Senate Health Care Bill
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=183670
Printed Date: 22 January 2026 at 6:55pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Senate Health Care Bill
Posted By: oldsoldier
Subject: Senate Health Care Bill
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:20pm
|
Another attempt at shifting money from the priivate sector to the government. More taxes for less available care (no way you can increase the patient base and lower the physician base and not cut services in some way, means, manner or form). On top of that nay private purchase of mediacl coverage, or employer purchased mediacal coverage will have a 40% exsize tax placed on it. That alone ensures that the employer provided health care will dissappear.
And to top it all of there will still be 4% (14,400,000) unisurable Americans for some reason. Also the mandated cut ($300B) in Medicare for the most needed (in the terms of health care)group the elderly also shows how that voter base is no longer important, and the new focus is on the baby boomers. Current Medicare programs are broke, and the elderly are suffering already under a Government run health care system, throw in the VA, and the proven 'success' rate of Government healthcare should be suspect. Read bill for yourself if you have approximately 34 hours of spare time. http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/11/18/hcbill.pdf - http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/11/18/hcbill.pdf 2012 can not happen fast enough. ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:25pm
Me sees a trend.------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:28pm
| Hiiiigh hopes, you've got hiiiiigh hopes! |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:29pm
Right. They better leave our amazing health care system alone! After all, what do you think we are? Scientists? No leave that fancy stuff to Cuba.------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Rofl_Mao
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:31pm
| So don't have a kid in Romania! |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:46pm
Sneaky, if you had been paying attention to an oldpbnoob/peter parker thread you would have noted that that the relationship between the polls you posted and U.S. lifestyle choices makes the poll numbers by themselves a less than stellar measure of health care effectiveness.
------------- 
|
oldsoldier wrote:Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:48pm
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:52pm
Valid question; for me personally it has to do with having seen what happens when the government runs health care. (And being worse off for the experience.) -------------
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 8:57pm
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 9:33pm
Also it is important to note that groups like the AARP support healthcare reform. ------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 10:09pm
|
With Medicare, why are we going to repeat the exercise. It has been proven that the Government can not manage direct funds, nor operrate a health care system, see Medicare and the Veterans Administration Health Care System.
Explain the Medicare cuts, when the elderly are the most in need health care class? And once on fixed incomes how are they going to support through higher taxation this new plan. Guess the won't buy healthcare and get the excellant healthcare the Bureau of Prisons offers for free. Beats a elderly home that won't be approved for assisted care. FCI Rochester, MN has an excellant facility for healthcare for elderly inmates. Just cell grandma and grandpa together and no more problems. Or the Logans Run appraoch, pick an age ...oh say 65 and the state will painlessly put them out of thier misery Two of the reasons our life expectancy/birth mortality rates are high is our non-healthy lifestyles (show me an overweight Japanese other than Sumo) and American woman are decidingf on childbirth way later in life where the risk factors are higher, and the I want the baby delivered on Tuesday mentality of the profesional working woman at 40 (medically the best child rearing age is between 14 and 28). The NHS in Englans has boards of non-medical personnel that determine your needs based on cost vs use for society. And we will end up with the same. 70 year old grandpa has a heart attack, some board somewhere will determine if the cost of the care and medications is worth it, and the numbers will not be good for ole grandpa. -------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 10:14pm
|
Can't wait till the day you all get the bill for this and stand in line for your "free" healthcare. Turn around you will not see Nancy or Harry in line with you. Socialist decide what is good for you not good for them. We will end up with a tiered system and you Joe Populace will not have available to you the same standard of healthcare the new Aristocracy plans for themselves.
And to paraphrase Margeret Thatcher. "Socialism is good until the Socialist has no more of your money to spend on themselves." Look at the tiered systems in these paradises on your charts. A very distinct line between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 10:21pm
|
Why are you so dramatic about everything and think everything is going to some drastic huge ridiculous push to some communist artistocracy fascist totalitarian state?
------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:01pm
What about the 15% of Americans- more people than the populations of many of these countries - who 'Have not' any health coverage whatsoever? If you want tot talk about 'haves' and 'have nots' you need to start looking in your own backyard first. I'd rather a bit of inequality than a number of people who have literally no health care option. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: *Stealth*
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:02pm
|
DOOM GLOOM! ------------- |
Posted By: Ben Grimm
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:32pm
|
So, to summarize OS' arguments:
1. ZOMG they are expanding government healthcare insurance!
2. ZOMG they are reducing government healthcare insurance!
Hmm... ------------- It's Clobberin' Time! |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:36pm
|
I don't think the public option bill is going to pass the senate. There are at least 6 Democrats right now that have already said they won't even let it get to debate unless the public option is withdrawn. I think Joe Lieberman probably has the most common sense I've seen on this issue thus far. He stated that a health care reform bill needs to do just that, reform the health care system, not turn it on its head. He stated on NPR the other day that while he would allow the bill to get to the floor for debate, if needed, he would side with republicans to keep a public option plan from going through. He said that he felt that reforms such as not allowing insurers to deny claims, create artificial benefit caps, or gouging clients on premiums due to "pre-existing conditions" as well as forcing insurance companies to group individual policy holders to lower rates would be a much more sensible and cost effective move for not only the government, but the masses as well. He also wants insurance companies to lose their trust exemption status and for tighter regulations to be put in place. I personally think that these are far better moves than a public option and am glad to see that Lieberman, who tends to sway the moderate vote his way, feels this way as well. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:39pm
1) This is incorrect. There is no decision based on "use for society." 2) The first part of your statement, boards of non-medical personnel determining what kind of treatment you get, yeah, that already happens here. We just call it an HMO. And instead of a decision based on this fake "use for society," it is based on how much money the company stands to lose if they have to pay you to get well. I know socialized medicine is used as an OOGA BOOGA now-a-days, but how is your health care being determined by a spreadsheet in an insurance office any less frightening? Also, as the final point to everyone in this thread - a point that I will continue to make every OGGA BOOGA SOCIALIZED MEDICINE thread that OS makes - OS is the proud user of VA health care. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:45pm
That's a pretty enlightened viewpoint. That said, I do think there are plurality of issues still needing to be addressed, not least of which is that some people in this country literally cannot afford health care. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:47pm
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Ben Grimm
Date Posted: 19 November 2009 at 11:52pm
Simple:
"Care" isn't measured by quantity, but by quality.
Have nurses to basic procedures instead of physicians. Have physical therapists do other tasks instead of physicians. Other healthcare systems get by with fewer physicians per patient because their non-MD staff do more.
I haven't received BETTER care just because a physician gave me a shot instead of a nurse - I have just received more expensive care.
Imagine a military where every task was done by officers, or a corporation where everybody was a vice president - that is no way to leverage knowledge and education.
Then, let's get the most out of our expensive equipment: Have fewer MRI machines - right now, many MRI machines (and other medical equipment) are not used anywhere near max capacity, but are basically kept on standby, so that nobody has to wait five minutes for a scan of their sprained ankle. MRI machines not in use are a complete and utter waste.
My dentist's office now has an x-ray machine in every room. This is completely ridiculous. I used to walk ten steps over to the x-ray room, and then walk back to my chair. We now use four x-ray machines to take the exact same number of dental x-rays, just so we won't have to walk down the hall. Total and complete waste.
I haven't received better dental care just because I can get x-rays in my chair - I have just received more expensive healthcare.
Put the money where it will do the most good. Instead of testing me for everything under the sun every time I see a doctor, test 500 more people for something that they might actually have.
Don't jump straight to the extreme and expensive procedures. Instead of sending me straight to surgery, have me at least try a couple of exercises first.
Healthcare isn't a race to see who can perform the most procedures, it's about getting the most bang for the buck. Healthcare is a scarce resource, and we are squandering it.
As to increasing the patient count - of course this will reduce costs, on a per-patient basis. Doesn't increasing volume always decrease the per-unit cost?
There is of course no guaranteed cost-savings, but the problem with our system isn't that we don't provide enough healthcare, or that we provide too much healthcare - it's that we foolishly misallocate our precious healthcare dollars.
The thing is that reading these bills in a vacuum is meaningless. Bills are not storybooks - you can't just read them through and think you will know what just happened. They interrelate to other rules and regulations, both ones that are referenced and ones that are not.
Easy (and ridiculous) example:
AB1
The legislature hereby declares that USC 42-356.1(d) be amended by removing the word "not".
The end
Downloading a large complex bill like this and just reading it like it is a newspaper is a total waste of time.
------------- It's Clobberin' Time! |
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 2:13am
This is the part that always confounds me. People constantly declare that they cannot afford health care. Now, for those who are so economically depressed that they can't afford housing, let alone full price food or health care, the US gov't already covers many of them under Medicaid. While eligibility requirements are up to the individual states, if you're dirt poor and need medical coverage, Medicaid is there and you should apply for it. Furthermore, many people shout "think of the children!" at the top of their lungs. Even if a parent isn't eligible for medicaid, their children might be. Furthermore, each state in the US has a S-CHIPS insurance system which is available to all under-privileged children and is based on the ability to pay. In short, the state offers insurance for children (usually up to the age of 18 or through their final year of public school) regardless of how much you can pay into the system. Many times this insurance is better than many paid private plans because it is usually grouped together with PEIA (government) style insurance plans. For those who don't qualify for medicaid or medicare I've always wondered this. Have you thought about getting a second job? Something part-time to cover something every bit as important as your health? Working part-time at McDonald's at minimum wage for 3 shifts a month would cover the cost of a good private PPO plan if you are an average male of 30 years of age or younger. That's 24 hours, one day's worth of time a month, to ensure that you are insured. Hell, go work as a paintball ref 3 Saturdays a month and you'll at least make that much (I got paid $10/hour when I did it back in college, and that was ages ago!) Almost everyone that works in my field who isn't in a managerial position works 2 jobs. Cooks work AM shifts at one restaurant and PM at another. Servers are teachers, police officers, administrative assistants, marketing analysts, etc during the day and serving you your NY Strip by night. If they can do it, so can the poor slob working a dead-end day-job who can't "afford" insurance on one income. This is the United States of America, the land of opportunity! Everyone who has ever come here from somewhere else looking for a better life was prepared to work their asses of to get that life! Only recently has the idea of working one job for one income become the norm. The age of entitlement came about in the 1960's with the hippie generation and guess what, they're the same people who are trying to push through the public option as we speak. I'm not saying that our system isn't in need of reform, or even that it isn't "broken" to some extent. But the fact of the matter is that common sense isn't prevailing in the debate of health care. It has become so polarized that we've come to an all-or-nothing stance on both sides of the aisle. Meanwhile people like Lieberman who are suggesting smart solutions in the form of reform through regulation are being ignored. There are so many nay-sayers on both sides that remove credibility from their arguments by their actions that it's not even funny. On the pro-public option side you have throngs of people that are the equivalent of the people you see in trailer parks who complain about their living conditions and how poor they are but they have 5 ATVs parked outside next to a Harley and at least two Mustang GTs/Camero SSs/Dodge Charger RTs. On the other you have the trust-fund kids and the ultra-rich who not only don't worry about money, but usually have 100% coverage by their companies/firms and don't want their own version of "free health care" to come to an end. One side wants a hand-out, the other doesn't want to end their own semi-hand-out (let's face it, they technically work for their coverage, I know I do). Can we really listen to these people? Of course not. We need to listen to some common sense. People need to take responsibility for their actions, including what they spend their money on, and companies need to take responsibility for the way they treat people. We don't let most companies change rules that affect the lives of millions at their own whim, why should we let the insurers do so? Regulation (as much as it kills my Reaganite founding to say so) is the best answer to this problem. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 6:00am
What basic procedures are you talking about? In all the years I've been in hospitals and doctor's offices, I have never ever seen a MD give an injection. Never.
