to me you sound like "no the swedish government is practically the opposite of the finnish government what are you talking about!"
the quality of the US's UHC would definitely be better than that of Poland's but it still wouldn't be as good as private sector healthcare
[QUOTE=Android phone;29045235]to me you sound like "no the swedish government is practically the opposite of the finnish government what are you talking about!"
the quality of the US's UHC would definitely be better than that of Poland's but it still wouldn't be as good as private sector healthcare[/QUOTE]
Then how does Canada or the UK spend so much less on healthcare per capita and still manage to have nationalized systems that are of pretty good quality?
[QUOTE=Android phone;29045235]to me you sound like "no the swedish government is practically the opposite of the finnish government what are you talking about!"
the quality of the US's UHC would definitely be better than that of Poland's but it still wouldn't be as good as private sector healthcare[/QUOTE]
what does that have to do with the previous discussion
do I give a fuck what you think I sound like? you're using blatantly fallacious reasoning, and i have more than a funny feeling in my hchrem to back that up
But no, just forget that. Pull more shit out of your ass. Universal Healthcare can't be as good as private healthcare? Sure, why back that up with anything. Just keep making assertions, eventually you'll win.
health care needed reform, but government regulated health care isn't the best way to do it.
[QUOTE=QuadCoreGman;29045457]health care needed reform, but government regulated health care isn't the best way to do it.[/QUOTE]
wait, then who the fuck is supposed to regulate health care
are you saying we should operate on some sort of honor system
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29045423]Then how does Canada or the UK spend so much less on healthcare per capita and still manage to have nationalized systems that are of pretty good quality?[/QUOTE]
what? I said the current system would likely be of better quality than nationalized, the US's current (private) healthcare is better than Canada's or the UK's
I can't imagine it'd be run very well when we've already got so much debt and our fingers in everyone's business everywhere, I'm going to be surprised if the US doesn't collapse as a first-world nation in the next 50 or so years
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;29045433]what does that have to do with the previous discussion
do I give a fuck what you think I sound like? you're using blatantly fallacious reasoning, and i have more than a funny feeling in my hchrem to back that up
But no, just forget that. Pull more shit out of your ass. Universal Healthcare can't be as good as private healthcare? Sure, why back that up with anything. Just keep making assertions, eventually you'll win.[/QUOTE]
why are you so mad? the private healthcare in the US is better than any nationalized healthcare I can think of right now, you pay way more for it but honestly it's worth it when you think about whether spending less money on it is worth risking life and limb every time you get injured
[QUOTE=Android phone;29045555]why are you so mad? the private healthcare in the US is better than any nationalized healthcare I can think of right now, you pay way more for it but honestly it's worth it when you think about whether spending less money on it is worth risking life and limb every time you get injured[/QUOTE]
Really? Is that why the US is ranked below many nations who have nationalized healthcare? Because their private sector quality is just that much better?
Source:
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO%27s_ranking_of_health_care_systems"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO%27s_ranking_of_health_care_systems[/URL]
As you can see, the US is [I]#37[/I].
[QUOTE=Android phone;29045555]what? I said the current system would likely be of better quality than nationalized, the US's current (private) healthcare is better than Canada's or the UK's
I can't imagine it'd be run very well when we've already got so much debt and our fingers in everyone's business everywhere, I'm going to be surprised if the US doesn't collapse as a first-world nation in the next 50 or so years
why are you so mad? the private healthcare in the US is better than any nationalized healthcare I can think of right now, you pay way more for it but honestly it's worth it when you think about whether spending less money on it is worth risking life and limb every time you get injured[/QUOTE]
I'd also like to point out that, if I was lower class I wouldn't have the money to pay for the shit you just mentioned, got an arm off? Well bad luck buddy you got no money so we don't care. I'd rather have guaranteed health care that's of slightly lower quality than health care I can't even afford.
Also something that isnt really mentioned but the more capitalist a country is statistics show the the higher the environmental stresses which cause many health problems and is one of the main causes obesity, murder and many other crimes.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29034647]A government should set a basic level of living standards that acts as a safety net for those unable to support themselves, and it should remain at that standard. Otherwise governments will end up spending vastly much more money than needed as the people in the nation continually expect higher standards of living.[/QUOTE]
That's exactly what happens.
It's just that all the highest ranked countries in the world build that net out of healthcare for everyone, quality public education, and expansive welfare programs while the lower ranked countries continue to do the opposite yet still feel superior
I disagree that being a good human being is important so I'd like the US to make no change and save me a few dollars.
