Health Care

Damocles said:
Except it isn't when people are praising it as one of the best out there. Posting information from people who actually have first-hand knowledge of something is not a "red herring" in such a discussion.

You attempt to only regard information from editorials showing the positive, yet attempt to dismiss actual information regarding the negatives.
Click to expand...

No, I don't do that.
 
Darla said:
No, I don't do that.
Click to expand...
You just did by attempting to dismiss certain relevant information from the discussion. "red herring" and "irrelevant" are dismissive terminology used by those who wish to ignore information detrimental to their position.
 
Damocles said:
You just did by attempting to dismiss certain relevant information from the discussion. "red herring" and "irrelevant" are dismissive terminology used by those who wish to ignore information detrimental to their position.
Click to expand...

That's not what you accused me of:

You attempt to only regard information from editorials showing the positive, yet attempt to dismiss actual information regarding the negatives.

It really doesn't matter what Canada has (if I wanted to impress someone, I'd be talking about France anyway).

It matters what we have.

And we have what we have because of insurance companies spending many millions of dollars to put people on televison, and on the radio, and on the internet, to whine about someone breakign a fucking finger in Canada who didn't get their ass kissed.

I don't care.

We have the money to fix OUR system. We have the innovation to make our system, the best.

We should be number one across the board. We will never be as long as people whine about a Candadian they know.
 
Darla said:
That's not what you accused me of:

You attempt to only regard information from editorials showing the positive, yet attempt to dismiss actual information regarding the negatives.

It really doesn't matter what Canada has (if I wanted to impress someone, I'd be talking about France anyway).

It matters what we have.

And we have what we have because of insurance companies spending many millions of dollars to put people on televison, and on the radio, and on the internet, to whine about someone breakign a fucking finger in Canada who didn't get their ass kissed.

I don't care.

We have the money to fix OUR system. We have the innovation to make our system, the best.

We should be number one across the board. We will never be as long as people whine about a Candadian they know.
Click to expand...
Understanding the problems in other systems, and working to resolve them before impelementing them into policy is a valid way to work towards a real resolution, even if you don't care about some "canadian who didn't get their butt kissed"... As if that was what the articles were about.

Speaking of issues in places that have implemented such programs is relevant to a discussion of implementing a program here.
 
Cypress said:
Some bush whore tried to pull the "waiting lists" BS on me, with respect to canada. And he refereced some canadian association.

It took me 5 seconds on google, to find this canadian association he was using to fear monger about "waiting lists".

And you know what? I went to their website, and they were talking about problems in canada with waiting lists for elective surgery.

Well, what the fuck. If I wanted ELECTIVE surgery in this country, I wouldn't even get it if I didn't have insurance. And even if I did, I would have to wait for surgery that was elective, and wasn't life-threatening.


These CATO people lie and lie and lie. Its disgusting really
Click to expand...

Where is CATO's lie that you are referencing?
 
Darla said:
I am so sick and tired of these evil lies.

Deregulating the insurance industry is the solution?

I'll tell you, even if the director of Cato's health and welfare studies, Michael Tanner's insurance plan tells him they're not paying for his daughter's bone marrow transplant because it's "expermental" the daughter of the director of Cato's health and welfare studies, Michael Tanner, is not going to die, she's going to live, because the director of Cato's health and welfare studies Michael Tanner, is a wealthy man. But someone's daughter will die.

He's an evil man. And if it is true that the first shall be last and the last shall be first, may he burn in hell when the time comes.
Click to expand...


I really like your passion but I do not agree that one who suggests the market can offer better results than socialized medicine is evil.
 
Damocles said:
Understanding the problems in other systems, and working to resolve them before impelementing them into policy is a valid way to work towards a real resolution, even if you don't care about some "canadian who didn't get their butt kissed"... As if that was what the articles were about.

Speaking of issues in places that have implemented such programs is relevant to a discussion of implementing a program here.
Click to expand...

Again, I agree with you.
 
Darla said:
I am so sick and tired of these evil lies.

Deregulating the insurance industry is the solution?

I'll tell you, even if the director of Cato's health and welfare studies, Michael Tanner's insurance plan tells him they're not paying for his daughter's bone marrow transplant because it's "expermental" the daughter of the director of Cato's health and welfare studies, Michael Tanner, is not going to die, she's going to live, because the director of Cato's health and welfare studies Michael Tanner, is a wealthy man. But someone's daughter will die.

