible level of incompetence or corruption.

Which is it? Are the American people paranoid and selfish or is the government incompetent and corrupt?
2009-03-13 07:03:44
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7065

we have free healthcare bert
2009-03-13 09:53:18
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Which country was it that provided top of the line treatment free of charge for over 300 million people again?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-03-13 09:54:12
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6832|Global Command

usmarine wrote:

we have free healthcare bert
illegal aliens do marine. I have to pay for mine.
2009-03-13 11:59:08
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6884|SE London

Kmarion wrote:

Which country was it that provided top of the line treatment free of charge for over 300 million people again?
No countries did.

The closest anyone has come would be Japan. Which provided top quality healthcare to around 130 million people.
2009-03-13 12:42:03
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7065

ATG wrote:

I have to pay for mine.
no you dont
2009-03-13 13:00:29
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6904|132 and Bush

Bertster7 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Which country was it that provided top of the line treatment free of charge for over 300 million people again?
No countries did.

The closest anyone has come would be Japan. Which provided top quality healthcare to around 130 million people.
Less than half and without nearly the diversity.. and of course they don't have the same illegal immigration problem. Again, I'm not saying no to government sponsored programs. Just do it locally. This would more accurately resemble the European model. I'd like to be able to opt out also (tax credit?).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-03-13 14:46:58
[F7F7]KiNG_KaDaFFHi
Why walk when you can dance?
+77|6890|sWEEDen
Locally and optional.....hey why not?
2009-03-13 17:09:57
Karbin
Member
+42|6597
If you were to have Universal health care in the US, (not going to happen, but we'll carry on) you would have to kill off the private heath care system.
It's one of the reasons its gotten so expensive.
A two tier system is just as bad, and what the US has right now. If you can pay, out of pocket or through a (shudder) HMO, for most things you go to the front of the line.
If you have no coverage....  well.... all of us have heard of "dumping".

If you have a good health plan, every one will question it. God help you if it's a good plan from your employer.... that the employer pays for.
A good example would be the coverage in the unionised auto industry.
Ok, that's another debate.

I do live in a country that has universal care both of my parents are alive and financially sound because of it.
Mom had a heart valve replaced, took 8 months to get it done but, it got done.
I've been told in the US it's a $100,000 operation, here it didn't cost a dime.
Dad had a stroke. No questions asked, just treated fast, fast, fast.

Here thats all under threat now, as the only hospital in my town is a "For Profit" hospital
2009-03-14 01:50:28
HollisHurlbut
Member
+51|6300

Ty wrote:

As for long waits the only thing you have to wait for is organ transplants, and that's mostly because matching donors aren't easy to come by.
O RLY?  Perhaps we could take your statement as true if we consider people who get denied treatment because the medicine is just too durned 'spensive or the patient is due too old as not having to "wait".  But oh shucks, we can't do that either because people (SHOCK!) do have to wait under commie health care, sometimes with potentially lethal results.

Oh, and let's not forget the fact that Canada's "excellent" system of government-only health care, with private care being illegal, was declared a violation of human rights recently by the Canadian Supreme Court because the waiting lines were so long and the care was so crap.  But let's not let a piddly little thing like that ruin our vision of government-run health care as a panacea for all our ills, shall we?  Press onward, young soldiers!

You'll say, I'm sure, that some care is better than no care. Perhaps that's true, for those who have none to begin with. But the rest of us who do have it will be subjected to rationing and waiting queues that we don't have now. The biggest problem with socialized health care isn't that it would (supposedly) improve the lives of the minority who are uninsured, it's that it would do it at the cost (health-wise, not just money-wise) of the rest of us who are insured now.

If you have a major accident and need immediate medical attention you will get it. They won't shove you out the door as soon as you're stable either, they'll make damn sure you've recovered first. I think it's perfectly reasonable for Americans to want this kind of sevice, the truth is they're certainly not getting it.
Oh, that is the truth, is it?  From a car rollover to ACL reconstruction to fucking cancer, I've had nothing but positive things to say about US health care.  And those are just the major things I've had to deal with.  I see no reason I should be compelled to dumb down the quality of my care for the benefit of someone else.  Am I being selfish?  Yeah, I probably am.  But it's my health we're talking about here, so why shouldn't I be selfish?

Last edited by HollisHurlbut (2009-03-14 01:54:17)

2009-03-14 01:59:42
HollisHurlbut
Member
+51|6300

Harmor wrote:

"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."
-- François Guizot
Well, I guess I never had a heart.

I'm okay with that.  I'd rather have a reason-driven brain than a wishy-washy heart.
2009-03-14 02:07:23
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6978|Canberra, AUS
So you would not object to turning away a cancer patient, just because they're poor?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard