Collarchat.com

Join Our Community		 Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citizen of a country with nationalize health care


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citizen of a country with nationalize health care Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 7:50:07 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed

If someone had to resort to threats or insults against another poster's family,

If someone could read and understand english they would know who gratutitously injected their family into the discussion.
If someone could read and understand english they would know that no threat or insult was posted.


and those posts got pulled, it would be ample proof that the person's arguments held no water.

No, that would be ample proof that the mods felt it was inappropriate.

Like someone pulling a rusty switchblade during a regional political debate.

They'd lose immediately by dint of such an action.
That would be faulty analogy...
all of which is off topic

(in reply to NoBimbosAllowed)
Profile   Post #: 401
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 7:51:21 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		It has reduced costs for citizens, but that is neither here nor there. And of course we can plot the lines of the graph you have against a graph of the United States both as percentage of GDP and given that we can see that ours rose much faster as a percent of gdp than theirs and there is at least one of the goodies.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 10/11/2013 7:53:03 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 402
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 7:52:14 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Where are those graphs showing the reductions?



Come on DS, everyone knows they experienced reductions... look at the charts... see, they're not as high as they would have been



_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 403
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 7:58:48 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		That of course speaks to teabaggers innumeracy.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 404
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:05:16 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
17% of GDP, DS. That's pretty damned shocking. Anyone would surely believe health care policy in the US requires a radical re-think of *some* kind.


I don't disagree at all. But, I also don't agree with "change for the sake of change." I'd much rather there be a damned good rethink before forcing something on the Country. I also don't see it as Constitutional for the Federal Government to do what it's doing (which is why I fully believe there will be challenges in the next couple years as people gain "standing" for lawsuits). I fully believe it will take an Amendment to authorize the Federal Government to go that route.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 405
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:09:01 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		Are you saying that a healthy individual presents the same income for a practice as a chronically ill individual?

Absolutely...how can you not see that? Healthy patient comes in for a check up. Office visit x dollars.
Chronically ill patient comes in for his office visit. Office visit x dollars.
The doctor has y number of office visits a day and gets the same pay for each one. The fact that the dr. sees one patient once every 6 monts and the other patient evrery week is not relevant so why do you seek to make it so?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 406
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:16:34 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Where is there any proof that moving to a national health care system has reduced costs?

Lets ask my g/f pam's teenage son.
If I take out the profit of the corporation and it's stockholders will the cost of health care go down?
He just rolls his eyes and says "is that a trick question" and then quite patintly he explanes to this old man that profit if considered as part of the cost of doing business if you take out the profit then the cost of doing business goes down...my g/f kid may be smarter than she gives him credit for.


That there are cost differences right now isn't proof that there will be reductions.

All of the countries with socialised medicine have lower cost than the u.s. That might be a clue. Please do not take my word for it google can be a friend here....the graph you put up shows the same thing.

Where are those graphs showing the reductions?

Well there is the one you posted showing that the u.s. has higher health cost than all the rest....Since the only difference is the for profit mechanism of the u.s. model, how is that not proof?

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 10/11/2013 12:16:47 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 407
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:45:00 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
It has been pointed out to you that the italian constitution recognizes health care as a right. Somehow that seems to offend you...why is that?

Neat thing is that Eulero was stating that they see it as a right and their Constitution says it's a right. Perhaps that's where I get the idea that the Italian government is giving something? Nooooo, couldn't be that...

The u.s. constitution recognizes certain rights.
The italian constitution recognizes certain rights.
How is it that you feel that the italian govt is giving rights to italians while at the same time saying that is not true in the u.s.?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 408
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:51:22 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

If the US put a cap on claims so the insurance companies aren't scared shitless at paying gazillions of $$'s in claims, then put a cap on what they are allowed to charge in premiums, the whole fantasy house-of-cards would collapse into something affordable.

I wonder how that is handled in countries with socialised medicine?

Very simple.
The courts and the legal system don't allow stupidly exorbitant compensation costs.

What would you consider "stupidly exoritant compensation costs"?

 
As an example, a 'decent' level of personal compensation over here would be maybe £5,000?
You wouldn't get much more than in general because the courts won't make such huge awards.
In the US, that same claim would almost certainly run into several hundred thousand $'s - maybe over $1million.


What do you think would be fair for someone who was deprived of their arms and legs fr their whole life?


I really can't be assed to do your legwork for you.

Since I did not ask you to do any legwork for me I do not understand your whining about it.



(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 409
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:54:21 AM   
eulero83


Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline 		the whole talk you are making sounds like:
"Mercedes is way too expensive for all of us having one of their cars"... "So buy a toyota"... "No! I will never consider a car if it's not a merceds, it's mercedes that must lower it's prices"... "but mercedes has no intention to produce cheap cars"... "I'll walk till mercedes won't do it"

< Message edited by eulero83 -- 10/11/2013 8:56:50 AM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 410
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 8:59:33 AM   
eulero83


Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


It has been pointed out to you that the italian constitution recognizes health care as a right. Somehow that seems to offend you...why is that?

Neat thing is that Eulero was stating that they see it as a right and their Constitution says it's a right. Perhaps that's where I get the idea that the Italian government is giving something? Nooooo, couldn't be that...

The u.s. constitution recognizes certain rights.
The italian constitution recognizes certain rights.
How is it that you feel that the italian govt is giving rights to italians while at the same time saying that is not true in the u.s.?


he already said that's immoral that our governament is also health care provider because it's not a natural right, so I think it makes him feel less corrupted.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 411
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:01:00 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
he already said that's immoral that our governament is also health care provider because it's not a natural right, so I think it makes him feel less corrupted.


Where did I say it was immoral?