He's an evil man. And if it is true that the first shall be last and the last shall be first, may he burn in hell when the time comes.
Click to expand...

I'm not wealthy and I ain't gonna die.

I really don't call anyone "evil". The only evil I know is apathy.ff
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
Some bush whore tried to pull the "waiting lists" BS on me, with respect to canada. And he refereced some canadian association.

It took me 5 seconds on google, to find this canadian association he was using to fear monger about "waiting lists".

And you know what? I went to their website, and they were talking about problems in canada with waiting lists for elective surgery.

Well, what the fuck. If I wanted ELECTIVE surgery in this country, I wouldn't even get it if I didn't have insurance. And even if I did, I would have to wait for surgery that was elective, and wasn't life-threatening.


These CATO people lie and lie and lie. Its disgusting really
Click to expand...

CATO's misguided. The sad thing is that they believe every word that comes out of their mouth is truth.

I don't think anyone in congress is even proposing any sort of plan that would involve waiting lists. Most involve people just PAYING for elective surgery - which isn't unreasonable. Our health system is so beaurocratic and badly managed it's unsalvagable without a complete fix-up.
 
I actually think insurance companies should be regulated even more. Their premium charges are a complete black box. Something just sounds fishy about a doctor who's charged $100K a year for insurance and the company has a $hit load of reserves.
 
What to people consider "elective surgery"? Its quite possible my nose break would have been considered elective since I wasn't dying and the most traumatic thing about it was hte way I looked after a few days.
 
Watermark said:
CATO's misguided. The sad thing is that they believe every word that comes out of their mouth is truth.

I don't think anyone in congress is even proposing any sort of plan that would involve waiting lists. Most involve people just PAYING for elective surgery - which isn't unreasonable. Our health system is so beaurocratic and badly managed it's unsalvagable without a complete fix-up.
Click to expand...

No. The sad thing about them is that they are well aware that further deregulation would only kill more people.

And that's also why they're evil. Whis is a word that I do use, even though it's not a word you use.
 
LadyT said:
What to people consider "elective surgery"? Its quite possible my nose break would have been considered elective since I wasn't dying and the most traumatic thing about it was hte way I looked after a few days.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's another question.

Is my nephew having his tonsils out "elective"? No. But neither is it, at this moment, life-threatening. So I don't know what that falls into.
 
LadyT said:
I actually think insurance companies should be regulated even more. Their premium charges are a complete black box. Something just sounds fishy about a doctor who's charged $100K a year for insurance and the company has a $hit load of reserves.
Click to expand...

I've come to the conclusion that insurance contracts are always going to go massively into profits for the insurance company, no matter how much you regulate. I really think the only thing that would solve it is universal healthcare.
 
Watermark said:
I've come to the conclusion that insurance contracts are always going to go massively into profits for the insurance company, no matter how much you regulate. I really think the only thing that would solve it is universal healthcare.
Click to expand...

Do you want this universal healthcare run by the government?
 
LadyT said:
What to people consider "elective surgery"? Its quite possible my nose break would have been considered elective since I wasn't dying and the most traumatic thing about it was hte way I looked after a few days.
Click to expand...

That would be one of the more difficult things in deciding how universal insurance should be run. I would really think that anything that a doctor could reasonably say is for the general well-being of the patient should be covered, without waiting lists, unless a small waiting period would be reasonable. But, I'm sure that's how the British got into their whole waiting list mess...
 
Watermark said:
That would be one of the more difficult things in deciding how universal insurance should be run. I would really think that anything that a doctor could reasonably say is for the general well-being of the patient should be covered, without waiting lists, unless a small waiting period would be reasonable. But, I'm sure that's how the British got into their whole waiting list mess...
Click to expand...

Then you get into gender identity issues. Should we foot the bill for someone who has genuine gender identity issues? That would improve his general well being.
 
Watermark said:
I don't think anyone wants the British system, Cawacko. We could do better. But really, I'd rather have the British system than the American one.
Click to expand...

I think our system is better if you have insurance than the British system. If you have none, Britain's is obviously better.


-BTW, I'd like to take this time out to thank one of the greatest minds of our time for igniting this national debate: ladies and gentlemen, lets give it up for Miiiiiiiiiichael Moore aka 2nd coming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top