Can I get some citations for that? The hospitals I've been in (one very metropolitan and one that wasn't) have their MRI machines running 24/7. Even when there aren't any doctors at the hospital after hours to read the results, they send the scans to Australia to have an MD read them there and send back the diagnosis. Far cheaper than keeping more MDs staffed around the clock. Heck, when the smaller hospital can't keep up with MRI needs, they send a portable unit via semi truck to help out.
I've been in a few dentist offices as well. Only the smaller practice where there is one or two hygienist's chairs as well as the Dentist's own room may have one x-ray room, but now when you have up to 8-10 chairs, having one x-ray room isn't feasible. I can't imagine people having to wait for an x-ray when it can be done right there on the spot. It saves the patient's time and allows more patients to be seen and cared for. It is convenient for the patient as well as the Dentist. The x-ray is done in the room, and in a matter of seconds can be brought up on the monitor for quick reading. No musical chairs. No waiting.
This just sounds like broad generalizations. If this is in anyway indicitive of the care you've received, exercise your right as a patient and find another physician or at best go alternative and see a Chiropractor. Not all MDs shove their patients into the, "I'm going to test you for-everything-under-the-sun" after every visit. I'll give an example. Before I knew I had a herniated disk in my lower back, my MD went through some methodology. First he started me on pain meds to see if my back spasms would stop enough where the muscles would relax and stop pulling on my spine. After a month when the symptoms didn't go away I had a test that checked my nerve impulses from my back down my left leg. That narrowed down the problem and the hypothesis was that I had a disk out of place pressing a nerve. Next was an MRI to confirm and then surgery to correct it. Right from the get-go, he didn't send me willy nilly for every test in the world. It was a process of elimination over several months.
If that is the case, why are auto mechanics still so expensive? Think about it for a second. Cost is no option right now. Everyone has free healthcare with the current amount of physicians. How many people are going to receive care and when? Right now, there are thousands of MDs that aren't taking new patients. Where are all these people going to find care now they can afford it on the government's dime? What about the people that have gone to their MD with or without insurance before? What kind of care can they expect now?
I agree that healthcare needs to be fixed, but not with the current plan that the Dems want to pass. They're pushing it too hard and too fast before anyone has a chance to understand what the bill is about. It needs more analysis, debate and ammendments before this thing becomes a law that can have severe negative economic ramifications to our country.
------------- 
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 7:17am
|
Don't let the public find out what is in the bill...
Hurry and pass it.
Remember, we were promised the discussions on it would be on cspan....
Oh, and nice job pushing mamograms to age 50.
And now they want cervicle checks to go to 21.
Yeah, less is more.
And the people that will now die from this new "increase" in healthcare, that is all OK to the liberals, anything to cut costs.
But, just don't call it a death panel.
(hmm, they make decisions that cause people to die... Naa that isn't a death panel). ------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 8:24am
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:06am
|
These health care threads are headache inducing.
I would like to see more public discussion of this bill via elected officials. I feel like politics are something we the people sit back and watch like football, and this while health care dilemma exemplified that to me. The government has made little effort to determine what the public wants, or even tell the public what it's doing, buy instead has determined what I need and how I need it. That's really my two cents with this whole thing, I don't even begin to understand this bill enough to argue it, and I really doubt most of anyone here does. ------------- 
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:12am
|
$493,600,000,000 in additional taxes are in the senate bill... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:19am
|
source?
------------- 
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:29am
|
http://www.frc.org/washingtonupdate/whats-not-to-dislike - http://www.frc.org/washingtonupdate/whats-not-to-dislike ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:38am
|
more facts... http://keithhennessey.com/2009/11/18/reid-tax-increases/ - http://keithhennessey.com/2009/11/18/reid-tax-increases/ ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:44am
|
That's funny, every other site I have seen has said 370b. Either, let's do a little math. 463,600,000,000 in new taxes /10, the number of years over which this revenue is to be collected = 46,360,000,000 the amount of revenue to be collected per year /305,000,000 , the population of the United States = $152, the amount your new government health care plan will cost, per person, per year. What a rip off! -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 9:52am
|
To be fair Eville, not everyone pays taxes. Though I don't care about such a stupid small amount. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:01am
|
My concern is NO government program has to date fallen within the 'projected cost' usually the cost is 2X to 5X more expensive once implimented. Medicare is broke because it ran over government cost estimates, the VA is broke because it ran over cost estimates, take a guess what the reasoning will be for this new fiasco. -------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:14am
|
But, the taxes start when the bill is passed...
and "healthcare" doesn't start until 2014...
I guess that is no big deal either? ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:21am
|
Remmeber most of the individuals here are still under parents umbrella, and will not see this for what it is until they are paying the taxes and the insurance companies for health care till 2014. Confiscation of wealth with the power of government behind them, we fought a revolution over the same thing in 1776. Today's youth are just followers, trained to be followers, and allways will be just that, for to do otherwise actually means a commitment, something not in thier vocabulary.
BTW: Notice the VA come work for the VA commercials on TV. If government run healthcare was so good why are doctors and other medical profesionals leaving the VA as soon as they can and persueing private practice? (Guess being a medical profesional under a set payscale is not as good as the government says it is.) And why the commercials and recruiting push if the system is that great? -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:37am
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:39am
What the hell was that for? I wasn't even on your lawn or listening to my loud rock and roll! -------------
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:42am
|
Gotta love sweeping generalizations about how the youths of today can't think for themselves and are too dumb to have intelligent opinions.
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:51am
|
yeah, because we see so many instances that prove otherwise here on the T&O... oh wait. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:54am
|
Nice.
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:57am
|
Jmac3- Taxation without representation, the Tea Tax, the Stamp Act, England used the colonies purely as a tax resource when needed giving little or nothing in return. Our Congress now can be considered the "King" demanding more in taxes, with little in return.
I do find the sheeple instinct of youth more prevelant today than the past few generations. A true 'me' generation. For in the past the 'man' was the enmey of youth, today they blindly follow what the 'man' says. We'll be fighting in the streets With our children at our feet And the morals that they worship will be gone And the men who spurred us on Sit in judgment of all wrong They decide and the shotgun sings the song I'll tip my hat to the new constitution Take a bow for the new revolution Smile and grin at the change all around me Pick up my guitar and play Just like yesterday And I'll get on my knees and pray We don't get fooled again Don't get fooled again Change it had to come We knew it all along We were liberated from the fall that's all But the world looks just the same And history ain't changed 'Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war I'll tip my hat to the new constitution Take a bow for the new revolution Smile and grin at the change all around me Pick up my guitar and play Just like yesterday And I'll get on my knees and pray We don't get fooled again Don't get fooled again No, no! I'll move myself and my family aside If we happen to be left half alive I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky For I know that the hypnotized never lie Do ya? There's nothing in the street Looks any different to me And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye And the parting on the left Is now the parting on the right And the beards have all grown longer overnight I'll tip my hat to the new constitution Take a bow for the new revolution Smile and grin at the change all around me Pick up my guitar and play Just like yesterday Then I'll get on my knees and pray We don't get fooled again Don't get fooled again No, no! YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! Meet the new boss Same as the old boss -------------
|
Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 10:57am
|
FE's actually right on the front-loaded costs of Health Care. You have to add in the costs during the period which you won't be receiving coverage to the period where you will be receiving coverage. This makes the cost per person much, much higher. ------------- <Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.> |
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 11:01am
Indeed, because the general quality of today's youth can be accurately gauged by their conduct in their off-hours on an anonymous internet forum where NOTHING said or done has any impact whatsoever on real life. Never mind that we're only here when we aren't in class, or working, or volunteering, or overseas on military service or any of that. Nice painting us all with the same brush. I see what you did there. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 11:07am
|
Percentage man, percentages....Brihard you missed it....sorry..every generation has the 10%'rs who do it right.
Let the games begin: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/11/the-100-million-health-care-vote.html - http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/11/the-100-million-health-care-vote.html -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 11:09am
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 11:16am
|
Speaking of the "man" blindly following....
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/68451-jackson-you-cant-vote-against-healthcare-and-call-yourself-a-black-man - http://thehill.com/homenews/house/68451-jackson-you-cant-vote-against-healthcare-and-call-yourself-a-black-man =
Jesse Jackson: 'You can't vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man' ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 11:21am
|
I take it you do not understand the language and lexicons from the era, The 'man" was the name of authority, and used is many cultures, White, Black, Hispanic, etc
Just as youth of today has developed a slang of its own, the meaning of each phrase could mean something differant to the section of the culture that uses it. And we are paying more for less, as the schools, roads, and other programs are deteriorating, and more is demanded, and confiscated by force. Taxes a destroying the culture as industry, jobs, etc flee the higher taxes. NY is dieing because of taxation, CA also, no-one works for free, and profit is what creates the bussiness enviornment, low taxes booming economy, high taxes stagnant or declining economy. In 1961 in order to boost the economy JFK spoke on lowering taxes, they were and he was praised, In 1981 Ronald Reagan spoke on lowering taxes and he was demonized by the same group that praised JFK. You explain it? -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 11:25am
Jesse Jackson? You might as well link an article quoting Sarah Palin. I give her more credit than him. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 12:37pm
That's all nice and good for a 3rd grade history class, gives them a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside. Unfortunately it's not very accurate. The founding fathers were more than just patriots and activists and all that, they were smugglers. Britain came in and tried to put an end to their smuggling activities. They started losing money from the smuggling operations so they worked up the colonists, sensationalizing new taxes and tyranny for their personal gain until the war broke out. This is why the contemporary tea parties really do have a fitting historical basis. The tea act of 1773 would have actually lowered the price of tea for the colonists. Many of the founding fathers made their livings in part by smuggling tea. If the colonists would have accepted the less expensive tea from Britain, the fathers would have been put out of business. So what did they do? They organized the tea parties to turn away the cheap tea by convincing the colonists they were being screwed over by taxes when they actually would have been saving money. Sounds an awful lot like the republican party today. Business men and people with close ties to corporations getting nervous because new laws might make them slightly less wealthy so they work people up into a frenzy over new unfair taxes and the tyrannical government, all for their personal gain, knowing that the people would be better off with what they are fighting against. And people or "sheeple" like you blindly follow along with it. -------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 12:47pm
So what are the other 90% of your generation up to these days? Or the other 90% of your children's generation? The vast majority of youth are carrying along perfectly productive and pro-social paths. I work with young offenders three days a week; I've seen that *actual* small subset of kids who are genuinely screwed up and useless to society. I'd say if arbitrary percentages must be pulled out of thin air, it's 90% who get it right and maybe 10% who get it wrong. And that includes the members of this site. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 12:59pm
|
I'd also add what you started to hint at Brihard. I consider a good amount of the younger forumers to be pretty bright individuals that are more than capable of forming their own opinions and arguing on behalf of them. I mean, we get into some pretty good debates with many highschool and college age people actively contributing. Saying that the majority of youth today are followers with no real life experience, as OS repeatedly does, does these forumers a disservice. I'd say we're better informed and have more instant access to information than any other generation in history. ------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 3:36pm
says the man who goes crying every time someone says something bad about him ------------- 
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 3:37pm
 ------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: adrenalinejunky
Date Posted: 20 November 2009 at 5:39pm
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/science/22tier.html?_r=1&hpw - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/science/22tier.html?_r=1&hpw |
Posted By: Ben Grimm
Date Posted: 22 November 2009 at 1:04am
I have long since lost count of the number of shots I have received from MDs. My kids' pediatrician also gives all his own shots.
Only my own experiences, again. I have had a number of MRIs and CAT-scans over the years. On each occasion the doctor walked in, looked at my chart, ordered the scan, and 30 seconds later I was being wheeled off to the machine. I have never waited a second for a scan, I have never had to have a scan scheduled. Probability analysis tells me that those machines didn't all happen to free up just in time for me.
Also hearsay from people who should know: physicians and hospital administrators. I hear the same story from most physicians I know and from the handful of admins I know - their MRI machines are kept busy enough to pay for themselves, but not so busy that people have to wait, because then patients will go to the competition.
I have also worked on medical equipment lease programs, and in that context had plentiful discussions with the people who sell and finance medical machines (including MRI machines). Same story - the hospitals want to make sure there is little if any wait for a scan.
I could be wrong, but I have diverse and reasonably voluminous data that suggests that I am not.
And radiology outsourcing is certainly a big cost-saver. But are you sure the scans are read in Australia? Unless there US-certified MDs down under, there could be a real legal issue there. This has been a real issue for radiologists I know, who have been trying to set up of full-scale foreign outsourcing. Medicine is still a highly regulated industry, and unlicensed doctors is pretty much a no-no.
I think you just made my point for me.
I presume you missed my earlier post in a different thread about my experience with my golfer's elbow.
And yes, it is indicative of not only my care but the care of many. I know a handful of physicians who practice in multiple countries, and they are not shy about telling me that they follow entirely different procedures, and make entirely different recommendations, depending on the country in which they happen to be at the time.
Auto mechanics aren't particularly expensive. If there were an actual shortage of mechanics, they would be charging a lot more than they do. Their prices are still propped up a bit by lack of information transparency as well as the classic captive client, but they are fundamentally in a fairly competitive environment.
Other healthcare systems around the world get by with a lot fewer physicians per patient than we have here, and their systems work just fine. It comes back to the unnecessary procedures and tests, and unnecessary physician involvement.
Perfect current news example: Annual pap smears for all women 14 years and above. I frankly don't know what the guidelines are for pap smears in other countries, but if the current report is anywhere near accurate, it is painfully obvious that we have been wasting vast amount of money and physician time on unnecessary pap smears, and even created additional health problems in the process. ------------- It's Clobberin' Time! |
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 22 November 2009 at 3:02am
Woohoo, something I actually know as much as, if not more of, than Ben!
Sure, docs give injections. I'm not doubting your experiences, becuase I've had them too. But it all depends on where you go. Go to a busy level 1 trauma center like Parkland, and you'll NEVER have a doctor giving shots... it will always be the nurses or the techs. Go to your neighborhood "Urgent care" center that's actually staffed by an MD, and not a PA or NP, and they'll be giving the shots. All depends on location.
Again, totally depends on location. Some hospitals are mandated to require CT and MRI scanners at all times in order to maintain their status as a level I, II, or III trauma center. Your idea to have fewer scanners is, to be blunt, stupid. Lets say one hospital per city has an MRI scanner... which hospital should get it? The level 1 trauma center? How about the stroke center? What about the ACS center? What happens if you go to one hospital, expecting they are able to help, then being told they don't have the equipment to do so, and must send you by ambulance to anouter hospital, 5-60min away, to get a test done? Can a CVA or abdominal bleed wait that long? (Answer is no) Go spend some time in the radiology department at your local level 1 trauma center sometime. You'll hardly see a time when the CT or MRI rooms are NOT full.
And they (or you) left out another part of the equation: Not enough patients. You aren't going to have pts who require CT or MRI scans every 5 minutes, 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year, even if there IS only 1 scanner per city.
Because for things such as a CVA or traumatic bleed, there isn't time TO wait.
Except here's the problem that needs to be fixed before anything else: Litigation. Doctors have been sued for missing something, even if that something either didn't pertain to the original complaint, or didn't fit the original complaints usual presentation. This is why the myriad of test are now performed in the hospital: CYA. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Ben Grimm
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 12:12am
|
Linus - your perspective is obviously shaped by your primary contact with the healthcare system: the ER.
Most of the system is not the ER, however, and most MRIs can wait just fine - but they don't. I have had my shoulders, elbows, knees, and ankles scanned on various occasions. None of these were anywhere near emergencies, but never did I wait even five minutes for a scan. That is a sign of underutilized equipment.
But more tellingly, we can again simply compare to other systems. In the US we have something like four times as many MRI machines per capita as Canada does - FOUR TIMES. Yet Canadian ERs manage just fine. Yes, non-emergency MRIs have to wait a bit, and the result is tremendous savings.
(and keep in mind that - unlike the US machines - Canadian MRI machines services their entire population)
Similar comparisons work for other Western healthcare systems as well. We have vastly more expensive machinery than anybody else, but they mostly sit idle. I seem to recall that US machiens are in use less than half of the time, compared to 80% average usage most places.
Yet none of the comparable systems have worse results in their ERs than we do here.
EDIT - oh yes, the litigation boggle. This keeps coming back, despite how ridiculous it is. By the most liberal estimates available, the TOTAL cost of all malpractice litigation in the US is less than 2% of the total healthcare cost. More reasonable estimates put the figure closer to one half of one percent. That's all litigation, not just what some folks call "frivolous" litigation. So-called "tort reform" will not meaningfully affect healthcare costs.
------------- It's Clobberin' Time! |
Posted By: Belt #2
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 2:10am
|
Speaking of injections, NEVER let an MRI tech bang a needle full of that Germanium in your hand. There was needle on bone during the first 4 attempts. *shudder* She finally had to call a nurse to do it for her. Everyone brace yourselves, things are about to get out of control in this post. If you are a rational minded individual, skip this post. Forgive my drastically misplaced rantings in advance. Government health control is about just that, control. The Feds control our food, fuel, education, electricity, communications networks, and roadways. The last link in the system is health care. If they get a hold of that, it would be a massive "bargaining chip" in their favor. "You don't agree with the pigs on the animal farm? Tough luck, no health care for you, go die." At that point, all the CDC has to do is rush through some hair-brained "study" on firearms and they'll take them away, too. ("Guns affect your health, no guns for you. But it's for the CHILDREN!! Its a PUBLIC SAFETY EPIDEMIC!!!") Once our guns are gone, so are the rest of our rights (at least whatever is left after the "Patriot" Act #1 AND #2). The jack boots come a knockin' at that point; aided by NICS and the federal firearms registry which they're not supposed to have but yet brag about. Did you know that if you own a gun your name, address, and firearm serial numbers are on the internet and translated into multiple languages, courtesy of the BATF? Has anyone else read about how (I think it was) Maryland pushed a bill through that would allow for Martial law in the case of a swine flu "epidemic?" Now how is swine flu an epidemic now? Anyone remember SARS, or the horse flu, or the bird flu? How many untold millions died of that here in America (hardy-har-har). How about how the Feds have changed the definition of a 'Terrorist?' Just about anyone who breaks the law is a terrorist now. How about the 'study' put out by (I believe it was) Homeland security? You know the one labeling pro-gun, ex-military, or small-government-minded folks as potential "terrorists?" Lets not even mention the "Patriot" act. Now they're going for "Patriot" round #2. How about Obama's national police force? Or the expansion of employment at Homeland Security? Or the bill proposed by the wife of the vice president of Monsanto; where government 'inspectors' could inspect a private farm and issue fines (up to a million per day) for just about any reason they choose; in addition to stealing your land for such "violations?" And I thought eminent domain was bad (my family was a victim of it decades ago). How about Obama and his cronies trying to redefine U.S. citizenship, where Obama himself hasn't even proved his citizenship (tell me something doesn't smell funny here)? Is there a clause in this health bill that bars illegal immigrants ("undocumented workers" for the lefties) from soaking up health care dollars that they didn't put into the pot? Anyone with a brain realizes that the mortgage 'crisis' (2% of the mortgages out there, if I'm not mistaken) was CREATED by the Federal government, almost at the whim of ACORN (who's head honcho was no other than Obama at the time). Thank Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, folks. Then the "bail out." Show me the money, folks. I don't see any. Three trillion went 'poof.' Obama (really, congress, but with big O's signature) put this nation further in the hole than the rest of the presidents in this century combined. Our dollar is based on thin air, our taxes are going up and inflation is about to UFC the population into submission. Smells a little Marxist, to me. But, oh boy, letting previous tax cuts expire in no way classifies as a tax hike (give me a break). Thank you Woodrow Wilson. Him and his buddies created one of the biggest oxymorons this nation has ever seen, the "federal reserve." "making the world safe for democracy" Give me a break. We are (were) a Constitutional Republic. And you thought that was bad enough? Kennedy tried to abolish the federal reserve with an executive order, and ten days later.... Talk about the single most profitable entity on the planet (the fed).... I remember when Enos Shenk posted a link to a bill they tried to pass through congress a few years ago (back in the F.A.B. days, for you forum oldies out there). Congress seriously wanted to put a chip in just about every electronic device so that they could monitor, track and pull the plug on any computer in the nation, including internet servers. The bill required most all electronic devices produced after a certain date to have a "fritz chip" hardwired into the mother boards. What if you try to modify, remove or otherwise bypass the chip? Instant federal offense. The internet is the greatest enemy to the powers that be, instant dissemination of their travesties all across the world. And the GPS chips in our cell phones? Everything we say, text or type gets stored somewhere, folks; and the best part is, they can find out where you are and don't even need a warrant to do so. Over there in the People's Republic of Kalifornia, you can't even buy hand gun ammo without a thumb print. They tried to add a notion to the bill where you could only buy 50 rounds a month, but it was removed from the final bill. I'm sure the older guys remember when you had to sign for .22 or any other "pistol" ammo back in the day (right here in Missouri, believe it or not). Back then, you couldn't even buy .22LR if you were under 21. Any one read their BATFE form 4473s recently? Note the clever wording around the "mental deficient" paragraph. ANYONE can prevent you from buying a gun if they are a "qualified individual" but there is an odd absence of descriptive factors on just whom is 'qualified.' Don't even get me started on the BATFE, in general. Good god. Even CONGRESS found them to be 'indifferent' to the rights of the individual. Along with the supreme kangaroo court. All of this on more than one occasion; to add the proverbial icing on the cake. Bill Clinton said something to the effect of "We can't be so focused on preserving the rights of the individual." Boy did he hit the nail on the head. After all, we all know what Rham Emmanuel, Obama, AND Hillary Clinton said about "Not letting a good crisis go to waste." I do not deny being a conspiracy theorist. I am absolutely guilty of that. But I can see a "perfect storm" brewing on the horizon (in my own twisted mind). Blatant, unconstitutional power grabs by the Feds (whom 9 out of 10 things they do, and programs they run are unconstitutional to begin with). The Federal Government has no right to grant any charity to any entity under any circumstances. Even Davy Crockett knew that... We are a modern Rome. They fell because of their Senate, weak borders, dilution of culture, complacency, wide spread corruption and arrogant ways. We have a house and a senate, so how do you think we will fare? (Ha!) In my mind the health care will be a final nail in the coffin. (if it does pass I'll probably end up in a straight jacket, if I don't deserve on already) I am one of those "jack boots come a poundin' " types. I am rabidly distru**edited**l, disillusioned and possibly delusional to top it off. With all of that in mind, I apologize for the extended idiot-blather. I may have grown older and a bit more mature in the past few years, but I'm still the same old twisted 'Belt' I was before. I have no right to post such garbage and clog such bandwidth, but somethings must be brought to mind in this current society. The mainstream media sure isn't (who hasn't given up on them). Feel free to criticize, assail, condemn, scold, admonish and just generally flame my crooked opinions. I'm a "1%er," for real.... We're a heartbeat away from 1984, d00dz. */me dives into nomex suit* ------------- Most importantly - People suck. |
Posted By: Belt #2
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 2:30am
|
I think what I was trying to get at is: After all of the blatant travesties, people are prepared to entrust their very life blood, their health and wellness, to the same organization that can't even read it's own rule book, let alone history? If Iraq or Afghanistan are having trouble writing their own constitution, why don't we just give them ours? It's not like we're using it anymore. You can hear the arrogance in the words of the powers that be. How many times have you heard senators or house members refer to themselves as "lawmakers?" They are our REPRESENTATIVES. And they are doing a pretty cruddy job at that. If You or I had the same disreguard for the law We'd end up in jail; but not so for those with "clout." We need a four term limit. Two in office and two in jail. ------------- Most importantly - People suck. |
Posted By: stratoaxe
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 2:36am
 -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 2:38am
|
Holy hell. If that isn't the most RIDICULOUS, WRONG, MISINFORMED post I have ever seen than I don't know what is. Hell I am going to quote it so you can't backtrack any of it.
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 2:38am
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 23 November 2009 at 2:43am
|
We need to start tracking how many times Linus says trauma.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 25 November 2009 at 6:56pm
You totally ignored a pretty big thing, that if you want to get rid of 'excess' machines you'll have to do a darg good job at explaining. You know, the part about hospital designations, hospital specialties, and regulations? -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 25 November 2009 at 8:39pm
|
Ben, having dealt with government run health care I can tell you what it's like under conditions where money is saved by having less equipment and the government determines what treatment you get based on how expensive it is: It sucks. More explanation: I went through more red tape than you can imagine before my first back surgery just to get an MRI done and see a specialist because a GP made the determination that the injury wasn't severe enough to warrant the cost of either. This is a decision that eventually cost me two back surgeries, a set of pins in my back, more physical therapy than I care to recall, about 8 years of cycling on and off of ever heavier-duty painkillers (with the last 4 being pretty much "on" the whole time) and an early retirement that will probably end up costing taxpayers more than just taking care of the problem before it exacerbated would have. I had an "emergency" surgery delayed over two weeks (during which I essentially couldn't walk) the second time around because of a lack of available MRI machines due to the way the government currently rations them to federal facilities. While our health care system needs reform, allowing a bunch of bureaucrats who will probably exempt themselves from using the resulting mess to design this reform is a very, very bad idea. I will also add that my experiences weren't unusual. I am fairly certain that I have seen more than my fair share of incompetent medical practices (misdiagnosed ovarian cancer, misdiagnosed tubal pregnancy, misdiagnosed brain cancer, sending someone back to work with a perforated colon only to have them collapse on the job and numerous misdiagnosed joint injuries) that in the civilian world would have resulted in litigation. However, that is not an option with government-run health care as it is currently practiced. Before you ask, I think the litigation aspects related to medicine need fixing as well but I don't think the option to litigate should be completely removed--which is how it was in the military. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 25 November 2009 at 8:54pm
|
Mack, you're talking government run health care. The bill is about government insurance and insurance reform. Two very different things than government run healthcare. -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 25 November 2009 at 8:56pm
|
No, it's not really. If you institute a government option we will end up with government run health care. Actually, on second thought, go ahead and have at it . . . then I can laugh at all the people who used to have better health care than me and never realized it. -------------
|
Posted By: Ben Grimm
Date Posted: 26 November 2009 at 5:13am
I too have dealt with government healthcare - both government-run and government-funded. I thought both were pretty awesome, compared to what I have now.
So, apparently do all of our resident Canadians.
But to get more specific, I will also tell you what it's like under government healthcare:
If I take a look at one of the endless "benefits statements" I get from my (private) healthcare plan, there is a number in the bottom right: "Lifetime benefit: $2,000,000". Yep, that's right - the most I can ever get from my supposedly awesome private health insurance is two mil.
I wonder how many months of cancer treatments that will buy me.
What is the "lifetime benefit" under the VA plan? TriCare? NHS? CanuckiCare? I do believe that the lifetime benefit under each of those (and others) is "all you can eat."
Yes, there is rationing of healthcare - and we are living it right here right now, while the Europeans are enjoying unlimited lifetime benefits. The only people in the US who are NOT dealing with rationing issues are the folks on government plans - VA, Medicare, etc. Which makes it particularly ironic when somebody who is currently enjoying unlimited government healthcare expresses fear for the rationing that will occur when the government starts controlling healthcare.
Oh, the horrors of government healthcare, where I have to wait two months to MRI my elbow, but will receive unlimited radiation treatment at no cost.
Ever been approached for charitable donations to fund the cancer treatment of some kid? Yep, me too. Let's ask our Canadian or European friends how often that happens to them. I believe that answer will be "never." Why is that, I wonder?
And here in the States, health issues is the leading cause of personal bankruptcy. My understanding is that in most countries with socialized healthcare, there are basically zero bankruptcies caused by health issues. Why is that, I wonder?
(Ok, so I know your point wasn't about rationing, but I got distracted) ------------- It's Clobberin' Time! |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 26 November 2009 at 5:29am
On the flip side, I had to get an MRI done once. If there had been a two month wait it would have ruined my athletic career. I suspect a touch of exaggeration as I cannot fathom how it would take two months to schedule an MRI. They can't fix anything on their own, so many people aren't very interested in them.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 26 November 2009 at 7:46am
|
Actually Ben, you kind of led into my next point (despite the distraction); unlimited benefits are no more useful than limited benefits when you aren't allowed to use them. Imagine going to Golden Corral (an "all you can eat buffet-style restaurant* for those who don't know) and finding out you can indeed have all you want as long as you can get by the ex-NFL linebackers they hired to guard the buffet tables.**) *And probably one of the reasons for the lower life expectancy in those charts that Sneaky likes to post. **Probably not the best analogy, but it makes for an interesting mental image. -------------
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 26 November 2009 at 12:15pm
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 26 November 2009 at 12:46pm
I am always amused by the people who have never been under one of these plans but seem to thinks so highly of them.
This, more than anything else, convinces me your experiences with the government systems has been limited. The last bill I perused included rationing (per se) of health care based on life expectancy and other factors. (It is these less clearly specified other factors that both worry a lot of people and have led to the "they're gonna knock off grandma" hysteria.) Let me tell you how the military system works; when they decide you can no longer contribute to the mission you get medically retired to civilian life as opposed to Tricare spending money to actually fix your issue. Once in the VA system you face a bureaucracy that is designed to provide medical maintenance at minimal cost as opposed to spending additional funds to solve the root issues of the problem. The same attitude translated to a government-run civilian system could easily result in a caregiver response that essentially means (but is put more politically correctly*) we're sorry but since you no longer contribute (pay taxes) and in fact are a drain on the system (social security, military retirement, whatever) we have decided it is cheaper to ease you painlessly into the grave rather than actually heal you.
