I watched "Sicko" and it was so close to my own opinions that it
asked a lot of the same questions I asked without ever having seen it.
Have you seen it? Were you impressed with the French health care
system? That movie convinced me that we, the US, are not the
greatest country in the world ... that we are in denial and maybe
our unfounded optimism is leading us off the edge of a cliff. Maybe
a little dramatic but not as dramatic as what might happen to people
who have never lived in need and find themselves deserted by the
ones who they think are friends.
And one other thing ... Do you think part of the health care push is to
cover up for the Wall Street ripoff? Money that could be used for
health care and many other important issues, maybe more important
was lost forever, apparently, to predatory investment bankers.
>I don't think Michael Moore's movie, "Capitalism, A Love Story",
>is very convincing. Some of it made me wonder about people who
>just aren't facing reality... but
>
>I watched "Sicko" and it was so close to my own opinions that it
>asked a lot of the same questions I asked without ever having seen it.
>
>Have you seen it? Were you impressed with the French health care
>system? That movie convinced me that we, the US, are not the
>greatest country in the world ... that we are in denial and maybe
>our unfounded optimism is leading us off the edge of a cliff. Maybe
>a little dramatic but not as dramatic as what might happen to people
>who have never lived in need and find themselves deserted by the
>ones who they think are friends.
>
I'm sure that your statement about the status of the U.S. was just an
opinion regarding health care.
You may well be right about that comparison. Its an opinion that has
a following, but that's just one of a myriad of areas to be considered
when discussing our greatness. There few, if any, other subjects
that America isn't the world leader.
>And one other thing ... Do you think part of the health care push is to
>cover up for the Wall Street ripoff? Money that could be used for
>health care and many other important issues, maybe more important
>was lost forever, apparently, to predatory investment bankers.
>
No. The health care push has been on the table for years.
BK
LOL
Why is government controlled health care the only solution?
> Why is government controlled health care the only solution?
So much fear and paranoia in just one sentence. The government does not
want to "control" healthcare in the sense that you mean. In the rest of
the first world, universal healthcare is cheaper due to economies of
scale. An entire nation of people is going to be more successful at
setting prices than would individuals getting raped one after another by
insurance and pharmaceutical companies who collude together to keep
prices as high as possible. It's simple economics.
Why do you fear knowledge?
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4540 (20091025) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4540 (20091025) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
Why do you fear admitting that everything the government touches turns to
shit?
Your tin foil hat isn't covering your whole head.
Yeah -- That's why we lost lost WWII -- letting the government run the
military.....
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4541 (20091025) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4541 (20091025) __________
How did the government suddenly become competent? Let alone in the area
of health care?
The Canadian government can't successfully run their health care system
to provide their own citizens with proper health care without
outsourcing to the USA. Britian parks injured people in ambulances off
the hospital grounds so that the administrators can keep thier response
times at acceptable levels. Britian tells women in labor after their
water breaks to walk to the hospital rather than send an ambulance.
Tell me some more about governments running things. Do you want to buy a
$1,000 toilet seat or a $600 hammer? I can go buy a toilet seat for
$6.99 at HomeDepot and I can get a hammer for $9.99. It didn't take the
government to negotiate those prices for me.
The problem in health care is that the consumer is not purchasing the
services. With the government stepping in everyone is going to become
"entitled" to a private room in the hospital, "entitled" to all
avaliable tests, "entitled" to whatever anyone else gets. Then you wind
up with the Canadian system but, there is no USA to outsource the care
of the paitents to.
What happened in Vietnam? The government was running the war in Vietnam
and they sure as hell screwed the pooch on that one.
Says the guy that makes up stuff..... or did I miss the suggestion in this
thread that single payer is the only option?
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 4541 (20091025) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4541 (20091025) __________
What is the problem and what is your solution?
> In article <4ae44998$0$5113$9a6e...@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
> nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
> >
> > On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 07:52:26 -0400, BAR wrote:
> >
> > > Why is government controlled health care the only solution?
> >
> > So much fear and paranoia in just one sentence. The government does not
> > want to "control" healthcare in the sense that you mean. In the rest of
> > the first world, universal healthcare is cheaper due to economies of
> > scale. An entire nation of people is going to be more successful at
> > setting prices than would individuals getting raped one after another by
> > insurance and pharmaceutical companies who collude together to keep
> > prices as high as possible. It's simple economics.
>
> How did the government suddenly become competent? Let alone in the area
> of health care?
>
> The Canadian government can't successfully run their health care system
> to provide their own citizens with proper health care without
> outsourcing to the USA. Britian parks injured people in ambulances off
> the hospital grounds so that the administrators can keep thier response
> times at acceptable levels. Britian tells women in labor after their
> water breaks to walk to the hospital rather than send an ambulance.
Er, excuse me, Bertie, old chap, but it's "Britain", please. If you are
going to peddle urban legends to suit your crackpot politics, at lease
get the target of your lunacy correct.
>
> Tell me some more about governments running things. Do you want to buy a
> $1,000 toilet seat or a $600 hammer? I can go buy a toilet seat for
> $6.99 at HomeDepot and I can get a hammer for $9.99. It didn't take the
> government to negotiate those prices for me.
$16,500 for a Ti -6-4 hip prosthesis? I think the government would have
a hard time topping that.
>
> The problem in health care is that the consumer is not purchasing the
> services. With the government stepping in everyone is going to become
> "entitled" to a private room in the hospital, "entitled" to all
> avaliable tests, "entitled" to whatever anyone else gets. Then you wind
> up with the Canadian system but, there is no USA to outsource the care
> of the paitents to.
Well, you seem to be a living example of what happens when people don't
have to "purchase" their education. "Paitents", indeed. Shame on you -
but the spelling is at least consistent with the IQ of your statements.
Britian Britain what's the difference? It it was such a great place your
would be there now.
> >
> > Tell me some more about governments running things. Do you want to buy a
> > $1,000 toilet seat or a $600 hammer? I can go buy a toilet seat for
> > $6.99 at HomeDepot and I can get a hammer for $9.99. It didn't take the
> > government to negotiate those prices for me.
>
> $16,500 for a Ti -6-4 hip prosthesis? I think the government would have
> a hard time topping that.
Find something new to whine about.
> >
> > The problem in health care is that the consumer is not purchasing the
> > services. With the government stepping in everyone is going to become
> > "entitled" to a private room in the hospital, "entitled" to all
> > avaliable tests, "entitled" to whatever anyone else gets. Then you wind
> > up with the Canadian system but, there is no USA to outsource the care
> > of the paitents to.
>
> Well, you seem to be a living example of what happens when people don't
> have to "purchase" their education. "Paitents", indeed. Shame on you -
> but the spelling is at least consistent with the IQ of your statements.
Looking at the world through your jaundiced eye again. Its too bad you
only have one yard-stick.
It must be pretty dark where your head is...
OK -- don't call the fire - police or an ambulance.
BAR -- successfully barring information from his brain once again.
>> Tell me some more about governments running things. Do you want to buy a
>> $1,000 toilet seat or a $600 hammer? I can go buy a toilet seat for
>> $6.99 at HomeDepot and I can get a hammer for $9.99. It didn't take the
>> government to negotiate those prices for me.
>
> $16,500 for a Ti -6-4 hip prosthesis? I think the government would have
> a hard time topping that.
>>
>> The problem in health care is that the consumer is not purchasing the
>> services. With the government stepping in everyone is going to become
>> "entitled" to a private room in the hospital, "entitled" to all
>> avaliable tests, "entitled" to whatever anyone else gets. Then you wind
>> up with the Canadian system but, there is no USA to outsource the care
>> of the paitents to.
>
> Well, you seem to be a living example of what happens when people don't
> have to "purchase" their education. "Paitents", indeed. Shame on you -
> but the spelling is at least consistent with the IQ of your statements.
>
People like you are amazing. You can't identify the problems and you
haven't got a clue about the solutions.
I enjoyed bursting your "the government is the answer" delusion.
Aren't you going to ask me for cites for my arguments above? Or, are you
and Billy sufficiently grounded in reality that you know that the cites
are easily obtainable.
>In article <vae7e5hhmapkt169m...@4ax.com>,
>bkn...@conramp.net says...
>>
>> >And one other thing ... Do you think part of the health care push is to
>> >cover up for the Wall Street ripoff? Money that could be used for
>> >health care and many other important issues, maybe more important
>> >was lost forever, apparently, to predatory investment bankers.
>> >
>> No. The health care push has been on the table for years.
>
>Why is government controlled health care the only solution?
who said that it is?
BK
Which is precisely why he's in my idiot file.
-Greg
I should expend the energy for the two mouse clicks to drop him into the
idiot file but it just seems such a waste of time.
Are you now anti-public option and pro private solutions?
> In article <wclark2-C0CBFE...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
> state.edu>, wcl...@colnospamumbus.rr.com says...
> > > How did the government suddenly become competent? Let alone in the area
> > > of health care?
> > >
> > > The Canadian government can't successfully run their health care system
> > > to provide their own citizens with proper health care without
> > > outsourcing to the USA. Britian parks injured people in ambulances off
> > > the hospital grounds so that the administrators can keep thier response
> > > times at acceptable levels. Britian tells women in labor after their
> > > water breaks to walk to the hospital rather than send an ambulance.
> >
> > Er, excuse me, Bertie, old chap, but it's "Britain", please. If you are
> > going to peddle urban legends to suit your crackpot politics, at lease
> > get the target of your lunacy correct.
>
> Britian Britain what's the difference? It it was such a great place your
> would be there now.
"Your" would be there? Bertie Boots, you are getting worse by the
minute. Tut, tut.
>
> > >
> > > Tell me some more about governments running things. Do you want to buy a
> > > $1,000 toilet seat or a $600 hammer? I can go buy a toilet seat for
> > > $6.99 at HomeDepot and I can get a hammer for $9.99. It didn't take the
> > > government to negotiate those prices for me.
> >
> > $16,500 for a Ti -6-4 hip prosthesis? I think the government would have
> > a hard time topping that.
>
> Find something new to whine about.
I see, I provide evidence that your argument is about as flat as last
year's cola, and you can only respond with a lame deflection. No
surprise there, though. I would probably have to do the same if I was
caught like that.
>
> > >
> > > The problem in health care is that the consumer is not purchasing the
> > > services. With the government stepping in everyone is going to become
> > > "entitled" to a private room in the hospital, "entitled" to all
> > > avaliable tests, "entitled" to whatever anyone else gets. Then you wind
> > > up with the Canadian system but, there is no USA to outsource the care
> > > of the paitents to.
> >
> > Well, you seem to be a living example of what happens when people don't
> > have to "purchase" their education. "Paitents", indeed. Shame on you -
> > but the spelling is at least consistent with the IQ of your statements.
>
> Looking at the world through your jaundiced eye again. Its too bad you
> only have one yard-stick.
Caught again - hook, line, and sinker. This is all you can come up with?
> In article <t5e9e5p2slrt4aoud...@4ax.com>,
> bkn...@conramp.net says...
> >
> > On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 07:52:26 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >
> > >In article <vae7e5hhmapkt169m...@4ax.com>,
> > >bkn...@conramp.net says...
> > >>
> >
> > >> >And one other thing ... Do you think part of the health care push is to
> > >> >cover up for the Wall Street ripoff? Money that could be used for
> > >> >health care and many other important issues, maybe more important
> > >> >was lost forever, apparently, to predatory investment bankers.
> > >> >
> > >> No. The health care push has been on the table for years.
> > >
> > >Why is government controlled health care the only solution?
> >
> > who said that it is?
>
> Are you now anti-public option and pro private solutions?
Excuse me, but to those capable of thought, "option" implies one of a
number of alternatives.
Got it?
> In article <c8c7b7b0-14ef-4f9f-961e-6e4835885d09
> @f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, gds...@aol.com says...
> >
> > On Oct 25, 1:33�pm, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > > In article <4ae4b32a$0$4247$882e0...@news.ThunderNews.com>,
> > > NoS...@NoWay.com says...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > "BAR" <sc...@you.com> wrote in message
> > > >news:MPG.254e73341...@news.giganews.com...
> > > > > In article <4ae4a524$0$17148$882e0...@news.ThunderNews.com>,
> > > > > NoS...@NoWay.com says...
> > > > >> >> > Why is government controlled health care the only solution?
> > >
> > > > >> >> Why do you fear knowledge?
> > >
> > > > >> > Your tin foil hat isn't covering your whole head.
> > >
> > > > >> Says the guy that makes up stuff..... �or did I miss the suggestion
> > > > >> in
> > > > >> this
> > > > >> thread that single payer is the only option?
> > >
> > > > > What is the problem and what is your solution?
> > >
> > > > It must be pretty dark where your head is...
> > >
> > > People like you are amazing. You can't identify the problems and you
> > > haven't got a clue about the solutions.- Hide quoted text -
> > >
> > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > Which is precisely why he's in my idiot file.
>
> I should expend the energy for the two mouse clicks to drop him into the
> idiot file but it just seems such a waste of time.
Wouldn't that be self-defeating, given that you already are in there? I
thought you would want to get away from him.
> So much fear and paranoia in just one sentence. The government does not
> want to "control" healthcare in the sense that you mean. In the rest of
> the first world, universal healthcare is cheaper due to economies of
> scale. An entire nation of people is going to be more successful at
> setting prices than would individuals getting raped one after another by
> insurance and pharmaceutical companies who collude together to keep
> prices as high as possible. It's simple economics.
you don't understand economics or control. 1st law of control: he who pays
the piper calls the tune.
--
bill-o
Why bother? You wouldn't produce them.
Except it is you that is deluded -- I responded to the claim that EVERYTHING
touched by the gov't turns to ....
I never claimed anything of the sort you are now attempting to claim -- but
I don't expect anything resembling coherence from you -- just you looking
foolish -- which I find oddly funny.
But you can rescue yourself -- just point out where I made a claim like "the
government is the answer" -- be the big man that resides only inside your
head -- prove me wrong!
I know one problem -- you and reality -- or is it just that you can't stop
making up stuff?
-Greg
== No - it's because I've called you on your posts & you ran as fast as you
could to the killfile -- but -- no matter -- I just keep calling you on
it -- not caring if you see it because I know others do.
He's claiming I said it -- but -- he seems unable to show us where.
duck & weave all you like -- but truth has this nasty way of proving you
coming up short once again --
Funny that you choose one of the very few things gobmint is for as defined
by the constitution for your example.
I wonder why you didn't mention our wonderful public education system.
That certainly seems to be the case now. However the reality is that the
rest of the first world has more cost effective and better healthcare
systems than the US, so obviously there going on than you libertarian
dreamers allow yourselves to see.
How can you be so certain that it always does? Biased much?
It must have failed you --- because the claim was EVERYTHING touched by the
gov't -- so only one answer would suffice in discrediting the whole
statement -- but I guess you missed that too.
It is interesting that these guys that want us to believe they are sooooo
smart -- can't see the claim is EVERYTHING -- it makes look so --- what is
the --- foolish?
Why pick Canada, a single payer? France is doint fine
apparently with a mixed approach including govt.
And Goldman Sachs is the savior of America?
>
You make me laugh at your gullibility. Do you need to be deprogrammed at
the dinner table like we have to do with our daughter after her daily
programming at school?
Define "cost effective" and "better health care."
Do you want to talk about infant mortality statistics?
You are afraid of the information.
Is there a health care crisis? If yes, how should it be solved?
Name one thing I have made up?
You libs are entertaining if you are nothing else. And you prove repeatedly
you are nothing else.
OK, so you concede that you did not understand what "option" meant.
Probably a good idea if you actually went to school with your daughter
one day, and sat in on her reading comprehension class.
How about life expectancy? That's the most complete measure of the
effectiveness of a health care system - how long it preserves health.
Oh, but you won't like the answers on that measure, will you?
It is hard to be afraid of what does not exist.
or overhead costs.....
I'll reply after you answer my previous reply to your made up claims.
translation --- gulp
look above in the thread-- but wait -- you have failed to answer that
one ---
Have you got her thinking the earth is 5,000 years old?
Great! Now we won't have to hear anymore of your health care nonsense.
Sometimes that is the scariest of all.
BOO!
It's on cable in my area.
I suggest that I may have more insight into that than you or BAR -- but
anyway -- I just said I would reply to his request -- not to stop calling
you out for your errors.
Do you want to know why I think I may have more insight?
"Option" implies a number of alternatives. "Public Option" implies one of
the alternatives.
I must have missed these news stories.
Can you point me a reliable source that covers them, please?
Brilliant! So health care with a public option is not "government
controlled health care" just so long as any other options exist.
thank you.
Don't expect much.
Britian parks injured people in ambulances off
> the hospital grounds so that the administrators can keep thier response
> times at acceptable levels. Britian tells women in labor after their
> water breaks to walk to the hospital rather than send an ambulance.
Crap.
Pick on your own 'system' which you should know more about.
Believing that crap says something about your education system also.
Rog
Are you saying BAR is wrong??? ;-))
Actually the public option part would be government controlled. It's also
the first step to a single payer system which is what Obama really wants.
True -- all those lies to the uninformed are scary.
Faux News tinfoil alert!
Yes - and there is the difference that poor ol' Bertie can't quite
grasp. The public part is government controlled, but the rest IS NOT!
Of course, if you choose to see a reds under the bed conspiracy in this,
that's up to you. In any case, an awful lot of folk would be very happy
with a single payor system.
Actually, that's all you need to say to make them convulse with
laughter. Like tickling with a feather.
Fortunately there are more who wouldn't be happy with it.
Obama and his spineless supporters sure arent laughing about it.
When I first moved here I thought Fox News was some sort of black comedy
show. With all its red-faced screeching and its cheap "some people
say..." rhetoric, it was so obviously biased and unfair I didn't think
anyone could possibly confuse it with a real news program. But I learned
fairly quickly that there is a segment of the population that
uncritically accepts everything they see on Fox.
I think you are confused. You are talking about MSNBC.
I'm pretty sure most of Obama's supporters have spines. And the people
under him also are much better at shaping public opinion than you are.
I'll just throw this out there: do you think it may be possible that his
media people understand the dynamics a bit better than you? Do you think
perhaps there is a carefully planned strategy in play, involving various
facets you haven't even considered?
Tell you what: find one instance of an MSNBC host screeching "WHY DO YOU
HATE AMERICA!!!??" at one of their guests, I'll consider the possibility.
I wouldn't be so sure about that.
That darned liberal thing called reality is knocking at your door to laugh
at you.
http://www.healthcare-now.org/another-poll-shows-majority-support-for-single-payer/
A New York Times/CBS News poll released last week shows, yet again, that the
majority of Americans support national health insurance.
The poll, which compares answers to the same questions from 30 years ago,
finds that, �59% [of Americans] say the government should provide national
health insurance, including 49% who say such insurance should cover all
medical problems.�
Only 32% think that insurance should be left to private enterprise.
Since you are a transplanted Floridian, are you proud of the Orlando
congressment that says "Fox News and the Republicans are the enemies of
America?" Now there's a tolerant liberal.
-Greg
Is he a host on MSNBC?
> That certainly seems to be the case now. However the reality is that the
> rest of the first world has more cost effective and better healthcare
> systems than the US, so obviously there going on than you libertarian
> dreamers allow yourselves to see.
I see no proof of this reality you speak of. And I have actually experienced
care out of the US. You post charts and numbers, all from agenda-driven
sources, yet you don't seem to be aware of the problems in you native land
with the healthcare system. You also post longevity tables, but what counts
is not how long you live, but how long you live after getting sick. No
country has better survior numbers than the US.
--
bill-o
> How about life expectancy? That's the most complete measure of the
> effectiveness of a health care system - how long it preserves health.
no it doesn't. It measures heathiness of lifestyles.
--
bill-o
> > Oh, but you won't like the answers on that measure, will you?
>
> or overhead costs.....
Enron accounting, you mean: the costs don't get reduced, they get moved to
other gov't depts.
--
bill-o
> Why pick Canada, a single payer? France is doint fine
> apparently with a mixed approach including govt.
France is doing fine? Tell that to the yutes, especially those that live in
les banlieus. It is so costly to hire, due to various payroll taxes to fund
le SECU (nat health ins) that while unemployment is around 8.8%, that of
21-26 yr olds is in the 20% range and the youths in the immigrant ghettos is
around 40%.
--
bill-o
> >> Why do you fear knowledge?
> >>
> >
> > Why do you fear admitting that everything the government touches turns
> > to
> > shit?
>
> And Goldman Sachs is the savior of America?
Apparently Obama thinks so
--
bill-o
> > You make me laugh at your gullibility. Do you need to be deprogrammed at
> >
> > the dinner table like we have to do with our daughter after her daily
> > programming at school?
>
> OK, so you concede that you did not understand what "option" meant.
> Probably a good idea if you actually went to school with your daughter
> one day, and sat in on her reading comprehension class.
you ever heard of "newspeak" genius? "public option" and "employee free
choice act" are 2 prime examples.
--
bill-o
You have admitted your primary source for news is Jon Stewart.
It is obvious Obama and his media have stepped in it. Another misstep.
When Obama's media people excluded Fox from an interview with the pay Czar
all the other networks refused to accept the invitation.
Obama had to retract and include Fox. Nice way to alienate his media pals.
Did you say the same thing about Bush when he excluded NBC?
dene bobs & weaves -- to no effect.
Why do Jon Stewart's viewers score better on current affairs testing & have
a higher education level than Faux News viewers?
Maybe it's because they aren't polluted by your "news" source.
Enron = the health insurance industry?
If you think so -- who am I to disagree?
Care to show us your cite?