[QUOTE=Robbobin;29025311]-snip-[/QUOTE]
One problem with the current liberals and their views is that they always try to treat the symptoms, and never the cause.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;29030802]So you're saying that Poland's health care might not be the best in the world?
Shocking...[/QUOTE]
Poland uses the same healthcare as the UK, socialist.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29045815]Really?[/QUOTE]
That was perhaps one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen in my entire life. Everyone in this thread is now dumber, having read it.
[QUOTE=Hollow Earth;29063752]That was perhaps one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen in my entire life. Everyone in this thread is now dumber, having read it.[/QUOTE]
I don't know, when someone links me to World Health Organization statistics I generally get smarter
I love how ShivanCommander is new to this site and he rates everyone who does not agree with him with boxes.
[editline]8th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29063551]One problem with the current liberals and their views is that they always try to treat the symptoms, and never the cause.[/QUOTE]
The cause of crime is poor education and growing up in a poor environment. If someone isnt trying to find the root of the problem it would be the conservatives with there send people to jail first Behavior.
[editline]8th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Hollow Earth;29063752]That was perhaps one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen in my entire life. Everyone in this thread is now dumber, having read it.[/QUOTE]
Yep science and statistics is stupid.
The thing is socialised health care and dedicated education plans aren't really part of any socialist ideals in Europe any more. They're pretty much engraved in the minds of people and as such they would never be taken away. Even the ultra right wing parties in Finland wouldn't take down health care because its such a fundamental part of European society. Politics is more based around taxation and social policies. Finland is pretty much run by the Centre Party (Kokoomus) now that they've finally beaten the Social Democrats.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It's failed everywhere it was tried. [/QUOTE]
What about Denmark, Sweden and Norway, you know, the countries with some of the highest quality of living?
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It makes everyone pay higher taxes. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, money you don't have to spend on a new liver or heart when you turn 60.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It lowers the quality of healthcare.[/QUOTE]
Source?
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It makes longer waiting lines.[/QUOTE]
That's because people can actually afford to get treated for their illnesses, instead of just living with it because doing something about it would put their family on the street.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It eliminates people's ability to choose their own healthcare plans and their own doctors.[/QUOTE]
A) That's because everyone gets the same, free, healthcare. Plus, there's still room for private hospitals.
B) Uh, no. I could switch doctors with a phone call if I wanted to.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It means lesser healthcare for the elderly.[/QUOTE]
Source?
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It makes things even easier on people who don't work and skim off government.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, god damn those leeches just wanting to survive. What you're saying is that people who don't work, don't deserve to live?
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]There is absolutely no desire for anyone to be a doctor.[/QUOTE]
The pay is still gonna be extremely good, if that's what you're talking about. Besides, I doubt people devote 8 years of their lives to studies just for the money.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]Oh and don't forget that ever since England adopted universal healthcare, patient deaths due to doctor negligence have risen nearly 80% more than they were before.[/QUOTE]
[I][B]Source?[/B][/I]
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29063551]Poland uses the same healthcare as the UK, socialist.[/QUOTE]That you're using socialist as an insult demonstrates your lack of intellect. Poland is in much direr straits than the UK economically; the UK's GDP per capita is twice that of Poland's
it's not like private healthcare is gonna say 'fuck this, I'm out'. Just like in the UK we have the NHS, but if you want private you go BUPA or simplyshite or something. I don't want private since the NHS is fine.
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
so just let it come in and buy private if you can afford it, then shut the fuck up
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29063551]Poland uses the same healthcare as the UK, socialist.[/QUOTE]
Even Socialist systems can vary in quality.
[QUOTE=Hollow Earth;29063752]That was perhaps one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen in my entire life. Everyone in this thread is now dumber, having read it.[/QUOTE]
The epitome of arrogance; the distrust of the world largest and most competent health organisation, simply because it doesn't adhere to your political views.
[QUOTE=Hollow Earth;29063752]That was perhaps one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen in my entire life. Everyone in this thread is now dumber, having read it.[/QUOTE]
I apologize if my post required too much coherent thought for you to understand it.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;29047828]That's exactly what happens.
It's just that all the highest ranked countries in the world build that net out of healthcare for everyone, quality public education, and expansive welfare programs while the lower ranked countries continue to do the opposite yet still feel superior[/QUOTE]
Not quite, for example in Britain they do it somewhat excessively.
I could live off the state for simply being diagnosed as autistic, having no job and being on my own. I would have free healthcare and the such.
A government should at least try to make people do things like build motorways and railways, or decrease the money spent on the pen pushers who occupy the bureaucracy and tend to do fuck all.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29066767]Not quite, for example in Britain they do it somewhat excessively.
I could live off the state for simply being diagnosed as autistic, having no job and being on my own. I would have free healthcare and the such.
A government should at least try to make people do things like build motorways and railways, or decrease the money spent on the pen pushers who occupy the bureaucracy and tend to do fuck all.[/QUOTE]
Live off the state just for being autistic? How? I don't see having free healthcare as "living off the state".
I know it's like half a week late, but whateva
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983340]It's failed everywhere it was tried.[/quote]
The NHS has been going strong for the last 70 years - Thousands of people died last year alone in the US because they couldn't get healthcare.
There is no signs or evidence that any country with socialised medicine are doing worse. Matter of fact, they're doing exponentially better then the US.
AND they also have the highest quality of life and rank up top of the HDI chart. Both of which factor in healthcare availability, economic cost and quality of healthcare.
[quote]It makes everyone pay higher taxes.[/quote]
Barely. The US alone has the highest expenditure of healthcare in the entire world. Taxes in other countries are indeed higher, but healthcare expenditure and taxation either doesn't superscede the US or does so by a small margin.
[quote] It lowers the quality of healthcare.[/quote]
Statistics of both the CIA world factbook and the World Health Organisation pin the US above the 35 mark on the quality of healthcare around the world chart. The WHO ranks them at 37, 17 places down from a list of countries with either socialised medicine or a tier 2 system which is basically socialised private healthcare.
[quote]It makes longer waiting lines.[/quote]
I cover below that this is a myth.
[quote]It eliminates people's ability to choose their own healthcare plans and their own doctors.[/quote]
[url]http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheNHS/Yourchoices/GPchoice/Pages/ChoosingaGP.aspx[/url]
uhm
no, actually. It clearly doesn't do that.
[quote]It means lesser healthcare for the elderly.[/quote]
Then explain why every country with socialised medicine has a MUCH higher life expectancy rate then the US. Mind you, this factors in healthcare availability and quality for the elderly. So statistically, something is going right.
[quote]It makes things even easier on people who don't work and skim off government.[/quote]
I don't think poor people are purposly going out of their way to hurt themselves to get free healthcare. One usually aspires to not be sick. This is not some welfare programme, it's fucking healthcare. And if a do-nothing comes and needs help, so fucking what? There literally a hundred other things that are both more expensive and more of a burden then healthcare to worry about.
Not only that, the people you describe are SO far and few between with literally no effect on them other then to just help them when they're sick or hurt.
[quote]There is absolutely no desire for anyone to be a doctor.[/quote]
This is complete bullshit because there's no real explanation as to why.
Let me make a few arguments in your place then, feel free to explain. I understand this is pretty bias, but hey, you need to elaborate.
"Doctors make less money, thus meaning they don't desire to be a doctor"
Nope! The salary of a doctor in a UHC system varies. How does it vary amute (or warhol, trotsky, thelocalflavor, or garnier, or whoeverthefuckyouarestopfuckingchangingfuckingacccountsgod?) Well, you see, doctors gain more capital depending on how well they do their job. If you are shitty doctor who gets no results and complaints from your patients - then the system will pretty much make your pay shit. And I have no problem with that. I'm sure you capitalist broskis do though.
Even then, so what? Doctors are there to HELP people, not earn money, bitches and ride the sweet life, but with that occasional helping thing or whatever the fuck that is
"Working for a big bad government agency makes millions of doctors turn away from their career choice"
Well, millions of people are in the public sector and it honestly provides better care and service to its workers. But again, a doctor isn't being a doctor because his boss is government.
"There's so much red-tape, a doctor can't move"
This is a more fair statement that is something a person for private healthcare would say (seeing as they think doctors are bound up in bureaucracy.) but it really isn't true. Doctors have a lot of freedom, but they're also employees. So they follow rules and regulations like they should. None of which dictate how to treat a patient. They aren't slaves, they're employees.
Just like you can't grope the secretary at your supposed minimum wage job my dear libertarian, you can't do harmful things in your doctors position.
Honestly, I can't think of anything else that would explain why a doctor would not be a doctor because of healthcare.
[quote]Oh and don't forget that ever since England adopted universal healthcare, patient deaths due to doctor negligence have risen nearly 80% more than they were before.[/quote]
I searched that and got a minecraft forum topic.
I also looked up rates for doctors negligence in the NHS
I have found nothing. Please - provide some evidence.
[quote]This is America, if you need a surgery, you get a job and you work for a living like a normal person, don't skim off government programs that let you sit on your ass for 5 years, or wait, even more years now, since they extended unemployment.[/quote]
Actually no, in American, you fill out reams and reams of insurance forms and wait for many months, panicking and suffering as you prepare your life to have to pay out the ass to finally be denied a life saving operation because you have pre-existing conditions and that makes the Insurance companies lose money.
And when insurance companies lose money, Satan resurrects a communist.
And what is your problem with poor people? You seem to think if you're poor, you're INSTANTLY lazy. It doesn't work like that. pls join reality
[quote]For every one person who is legitimately bad off and incapable of rational thought and/or working, there are a thousand people who abuse the system for their own personal gain and take money off of social security.[/quote]
So they wait and suffer for 60 odd years of their life, JUST to get a tiny bit of money? I'm not sure you understand what social security is.
[quote]Plus it's not like people don't all get healthcare when they need it[/quote]
They don't. There's a lot more then hospital visits. There's doctors visits, emergency service, surgery, and shit like cars, buses and planes hitting you.
[quote]liberal propaganda has people believing that if you go into an emergency room you won't get treated simply because you're not "super rich" which is a complete and utter lie.[/quote]
This has only been recently rectified. They actually had to pass a law that stated you couldn't be denied immediate care because of lack of insurance. If that's not bullshit then I don't know what is.
[quote]They are required to treat you, it doesn't matter how much money you have.[/quote]
Then they bleed your ass dry from the costs. You forgot that part.
[quote]Why should the government decide what healthcare I get?[/quote]
They don't/won't
[quote]Why should the government decide who my doctor is?[/quote]
They won't/don't
[quote]It shouldn't, but that's what people want.[/quote]
What people?
[quote]People are getting lazy and stupid[/quote]
Maybe in America, but people seem to be moving about here.
[quote]they want the government to do everything for them, since they're too lazy to actually get off their ass and do something like they're supposed to.[/quote]
This has been your ONLY point, that every single person who will benefit from socialised medicine are all employed and lazy. Honestly, you're pretty much just regurgitating what you see on things like Glenn Beck's show or the drudge report. You don't really understand any of what you're talking about - no sane human being would make such absurd generalisations and not be fucking whacked.
Go get a juice box or something.
[quote]If anyone remembers during the 2008 election, reporters were asking random people off the street why they were voting for who they were voting for, and the number one answer for people who voted for Obama (a Democrat), was that he would "take care of them" and "pay off their debt for them" because they were too fucking stupid to pay off their own debt[/quote]
I never heard anyone vote for obama because they'll 'take care of them' or 'pay off their debt'
Could you like provide one human being who has even thought that?
And what does obama have to do with this? He's a cowardly democrat who had a tier 2 system that the Right wing gutted and he said nothing.
Obama supporters said things like 'end the Iraq war', 'reverse bush policies' and other assorted things that make more fucking sense then what you think does.
[quote]in fact, they were stupid enough to get in debt to begin with by purchasing things they don't need on credit.[/QUOTE]
Except Credit card companies are basically to blame for that. They encourage people to spend unwisely and mask it with rewards or bad advice because it makes more money for them.
Capitalist entities like Credit card companies delude people so they can maximise profits - it's not stupidity, it's deceit.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983496]No, I've never required surgery. But if I did, I can guarantee you that I would start making those paychecks count.[/QUOTE]
Not everyone can. The fact that people need to reorganise their lives for something that struck them is pretty cruel and heartless. And on the other hand, people claiming that the work of lazy poor people, is just stupid.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;28983661]Are you saying that everyone should get everything for "free"? And by free I mean forcing hard-working American paying outrageously high income tax so that people who don't work, nor have any inclination to work can benefit?[/QUOTE]
You do know that the people who receive the healthcare have to pay taxes too, right? You're acting like the the rich have to pay 50% of their salary JUST to help ONLY lazy people.
18% of the US doesn't have healthcare, and conditionally, about 40% of Americans are unhappy with their healthcare. You mean to tell me roughly 58% of the country is ALL lazy, out of work and have no inclination to work?
Saying anyone who has trouble with healthcare because they're lazy, thus explaining why they're poor is so fucking ignorant, no human being with a soul or half a brain should ever adopt that opinion. Because it simply isn't true.
But if that's not enough, look at the unemployment rate - it's at 9%. Even with a margin of error of people who may not be on that, it's still a LOT lower then even the 18% of people of the people who do not have or dislike their healthcare.
Oh, and here's the kicker boyo - you DON'T pay high taxes because of healthcare or ANY public service. You pay high taxes for things like the drug war, military and other assorted causes that nobody likes. People in other countries have kinda high taxes, but they aren't really that bad.
And what i love about Americans complaining about taxes is that they have the lowest taxes in the industrialised world BUT their taxes are spent on stupid things, thus increasing it. It's a catch 22 of stupidity. Good job America. So if you want to complain about expenditures, complain about that first.
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29063551]One problem with the current liberals and their views is that they always try to treat the symptoms, and never the cause.[/quote]
I think a more accurate sentence would be: Conservatives create problems and Liberals do nothing to help.
[QUOTE=Android phone;29045065]how does my experience with a nationalized healthcare system not relate to a nationalized healthcare system[/QUOTE]
[quote]Poland uses the same healthcare as the UK, socialist.[/QUOTE]
Both of you need to realise something. Healthcare waiting times vary by HOSPITAL and clinic, not by country.
I am a traveller, I like to go to many countries, and I've had problems in France, America, my home-country Ireland etc. And the waiting times all vary. I've had horrible hospital times in America, and some good ones. Same with the other countries, it all varies. Hospital waiting times don't factor in socialised or privatised healthcare simply because there are many factors that effect times in hospitals.
Even with the variables, you still have the fact Hospitals in America can't turn you away for insurance purposes now, which is a good thing, but doesn't that mean America should have equal waiting times with other countries? Seeing as they can accept just ANYBODY in. This point is moot, because there is really no effect of hospital times in any healthcare system. Sure there is influence, but no direct effect. Not only that, hospitals run on an emergency response and helping really hurt and sick people. What you're implying is, socialised medicine is bad because it increases waiting times - which may be a valid point if it were true, but lets see what it realllllly means, because there is no possible way you can spin it other wise: Who is making those waiting times longer? Really sick or injured people who need medical attention immediately. Now you're saying that's bad - and the people who are here without insurance are freeloaders who are poor because of their freeloadyness, so therefore, poor people don't deserve medical treatment and are inferior because of their lack of wealth.
HOWEVER, there is an effect in a hospitals readiness and overall performance. Which, would you look at that, socialised medicine is much better at accomplishing this task.
Now for doctors offices and clinics, that's a different story. As opposed to Hospitals which are more emergency, doctors receive appointments and the people who make them need less needy care - and are aware of cost.
Even the most hardcore conservative who is against UHC, people like Steven Crowder or Lee Dorin, say that doctor offices have horrible waiting times. Yet always seem to chalk them up to about 40 minutes to an hour at most. And I will agree with them. In the countries I've needed medical help in over the years that have socialised medicine, I've had to wait about an hour extra at average
So yes, this part is true. Now... So fucking what? You really think the system should be scraped for that? You think it should be thought LESS of for that? If you think there should be ANY response in anyway to that fact, you are a lunatic.
If you think waiting an extra hour of your life is SO horrible that the ENTIRE system which helps millions of people should be scrapped or regulated to help 'less' people, then you don't deserve treatment.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29066852]Live off the state just for being autistic? How? I don't see having free healthcare as "living off the state".[/QUOTE]
Yes, being Austistic counts as a mental disorder, which in turn counts as a disability, which in turn counts for a disability allowance. (Which is quite generous)
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;29064111]I love how ShivanCommander is new to this site and he rates everyone who does not agree with him with boxes.
[/QUOTE]
Not true, I've rated some people here who disagreed with me with hearts if they were friendly in their post and weren't rude and so long as they didn't automatically assume they were right just because they're liberals/socialists/communists. Because I respect their opinions, even if I disagree with them.
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;29066852]Live off the state just for being autistic? How? I don't see having free healthcare as "living off the state".[/QUOTE]
How isn't it?
I fucking love you, amute
[editline]9th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=ShivanCommander;29069433] just because they're liberals/socialists/communists.
[/QUOTE]
wanting universial healthcare =/= commie scum
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;29069261]Yes, being Austistic counts as a mental disorder, which in turn counts as a disability, which in turn counts for a disability allowance. (Which is quite generous)[/QUOTE]
Did you hear? The liberals recently changed the meaning of "disabled" and so now about 1 in 4 Americans are now "disabled" and get even more money from the government, despite the fact that they aren't really "disabled" at all.
there's rich people that agree with socialism but there's never poor people that agree with libertarianism
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