I wanted to expand on my previous response to this while I was posting. If having fewer machines, doing things in a different manner, etc. was a profitable business model, the current private health care providers would be doing that already. The fact that they aren't is a good indication that this is probably not a successful business model. With that in mind they are not going to willingly make the changes that need to be made for all these (supposed) projected savings to occur so someone (i.e. the government) is going to have to force those changes. Voila, government-run health care. -------------
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 28 November 2009 at 5:08am
Yes, the Canadian system. Please explain why 30,000+ Canandians visit the United States each year for medical treatment?
Why is the hip replacement center of Canada in Ohio -- at the Cleveland Clinic, where 10 percent of its international patients are Canadians? Why is the Brain and Spine Clinic in Buffalo serving about 10 border-crossing Canadians a week? Why did a Calgary woman recently have to drive several hundred miles to Great Falls, Mont., to give birth to her quadruplets? It's simple. As the market-oriented Fraser Institute in Vancouver, B.C., can tell you, Canada's vaunted "free" government health-care system cannot or deliberately will not provide its 33 million citizens with the nonemergency health care they want and need when they need or want it. Courtesy of the institute, here are some unflattering facts about Canada's sickly system: Number of Canadians on waiting lists for referrals to specialists or for medical services -- 875,000. Average wait from time of referral to treatment by a specialist -- 17.8 weeks. Shortest waiting time -- oncology, 4.9 weeks. Longest waiting times -- orthopedic surgery, 40.3 weeks. Average wait to get an MRI -- 10.3 weeks nationally but 28 weeks in Newfoundland. Average wait time for a surgery considered "elective," like a hip replacement -- four or more months. What's so wonderful about that Canadian system again?-------------
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 28 November 2009 at 10:32am
You know what is kinda funny about all those examples you listed? The Canadian health care system pays for a substantial amount of those visits. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 28 November 2009 at 12:32pm
Two things:
-------------
|
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 28 November 2009 at 11:43pm
Really? How substantial?
http://realdebatewisconsin.blogspot.com/2007/09/oh-canada-comes-to-us-for-care.html - http://realdebatewisconsin.blogspot.com/2007/09/oh-canada-comes-to-us-for-care.html
100 Canadians a month to U.S. clinics and hospitals for such things as MRIs and knee replacements. Timely Medical's services came in handy for Lindsay McCreith, a retired auto body shop owner who was told in 2006 he probably had a brain tumor. He needed an MRI fast. But the wait time for a "free" public one was 4 1/2 months and it was illegal to purchase a private MRI in Ontario. McCreith contacted Timely Medical, which got him an MRI the next day in Buffalo that showed he had a Titleist-sized tumor. Four and half weeks later, McCreith had received the brain surgery that could have taken eight months to happen in Canada -- if he had still been alive. It cost him $28,000 -- for which Canada's government won't reimburse him.
This guy is in the minority, I take it. -------------
|
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 29 November 2009 at 12:08am
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 29 November 2009 at 11:11am
Go to page 10 of this link. Shows the text below.
http://www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/files/1/2007%20Annual%20Report.pdf - http://www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/files/1/2007%20Annual%20Report.pdf
Shona's ordeal is similar to that which Lindsay McCreith endured in 2006. A retired body shop owner fromNewmarket, Ont., Lindsay also had a brain tumour. Ontario's health care system told him he would have to wait more than four months for an MRI. Not willing to risk the growth and spread of what might be cancer, and with private MRIs being illegal in Ontario, Lindsay paid for an MRI scan in Buffalo, N.Y. He also paid for brain surgery in Buffalo to remove the malignant tumour, after having been told he would need to wait for three months to see a specialist in Ontario. These experiences are not unique. Ontario's health care system routinely offers two waiting lists: one for diagnosis, then another for treatment. This is the result of Ontario's laws, which make it illegal for people of ordinary means to access health care outside the government-run system. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 29 November 2009 at 11:19am
I'm calling shens on your shens. http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2000/08/23/ott_mrihull000823.html - Link First lines of linked article: "There's another step toward the privatization of Canadian health care happening in Hull. While private MRI clinics are illegal in Ontario, there's a new Hull clinic set to open in October that will offer MRIs to Ontario patients who are both tired of waiting and willing to pay. The private clinic will charge between $500 and $900 for a routine MRI" -------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 29 November 2009 at 11:45am
|
Two-tier healthcare is an ongoing controversy here in Ontario. Many of us would be supportive of options allowing for people of more substantial means to acquire market healthcare. I would personally like to see a system where medical professionals and facilities had to commit a certain percentage of their time/resources to the existing public healthcare system, while working 'for profit' the rest of the time. We have a serious doctor shortage, due in part to the limitations imposed by a public system. Simply put, docs can make far more money for less work down in the U.S. If a hybrid public/private system existed where everyone received coverage equivalent to the current level of care, but those with private means or insurance could seek better care, we would probably see mroe facilities open up and more doctors stay because suddenly they would stand to gain more from it. I object strongly to a system in which a significant number of people simply do not get healthcare due to poverty. This is ethically unacceptable in one of the most well off nations on the planet. However, someone who through their own work has the means to afford better healthcare is going to find a way to get it, and deserves to have the right to. We might as well keep that money, that investment within our own healthcare system by incorporating a hybrid system. This is obviously a very simplistic look at it, there would be a tremendous amount of detail to be worked out. But I think it acknowledges the realities of the situation. Most Americans have better healthcare than the average Canadian. But Canadians still have decent healthcare, and the 15% of Americans who have it worse than us have no healthcare whatsoever, and are left to die by their government. There's no justice in this. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 30 November 2009 at 6:09pm
Is that even legal? Doesn't that breach some kind of schoolyard etiquette? Sort of going from the single-dog-dare to the triple-dog-dare completely bypassing the double-dog-dare?
Oh, the ramifications. -------------
|
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 30 November 2009 at 6:27pm
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 30 November 2009 at 11:02pm
Stupid federal parliamentary democracies. -------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |