[catchtheroadrunner]

Originally Posted by TheUNZippee! Numbers from the internet? As compared to me struggling to live paycheck to paycheck. I'm telling you from personal experience, runner, our heath care system is in the shitter, big time, and any numbers can be put together to make things look better.

I'm not saying your hc system doesn't suck. But it ranks in the top 17% of 190 countries, though you pay through nose for it. A seperate discussion might define exceptable healthcare.

France is a socialist country and is ranked #1, they are also amongst the first to announce the emergence from the recession.

[TheUNZippee!]

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner I'm not saying your hc system doesn't suck. But it ranks in the top 17% of 190 countries, though you pay through nose for it. A seperate discussion might define exceptable healthcare. France is a socialist country and is ranked #1, they are also amongst the first to announce the emergence from the recession.

Now there's a conversation.


I'm certainly no expert on any subject man. I definitely have my political leanings, which I guess at the end of the day some would consider invalid because I didn't develop them from higher education. I developed my viewpoints by lots of talk with my mother, who is a ridiculously well read person, lots of talk with people I've met from all over both countries over 20 years of trucking, of course from following the news, from reading myself, and most importantly, just from living my life.

All I can tell you is that what we have now is not working. Despite our 'free' healthcare, despite some numbers saying we are leading in this category or that category, it actually only covers about 70% of expenses. On top of all the taxes and expenses I mentioned to you in previous posts, I STILL have to pay 28 bucks a week for my dental, eye care, and prescription plan.

And the fact remains, that while the numbers might preach one thing, Ive witnessed the system at work up close and personal in the last ten years, and it's progressively getting worse.

[Ke^in]

Chris it happened. And if this healthcare reform is so great, Obama and his kids will be on it right? No. Not a chance. It's for the "little people" *rolleyes*

Point is, it can be fixed WITHOUT socialisms. Socialisms are just being pushed because that's what the left want.

[03SonicBoom]

Originally Posted by 03SonicBoom You still ignore the fact that if our healthcare system is so terrible and it's also way over priced (both of which you are claiming/implying) then why the fuck are so many people coming here for our healthcare? Why are they choosing the 38th best healthcare system that's also over priced? Why not chose one of the "top 10" systems?

Again, I quote what I said so you'll maybe see the point. If we're so bad and over priced, why are so many people coming here for their healthcare?

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner In terms of personal safety, Canadian cities again perform best with Calgary, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto and Vancouver all ranked jointly at 22. In the US, Chicago, Honolulu, Houston, Lexington, San Francisco and Winston-Salem all share rank 53. Elsewhere in the region, Santo Domingo has the highest ranking at 92 followed by Panama City (96) and Monterrey (99). Bogota (207) in Colombia has the lowest levels of personal safety. The Canadian cities score 115.8 compared to Bogota's 30.4."

WTF does personal safety have to do with healthcare? Seriously, why bring in completely pointless and off topic polls? It's like comparing life expectancy and trying to correlate it to healthcare. Did you know that once you remove car accidents and homicides from life expectancy, the US ranks first in the world?

Lastly, I would like to point out that your WHO list of "best" healthcare systems is a decade old. Why don't you get some current numbers instead of outdated numbers?

[Ke^in]

America has the best health care in the world

[catchtheroadrunner]

Originally Posted by 03SonicBoom Again, I quote what I said so you'll maybe see the point. If we're so bad and over priced, why are so many people coming here for their healthcare? WTF does personal safety have to do with healthcare? Seriously, why bring in completely pointless and off topic polls? It's like comparing life expectancy and trying to correlate it to healthcare. Did you know that once you remove car accidents and homicides from life expectancy, the US ranks first in the world? Lastly, I would like to point out that your WHO list of "best" healthcare systems is a decade old. Why don't you get some current numbers instead of outdated numbers?

Good question, what does personal safety have to do with healthcare? It was part of the quoted paragraph. I didn't intend that specific bit to be intellectually moving.

[03SonicBoom]

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner Good question, what does personal safety have to do with healthcare? It was part of the quoted paragraph. I didn't intend that specific bit to be intellectually moving.

Are you going to answer my question or just ignore it? You want me to accept decade old data that says the US healthcare sucks but won't answer why so many people pay to come here if it sucks so much.

[catchtheroadrunner]

shit, a decade old? Good catch. I'll be right back.

You set yourself up though. Did you check yourself? What if I get back to you and it's worse?