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to eulero83)
Profile   Post #: 412
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:04:07 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the whole talk you are making sounds like:
"Mercedes is way too expensive for all of us having one of their cars"... "So buy a toyota"... "No! I will never consider a car if it's not a merceds, it's mercedes that must lower it's prices"... "but mercedes has no intention to produce cheap cars"... "I'll walk till mercedes won't do it"


My talk is that I want a Corvette (my favorite care of all time) that's truly a Corvette, and not a Yugo hiding under a Corvette body.

Are there no graphs that support the claim that the US moving to a national health care system would reduce costs? No graphs showing before/after national health care was instituted in other countries?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to eulero83)
Profile   Post #: 413
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:08:49 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
You are taking a look as a right coming from government.
That would be an idiotic interpretation of his post. He does not say that at all. This is a construct in your own mind so that now you have a straw man to knock down.
"If there was not a set of laws to protect a right the right doesn't exist..."
If there was not a right, there would be no set of laws to protect it. That's a look as the right being there without government.
The mother fucking point is that if that right is not protected it does not ipso facto exist...no one but you is saying that the government gives anyone rights.

You just said that without a law, a right doesn't exist. Laws require government, no?

If you cannot exercise a right does it exist for you?

That is the same thing as saying that government gives you rights.

No that would be what you are saying. What I am saying is that the govt guarantees your right.


And, that is not correct.

Well it is your opinion

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 414
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:12:34 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

the whole talk you are making sounds like:
"Mercedes is way too expensive for all of us having one of their cars"... "So buy a toyota"... "No! I will never consider a car if it's not a merceds, it's mercedes that must lower it's prices"... "but mercedes has no intention to produce cheap cars"... "I'll walk till mercedes won't do it"

I have a merceds s class...it cost me $300...yes I drove it home and drive it regularly.
No it is not new.

(in reply to eulero83)
Profile   Post #: 415
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:16:25 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri



Are there no graphs that support the claim that the US moving to a national health care system would reduce costs?


Why do you claim that there is no data to support the claim that the u.s. moving to nhc would reduce costs. Dont you have google?

No graphs showing before/after national health care was instituted in other countries?

Is the google fucntion broken on your computer?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 416
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:20:50 AM   
eulero83


Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the whole talk you are making sounds like:
"Mercedes is way too expensive for all of us having one of their cars"... "So buy a toyota"... "No! I will never consider a car if it's not a merceds, it's mercedes that must lower it's prices"... "but mercedes has no intention to produce cheap cars"... "I'll walk till mercedes won't do it"


My talk is that I want a Corvette (my favorite care of all time) that's truly a Corvette, and not a Yugo hiding under a Corvette body.

Are there no graphs that support the claim that the US moving to a national health care system would reduce costs? No graphs showing before/after national health care was instituted in other countries?



If you will just pay to the privates for the bills of who ever happens to be sick of course it will raise, as a matter of fact we are talking about producing health care directly because supply from the private sector is not enought to satisfy demand and with health care this means that for prices "sky is the limit".

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 417
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:32:03 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		It's tough to say that simply capping damages would result in a great deal of cost reduction in the cost of services and procedures. I'm not arguing they won't, but I'm not arguing that it would be the cure-all. IMO, it needs to be part of the plan.
quote:

There's excess cost because the cost of malpractice insurance is so much.
Given your stated beliefs on "personal responsibility" how would you solve this?

Cap damages. Serious, thompson.

If that is true then why do you say this?

"It's tough to say that simply capping damages would result in a great deal of cost reduction."



I bet my teen son could answer most of these.

Since I asked for your opinions why would the opinions of your son be relevant to this discussion?
Why would you bring your son into this discussion?
What purpose would this introduction have on this discussion?
Or was it just a gratutitous insult?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 418
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:35:22 AM   
eulero83


Posts: 1470
Joined: 11/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
he already said that's immoral that our governament is also health care provider because it's not a natural right, so I think it makes him feel less corrupted.


Where did I say it was immoral?





apology... you stand correct you never used that words... let say it's an interpretation of sentences as "health care is not a right" and "it's against the usa costitution that governament provides health care" this in combination with the 9th amendament and "you can't force people to give you something like health care"... I don't want to look and quote but it's from sentences like those.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 419
RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citiz... - 10/11/2013 9:36:17 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
the whole talk you are making sounds like:
"Mercedes is way too expensive for all of us having one of their cars"... "So buy a toyota"... "No! I will never consider a car if it's not a merceds, it's mercedes that must lower it's prices"... "but mercedes has no intention to produce cheap cars"... "I'll walk till mercedes won't do it"

My talk is that I want a Corvette (my favorite care of all time) that's truly a Corvette, and not a Yugo hiding under a Corvette body.
Are there no graphs that support the claim that the US moving to a national health care system would reduce costs? No graphs showing before/after national health care was instituted in other countries?

If you will just pay to the privates for the bills of who ever happens to be sick of course it will raise, as a matter of fact we are talking about producing health care directly because supply from the private sector is not enought to satisfy demand and with health care this means that for prices "sky is the limit".


How do you determine there isn't enough supply to satisfy demand? Just basing it on prices being high?

I was locked into a discussion with a friend of mine on FB who is a dyed-in-the-wool Catholic Republican. We agree on most issues, but he made the comment that the way to lower the cost of a hospital stay is so to have more beds available. While there are merits to the supply/demand argument, it's overly simplistic in his case. If there is not a frequent over demand of beds, increasing the number of beds isn't going to help outside of those infrequent times when there is a high demand.

I am not saying we don't have a glut of supply. I'm questioning the claim that there is a glut of demand.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to eulero83)
Profile   Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A question for Canadians, Brits and any other citizen of a country with nationalize health care Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.197