Retard of the Month

I Love America said:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/51288.htm

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_49594.htm

While they aren't official members they are partners. Do you really think NATO would stand by if Russia invaded Finland?
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter! It's an inane argument. The U.S. spends around $18 billion a year in foreign defense aid/funding of which 80% of that goes to only four countries (Irag, Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt). If we gave every red cent of that $18 billion to France it would only pay less than 6.5% of Frances annual spending on health care. It would be little more than a drop in the bucket. News Flash! We don't provide even close to $18 billion in military support to France. Hell if we gave every red cent we spent on defense spending this year to France it would only pay for two years of Frances total health care cost.

So to claim that the other industrialized nation can afford health care reform cause America "Fuck Yea" spends X amount on defense spending is completely divorced from reality.

To put things in perspective the US pays more in defense spending than the rest of the world combined. $600 billion annually, yet that only represents 20% of the $3.1 trillion in U.S. annual health care spending.

So when our health care spending is around 18% of GDP and rising and our health care outcomes are at third world levels despite having the best health care technology in the world then yea...it's time to study what others do and how they do it better for less cost.

To dismiss that based on America "Fuck Yea" simple mindedness is insane.

What Billy is saying is laughable because whatever financial costs that are saved by other modern industrialized nations due to US military hegemony are minute compared to those nations total health care costs. So ergo, if a nation like France can reduce total health care expenditures to around 10% of GDP while obtaining the highest health care outcomes in the world by making market based reforms than I say we have something to learn from France. That they are doing something right that we can learn from. It would be simply stupid not to learn from other nations successes.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It doesn't matter! It's an inane argument. The U.S. spends around $18 billion a year in foreign defense aid/funding of which 80% of that goes to only four countries (Irag, Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt). If we gave every red cent of that $18 billion to France it would only pay less than 6.5% of Frances annual spending on health care. It would be little more than a drop in the bucket. News Flash! We don't provide even close to $18 billion in military support to France. Hell if we gave every red cent we spent on defense spending this year to France it would only pay for two years of Frances total health care cost.

So to claim that the other industrialized nation can afford health care reform cause America "Fuck Yea" spends X amount on defense spending is completely divorced from reality.

To put things in perspective the US pays more in defense spending than the rest of the world combined. $600 billion annually, yet that only represents 20% of the $3.1 trillion in U.S. annual health care spending.

So when our health care spending is around 18% of GDP and rising and our health care outcomes are at third world levels despite having the best health care technology in the world then yea...it's time to study what others do and how they do it better for less cost.

To dismiss that based on America "Fuck Yea" simple mindedness is insane.

What Billy is saying is laughable because whatever financial costs that are saved by other modern industrialized nations due to US military hegemony are minute compared to those nations total health care costs. So ergo, if a nation like France can reduce total health care expenditures to around 10% of GDP while obtaining the highest health care outcomes in the world by making market based reforms than I say we have something to learn from France. That they are doing something right that we can learn from. It would be simply stupid not to learn from other nations successes.
Click to expand...

You are fooling yourself if you don't think there is an implicit guarentee that the US will be there to fight their battles

As for our healthcare outcomes let's look at something objective that we can tie directly to treatment like cancer. Why does the US have the highest cancer cure rates in the world?
 
I Love America said:
You are fooling yourself if you don't think there is an implicit guarentee that the US will be there to fight their battles

As for our healthcare outcomes let's look at something objective that we can tie directly to treatment like cancer. Why does the US have the highest cancer cure rates in the world?
Click to expand...
Because we have excellent technology. Why do we have one of the highest cancer rates in the world? Cause we suck at preventing cancer.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Because we have excellent technology. Why do we have one of the highest cancer rates in the world? Cause we suck at preventing cancer.
Click to expand...

So the others don't have excellent technology?

Your last statement shows how profoundly ignorant you are of physiologic and biological processes.

If you understood how people get cancer you wouldn't make such an idiotic statement.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
a few months ago my wife had cataract surgery......they do one eye separately from the other a few weeks apart.....we arrived at 7:30, done by around 9:00......the fee that day was roughly $6000. $2k for the facility, $2k for the doctor and $2k for the anesthesiologist......I sat in the doctor's office waiting room while the surgery was done........in that time a new patient arrived every fifteen minutes.......I asked at the desk and the nurse said there were sixteen scheduled that morning......

on that Monday the doctor made $32k.......the anesthesiologist made $32k.......the clinic made $32k........is there a limit?......
Click to expand...

There must have been 2 sets of surgery going on at the same time; because a 12 hour day, divided by 1.5 hours equals 8 procedures.
That would be;
2 Doctors @ $8k per day / 4 procedures per shift
2 Anesthesiologist @ 8k per day / 4 procedures per shift
and the clinic would make $32k per day.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
There must have been 2 sets of surgery going on at the same time; because a 12 hour day, divided by 1.5 hours equals 8 procedures.
That would be;
2 Doctors @ $8k per day / 4 procedures per shift
2 Anesthesiologist @ 8k per day / 4 procedures per shift
and the clinic would make $32k per day.
Click to expand...

there was one doctor who spent less than 15 minutes with each patient.....the rest of the time was spent with an anesthesiologist, a nurse giving her orange juice and lots of waiting around......
 
Dad of Desh said:
i have taken responsibility. I am living very happy not paying for sickly piece of shit boomers.
Click to expand...

so it was fine that the boomers paid for all the WWII generations needs all their lives but now that its time for you to pay for the boomers you want to reneg on the deal?



see your a sociopath.



without this program this country would not be providing you the opportunities it now does.



you don't fucking care


You want that economy without paying your share



you are a member of the most stupid, selfish, ungrateful, evil unthinking club.


young republicans club


where sociopaths meet other sociopaths
 
I Love America said:
So the others don't have excellent technology?

Your last statement shows how profoundly ignorant you are of physiologic and biological processes.

If you understood how people get cancer you wouldn't make such an idiotic statement.
Click to expand...
Oh please. Spare me the ad hom. I have forgotten more about biology and physiology than you have ever known. Where did you do your graduate studies in human biology? Please explain why our cancer rates our higher than most of the developed world if were so great at managing the disease?

Of course other developed nations have excellent technology in treating cancer but many of them also do a far, far better job of preventing cancer than we do.
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
there was one doctor who spent less than 15 minutes with each patient.....the rest of the time was spent with an anesthesiologist, a nurse giving her orange juice and lots of waiting around......
Click to expand...

That wasn't clear; but in that case, let's consider the following.

Let's give the Doctor with 15 minutes between patients, for what ever, and nock the hours down from 12 per day, to 8 hours per day.
That would be 30 minutes per patient, for 8 hours.
8 hours divided by 1/2 hour increments, equals 16 patients @ $2k per each, with a total of $32K.
That would leave $32K for the Anesthesiologist or Anesthesiologists if there were more then just 1; which there probably was, otherwise the monitoring would be really shoddy.
Of course the $32k that the clinic would get, would be to pay the nurse or nurses, equipment, utilities, and other overhead.

Therefore, your assessment total was correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top