[catchtheroadrunner]

Originally Posted by 03SonicBoom Are you going to answer my question or just ignore it? You want me to accept decade old data that says the US healthcare sucks but won't answer why so many people pay to come here if it sucks so much.

Commonwealth fund as reported by NY Times places us dead last overall, out of the 5 wealthiest countries, the only countries that were scrutinized. But we also do a lot of things well. It's the chronic stuff that requires regular visits to your doctor where we fail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html

"Quality. In a comparison with five other countries, the Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States first in providing the “right care” for a given condition as defined by standard clinical guidelines and gave it especially high marks for preventive care, like Pap smears and mammograms to detect early-stage cancers, and blood tests and cholesterol checks for hypertensive patients. But we scored poorly in coordinating the care of chronically ill patients, in protecting the safety of patients, and in meeting their needs and preferences, which drove our overall quality rating down to last place. American doctors and hospitals kill patients through surgical and medical mistakes more often than their counterparts in other industrialized nations."


Check this out from Harvard. They did a poll of peoples perception of healthcare. It's simply an opinion poll and 68% of Republicans believe our system is the best. 52% Percent of Democrats think it's better in other countries. Does really help anyone here, but it's interesting info that may be usefull in other arguments.

Most Republicans Think the U.S. Health Care System is the Best in the World. Democrats Disagree. - March 20, 2008 -2008 Releases - Press Releases - Harvard School of Public Health


Finding a ranking is difficult, the WHO no longer seems to rank, but here's just a bit from newsweek, August 7th, 2009. I can't get the article because I'm not a subscriber, so it is possible they are using the old WHO numbers. Singapore is at #6 (read the singapore bit). So unless you think the U.S. shot up the laddeer, which even fluffy might question, things probably are about the same. Especially when you read the first article above from NY Times.

Wealth of Nations : Countries WIth the Best Health Care Worldwide

I'm willing to entertain the idea that lot's of people come here for healthcare, but there's no point in arguing until you provide me with evidense (like I'm going to take your word for it when the internet you use to post here can also help support your assertions). You should really stop making that claim until you can support it, you're just blowing smoke. And it's irritating.

[catchtheroadrunner]

Originally Posted by 03SonicBoom Are you going to answer my question or just ignore it? You want me to accept decade old data that says the US healthcare sucks but won't answer why so many people pay to come here if it sucks so much.

Here, since your so unable to help me out I had to research your argument for you.

Medical Tourism ~ An Economic Boost to the United States

"Medical tourism represents an opportunity for U.S. hospitals to diversify revenue - usually hospitals with dedicated international centers generate five to ten percent of total revenue from international patients. Inbound medical tourism to the U.S. is approximately $5 billion or 400,000 patients annually, according to the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions."

Here is the current census report for the U.S. population as well as the entire globel.
U.S. 307,280,874
World 6,780,177,744
22:42 GMT (EST+5) Aug 26, 2009

Twice as many people visit the U.S. then leave it for health care. 2 to 1, yet the population outside the U.S. is 21 times greater than the U.S. population. So I'm going to assert reasonably that most wealthy people, regardless of their country, stay home for pricey health care. The percentage of U.S. citizens going abroad for healthcare is .065. The formula I used was 200,000 x 100 / 307280874. The population of the global population that comes here is so much smaller than that, my computer gave me an error. The formula being 400,000 x 100 / 6472896870 (that number is the census global pop number minus the U.S. pop number) =.

So what are you guys basing your claims on when you claim the U.S. is some sort of mecha for healthcare? Like 400,000 is such a big number (It's a number Doctor Evil would've used fresh out of his cryo coma). And those 400,000 spent 5 billion vs our 200,000 that spent 2 billion abroad.

Our profit last year from inbound medical tourism was 1 billion dollars. In 2007 we spent 2.2 trillion within our system, on ourselves. I've made a visual for you below.


1,000,000,000
2,200,000,000,000

Inbound medical tourism brings us what I estimate (data are from different years) to be 1/2200 of our healthcare budget, or .0454 percent.

[catchtheroadrunner]

How Does the Quality of U.S. Health Care Compare Internationally? - RWJF RWJF = Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

..."And while evidence base is incomplete and suffers from other limitations, it does not provide support for the oft-repeated claim that the “U.S. health care is the best in the world.” In fact, there is no hard evidence that identifies particular areas in which U.S. health care quality is truly exceptional."

[Fluffy The Rhino]

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner I'm not saying your hc system doesn't suck. But it ranks in the top 17% of 190 countries, though you pay through nose for it. A seperate discussion might define exceptable healthcare. France is a socialist country and is ranked #1, they are also amongst the first to announce the emergence from the recession.

A health care system that sucks, and is in the top 17% of "good" socialized health care? I guess the other 83% just don't count, right? Just ignore that and pretend it's a good system because of some that aren't great.

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner 1. Are you crazy, Singapore is a prosperous place to be and their private hospitals are state of the art. You wouldn't have any problems going to a private hospital in Mexico either. What are you basing your opinion on? How about Dubai, would you not go there either? You know that place has state of the art everything. Do you think asians are tech crazy in every regard except health care? Also, you wouldn't go there for surgery and go to a public hospital. Public hospitals in those places are for the very poor. You go to the private ones and even after the travel expenses, you're still ahead. 2 .But I agree with you profoundly on the medical system treating patients like commodities. That's exactly correct. And at the end of the day if the documents are complete, the physicians, the system, get paid. Doesn't matter if the procedure fails three days from now. By then there's plenty of other people who have cared for the patient, to be blamed for what was really a shitty outcome before the patient was off the OR table. 3. And about your Doom and Gloom nonsense. At the end of the last ice age, the climate changed rapidly. Would you have told everyone back then to not worry about it and go about your lives. Of course, not. Perhaps one need not worry, but one surely needs to prepare. You're pretty content to assure yourself that it's just not happening. Yet you know from history that it does happen. Your fixation on a fatalist position is sort of troubling. Even something as simple as a business climate changes, and the nimble businesses survive, the ones that sat around resting on their accomplishments don't. What I'm stressing here is to be a nimble animal, not a cow grazing away blissfully oblivious.

1. Still ahead of what? Bottom line is that I would not get medical treatment for something life threatening if it meant going to a different country because it's cheaper. What you are missing here is that the only reason other countries receive notoriety for various procedures is because of COST.

2. Socialized health care will be no different. Insurance companies will still get their money, and the hospitals will still get their money (and more than likely less of it since the government will be involved). Patients will still be CUSTOMERS. So please explain to me how socialized medical care is any better than the current system. If it has anything to do with subsidizing the poor so they can be taken care of, save it. That means more taxes. I pay enough taxes as it is, I'd like to be able to save just a little for retirement, just as millions of other Americans would.

Furthermore, if you've ever been in the military, then you might have a glimpse into what kind of system it is we're heading toward in the arena of medical care. You think it's bad now? Just wait. You think medical staff will be happier to see a patient walk through the door knowing that they won't be making as much money to take care of you? That's how it is in the military. Mediocre pay to service customers they don't care for.

3. Nonsense? I find humor in your ice age statement. The ONLY thing people were able to do was migrate. What happens when another comes along? Perhaps we can hire the Army to bomb the glaciers? Oh wise one, please tell me how to be nimble unlike a cow. Please tell me how I can change the orbit of the earth around the sun. Please tell me how I can stop solar flares. Perhaps with your help, and maybe that of Chuck Norris, I can prevent hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, and cancer. Perhaps I'm simply too much of a realist, but in 5 billion years when the earth is vaporized by the expanding sun, I don't think there's much I can do now to "prepare" for such a minor glitch in the existence of mankind. You seem to have all of the answers, so let's hear it. With that said, whether or not global warming has ANYTHING to do with mankind's influence, the truth is, it's on a global scale, is it not? How does one prepare for continued higher temperatures? Then again, how do nearly 7 Billion prepare for it? On a global scale, that's not exactly a small feat, now is it?

Do you propose we move every last man, woman, and child to cooler areas of the earth so they don't cook to death? Then you've got a whole set of other problems with large populations in smaller areas. What about natural disasters that happen in those areas? More people dead. You also have the problem of resources, etc... so I guess that's a stupid idea.

What else? Build a giant solar shield in space to block out the sun? lol Yeah, that'll work. That would be especially wonderful if the system malfunctions, the shield stayed in orbit, and blocked out the sun for a few weeks. That's a whole lot of mass extinction. Goodbye more resources. So, another stupid idea.

Ooooh, we can paint everything white! But then again, that doesn't stop the earth from shining. And with all of these pesky greenhouse gases floating around like a giant invisible turd in the toilet we call an atmosphere, all the light reflecting off of everything won't allow the heat to escape.

What I find "troubling," and even moreso, arrogant, is that any single person on this planet thinks that we as humans are powerful enough to stop nature from taking it's course. You think you are a "nimble animal" and I'm an blissfully oblivious "grazing cow." I'm far from oblivious. More along the lines of completely aware of what's going on, but I'm not living in paranoia and fear like all of the "nimble animals" who are arrogant enough to think that people such as myself don't know anything, are uneducated, etc...

I'm pretty content to know I have nothing to worry about except for higher electricity bills, higher gas prices, higher food costs, and shittier medical care. So be as nimble as you like. Sooner or later you and I will both die. It won't amount to anything. No matter how fast you think you are, or how slow you think I am, we will both finish the same race with the SAME results. Sorry for being logical and practical. Maybe next time if it'll please you, I'll role play and tell stories of how those "fixed on fatalist" views are all morons and how I find them troubling.

[Fluffy The Rhino]

BTW, posting all of these links that center around debates doesn't exactly further anyone's position in another debate. 76% of statistics are made up on the spot, and don't mean a bloody thing.

Polls from schools based solely on OPINION and the "Urban Institute" don't exactly equate to a NEED for reform.

Instead of touting socialism as the cure for whatever it is the liberals think is wrong, perhaps a real solution can be thought up by all of the geniuses (instead of wasting time with Goddamn polls) who feel they are the end-all answer to everything.

My bad, just more logic.

[catchtheroadrunner]

Originally Posted by FluffyTheRhino A health care system that sucks, and is in the top 17% of "good" socialized health care? I guess the other 83% just don't count, right? Just ignore that and pretend it's a good system because of some that aren't great.

I'm not saying it sucks, Zippee is, and he's credible so I'm not going to argue with him. So yes, if Zippee is correct Canada is in the top 17% of Suck.

]1. Still ahead of what? Bottom line is that I would not get medical treatment for something life threatening if it meant going to a different country because it's cheaper. What you are missing here is that the only reason other countries receive notoriety for various procedures is because of COST.

Show me some evidense of this. Your personal interpretation is pretty crappy since you don't use evidense.

2. Socialized health care will be no different. Insurance companies will still get their money, and the hospitals will still get their money (and more than likely less of it since the government will be involved). Patients will still be CUSTOMERS. So please explain to me how socialized medical care is any better than the current system. If it has anything to do with subsidizing the poor so they can be taken care of, save it. That means more taxes. I pay enough taxes as it is, I'd like to be able to save just a little for retirement, just as millions of other Americans would.

That's assanine to ask me to prove the future. It may not work. But I'll repeat, France is ranked the best, spends at about the median for GDP, and is one of the first countries out of the recession. Mit Romney (Republican) has brought Mass to 97% coverage through his programs. The current system sucks and I'm ready to give an carefully thought out alternative a chance.

Furthermore, if you've ever been in the military, then you might have a glimpse into what kind of system it is we're heading toward in the arena of medical care. You think it's bad now? Just wait. You think medical staff will be happier to see a patient walk through the door knowing that they won't be making as much money to take care of you? That's how it is in the military. Mediocre pay to service customers they don't care for.

3.5 years in the Navy. Citizens are not governed by the same standards as the Military.

3. Nonsense? I find humor in your ice age statement. The ONLY thing people were able to do was migrate. What happens when another comes along? Perhaps we can hire the Army to bomb the glaciers? Oh wise one, please tell me how to be nimble unlike a cow. Please tell me how I can change the orbit of the earth around the sun. Please tell me how I can stop solar flares. Perhaps with your help, and maybe that of Chuck Norris, I can prevent hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, and cancer. Perhaps I'm simply too much of a realist, but in 5 billion years when the earth is vaporized by the expanding sun, I don't think there's much I can do now to "prepare" for such a minor glitch in the existence of mankind. You seem to have all of the answers, so let's hear it. With that said, whether or not global warming has ANYTHING to do with mankind's influence, the truth is, it's on a global scale, is it not? How does one prepare for continued higher temperatures? Then again, how do nearly 7 Billion prepare for it? On a global scale, that's not exactly a small feat, now is it?

You are correct, 10,000 years ago all we could do was move. Yet it's 2009 and you suggest we do absolutely nothing except deny the possibility because of politics.

We don't even have to move. We need to look at crops that will grow best in the anticipated new climate, we need to attempt to model future shipping channels and safe ports of harbor, etc, etc, etc. We need to focus on our everyday habits to see what will be sustainable in the future. We need to investigate to be prepared. That's all I'm saying.

What else? Build a giant solar shield in space to block out the sun? lol Yeah, that'll work. That would be especially wonderful if the system malfunctions, the shield stayed in orbit, and blocked out the sun for a few weeks. That's a whole lot of mass extinction. Goodbye more resources. So, another stupid idea.

Actually, it's being investigated. Since Antarctica is decreasing in size it is providing less white snow to reflect energy away from the earth. The lost snow cover is compounding the problem because more energy is absorbed by the water and the water organisms that us it. So the thought is, that a much smaller area of cover (like a field of aluminum shavings or whatever you can imagine} orbiting much farther out in space in a position always between the earth and the sun, could scatter that areas lite from it's original path toward Earth.

What I find "troubling," and even moreso, arrogant, is that any single person on this planet thinks that we as humans are powerful enough to stop nature from taking it's course. You think you are a "nimble animal" and I'm an blissfully oblivious "grazing cow." I'm far from oblivious. More along the lines of completely aware of what's going on, but I'm not living in paranoia and fear like all of the "nimble animals" who are arrogant enough to think that people such as myself don't know anything, are uneducated, etc... I'm pretty content to know I have nothing to worry about except for higher electricity bills, higher gas prices, higher food costs, and shittier medical care. So be as nimble as you like. Sooner or later you and I will both die. It won't amount to anything. No matter how fast you think you are, or how slow you think I am, we will both finish the same race with the SAME results. Sorry for being logical and practical. Maybe next time if it'll please you, I'll role play and tell stories of how those "fixed on fatalist" views are all morons and how I find them troubling.

And we'll call this classic Fluffy who feels so small and insignificant he relies on others or just throws up his hands in surrender. You've posted this angle at least twice in this thread alone and it's stale.

[Fluffy The Rhino]

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner 1. I'm not saying it sucks, Zippee is, and he's credible so I'm not going to argue with him. So yes, if Zippee is correct Canada is in the top 17% of Suck. 2. Show me some evidense of this. Your personal interpretation is pretty crappy since you don't use evidense. 3. That's assanine to ask me to prove the future. It may not work. But I'll repeat, France is ranked the best, spends at about the median for GDP, and is one of the first countries out of the recession. The current system sucks and I'm ready to give an carefully thought out alternative a chance. 4. 3.5 years in the Navy. Citizens are not governed by the same standards as the Military. 5. You are correct, 10,000 years ago all we could do was move. Yet it's 2009 and you suggest we do absolutely nothing except deny the possibility because of politics. 6. We don't even have to move. We need to look at crops that will grow best in the anticipated now climate, we need to attempt to model future shipping channels and safe ports of harbor, etc, etc, etc. We need to focus on our everyday habits to see what will be sustainable in the future. 7. Actually, it's being investigated. Since Antarctica is decreasing in size it is providing less white snow to reflect energy away from the earth. The lost snow cover is compounding the problem because more energy is absorbed by the water and the water organisms that us it. So the thought is, that a much smaller area of cover (like a field of aluminum shavings or whatever you can imagine} orbiting much farther out in space in a position always between the earth and the sun, could scatter that areas lite from it's original path toward Earth. 8. And we'll call this classic Fluffy who feels so small and insignificant he relies on others or just throws up his hands in surrender. You've posted this angle at least twice in this thread alone and it's stale.

1. So why incorporate a system that is known to suck? And how do you know he's credible? Because he's on the internet? His word on the matter is just as good as anyone else's on the internet. I find this ironic coming from someone constantly demanding evidence.

2. Practice what you preach. You have shown no evidence. Evidence is PROOF. What you're plastering all over this thread are statistics, polls, and debates.

3. Good for France. This is the United States. Welcome. As for the future, maybe you should look at history. History has shown us that socialism in the long term does not work. Same with large fiat economies. That's where we are now. They do not last. We will eventually go bankrupt. Maybe, just MAYBE, if obama the messiah looked at actually getting rid of the federal reserve, went back to a precious metal-backed dollar, the economy would recover (instead of this stupid band-aid fix BS), and people would have the money they need to pay for health care. Then we wouldn't be going in the direction we're heading. But what do I know, I'm just a fucking grazing cow retard that reads Fox News, right? No, let's instead tout socialized health care some more and how great it is. Goshity heck, you're right, the rest of us are all wrong and we don't understand what it is we're saying. How foolish we all are.

4. No, they are not. But socializing health care is a pleasant start to that transition, now isn't it. Liberals want to socialize everything. USSR sure had a wonderful time with that!

5. Deny what? That people are not going to "fix" anything?

6. Already being done.

7. Great, let's cool the earth. And then what? Send a dyson vacuum up into space when the earth cools a lot faster than all of the scientists and liberals thought it would, causing more problems? The last thing on the liberal personal agenda is the space program. Good luck to anyone with actual solutions finding money to fund these lovely ideas that are never going to happen.

8. It's called being consistent. Is there any particular reason you feel the need to talk down to myself or anyone else who dismisses other's viewpoints that you post as your own?

Let's clear something up, shall we? You say I rely on others. Where is YOUR research? Where is YOUR solution? Where is YOUR work? What are YOUR thoughts? Everything you have posted is the result of what others have done. You seem to rely an awful lot on what everyone else has come up with. I don't recall you ever posting a link to a website that you created with polls or actual work you have done yourself.

Pot, meet kettle.

What I find most humorous about all of this, especially from people such as yourself, is that you feel so strongly about a cause that you'll talk down to everyone you feel who just "throws his or her hands up in surrender." Yet there you are, doing absolutely NOTHING to make the world a better place. Complain about everything all you'd like, I don't see you doing a Goddamned thing to improve what you feel is broken.

I'll stick with my own thoughts on these kinds of subjects. I don't need to rely on biased sources for what I believe in.

Post YOUR angle about global warming and everything else all you'd like. Your copy/pasting links isn't going to stop global warming : D

Lastly, since my points are "stale" to you, don't bother replying to anything else I say. It's pretty obvious you're frustrated with me because I think for myself, I don't agree with everything you post and that doesn't make you happy. I've grown weary of your pompous attitude, and you are surely bored with my incoherent use of logic and thought-out viewpoints. I apologize for "throwing my hands up in surrender," so soon again, but I'm sick of talking to a brick wall.

[catchtheroadrunner]

Originally Posted by FluffyTheRhino 1. So why incorporate a system that is known to suck? And how do you know he's credible? Because he's on the internet? His word on the matter is just as good as anyone else's on the internet. I find this ironic coming from someone constantly demanding evidence. 2. Practice what you preach. You have shown no evidence. Evidence is PROOF. What you're plastering all over this thread are statistics, polls, and debates. 3. Good for France. This is the United States. Welcome. As for the future, maybe you should look at history. History has shown us that socialism in the long term does not work. Same with large fiat economies. That's where we are now. They do not last. We will eventually go bankrupt. Maybe, just MAYBE, if obama the messiah looked at actually getting rid of the federal reserve, went back to a precious metal-backed dollar, the economy would recover (instead of this stupid band-aid fix BS), and people would have the money they need to pay for health care. Then we wouldn't be going in the direction we're heading. But what do I know, I'm just a fucking grazing cow retard that reads Fox News, right? No, let's instead tout socialized health care some more and how great it is. Goshity heck, you're right, the rest of us are all wrong and we don't understand what it is we're saying. How foolish we all are. 4. No, they are not. But socializing health care is a pleasant start to that transition, now isn't it. Liberals want to socialize everything. USSR sure had a wonderful time with that! 5. Deny what? That people are not going to "fix" anything? 6. Already being done. 7. Great, let's cool the earth. And then what? Send a dyson vacuum up into space when the earth cools a lot faster than all of the scientists and liberals thought it would, causing more problems? The last thing on the liberal personal agenda is the space program. Good luck to anyone with actual solutions finding money to fund these lovely ideas that are never going to happen. 8. It's called being consistent. Is there any particular reason you feel the need to talk down to myself or anyone else who dismisses other's viewpoints that you post as your own? Let's clear something up, shall we? You say I rely on others. Where is YOUR research? Where is YOUR solution? Where is YOUR work? What are YOUR thoughts? Everything you have posted is the result of what others have done. You seem to rely an awful lot on what everyone else has come up with. I don't recall you ever posting a link to a website that you created with polls or actual work you have done yourself. Pot, meet kettle. What I find most humorous about all of this, especially from people such as yourself, is that you feel so strongly about a cause that you'll talk down to everyone you feel who just "throws his or her hands up in surrender." Yet there you are, doing absolutely NOTHING to make the world a better place. Complain about everything all you'd like, I don't see you doing a Goddamned thing to improve what you feel is broken. I'll stick with my own thoughts on these kinds of subjects. I don't need to rely on biased sources for what I believe in. Post YOUR angle about global warming and everything else all you'd like. Your copy/pasting links isn't going to stop global warming : D Lastly, since my points are "stale" to you, don't bother replying to anything else I say. It's pretty obvious you're frustrated with me because I think for myself, I don't agree with everything you post and that doesn't make you happy. I've grown weary of your pompous attitude, and you are surely bored with my incoherent use of logic and thought-out viewpoints. I apologize for "throwing my hands up in surrender," so soon again, but I'm sick of talking to a brick wall.

Who the hell said we should adopt Canada's system? How about fixating on the several times I've pointed out Mit Romney's success.

Your copy/paste comments....golden. I present you evidense to support my claim, you present absolutely nothing to support yours. If not copy and paste links, how would you have me present the evidense to you? If you send me your address I'll supply all future support for my position with crayon on construction paper and send it to your house. You're dismissing these links because you dislike my position. How about providing enough of your own substantiated info to cause me to reject my position.

And I'll tell you a secret...shhh..I'm a Skeptic, and by definition I'm required to modify my position to reflect all the new credible evidence that comes my way. You noticed that I abandoned my claims that GW is man made. I couldn't support it through my own research.

"I'll stick with my own thoughts on these kinds of subjects. I don't need to rely on biased sources for what I believe in."

And that my friends, sums it up. Rather than do the research, he'd rather just believe, based on the few measly morsels that support his gut feeling.

Pompous, Fluffy, sometimes in here with you and the boys, I feel beyond pompous. If I could, I would take away your right to vote. Because an intellectual sloth is of no use to a competitive country with a tiny manufacturing base. Nor is it contributing to the development of the nervous system of tomorrow's human race.

You're not frustrating. I'd pick a different adjective. You haven't a clue how much new shit I've read over these past couple days. And how many "bridge" details I've learned, tying together fragmented information I already have. I learned just today that we import more people to work in healthcare than who come here as medical tourists. That's money out the window my friend. Lots of money sent back to families in other countries, by people who occupy jobs that Americans should have. People like you actually help people like me. You provide me with a challenge, and a reason to do what I should be doing anyway, and that is learning about the world I live in. Taking time out for a beer and blowjob occasionally.

[Fastback91]

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner Actually, it's being investigated. Since Antarctica is decreasing in size it is providing less white snow to reflect energy away from the earth. The lost snow cover is compounding the problem because more energy is absorbed by the water and the water organisms that us it. So the thought is, that a much smaller area of cover (like a field of aluminum shavings or whatever you can imagine} orbiting much farther out in space in a position always between the earth and the sun, could scatter that areas lite from it's original path toward Earth.

If antarcica has been "decreasing in size" as you say how come How come the charts that the "National Snow and Ice Data Center" show differently?

charts compare ice from 1980 to 2009
THis chart shows ice in July
NSIDC BIST: Compare data: Sea Ice Index: Extent, Concentration, and Concentration Anomalies
This Chart shows it in April
NSIDC BIST: Compare data: Sea Ice Index: Extent, Concentration, and Concentration Anomalies

[Ke^in]

"Alert Michael Moore! Both he and the World Health Organization say France has the best health care system in the world, and America's system is barely better than Slovenia's. However, French professor Alice Teil not only said the French system is “not sustainable anymore,” but copying parts of America's could save it."

Teil turned to a privately-owned hospital in Utah after a survey of international health care experts ranked Salt Lake City's Intermountain Health Care the number one hospital in the world. You would think that a media so hyper-worried about the “broken” US health care system would report the encouraging news, but other than some bare bones local coverage, this story was ignored.

Maybe it was ignored because Teil's startling description of France's situation did not match the media's typical positive depiction of “free” health care. The earliest online report of Teil's trip was a brief August 22 article posted on Salt Lake City radio station KCPW's website, and it did not stick to the usual MSM script (bold mine throughout):

"It's true we really have good access, but what if the system is not sustainable anymore?" says Teil. "It's going to break. It's going to blow. And then no more accessibility for anybody."

Tiel says the cost of France's socialized health care is growing faster than its economy. Workers pay about fifty percent of their paycheck each month into healthcare, retirement and unemployment and more companies are outsourcing jobs to avoid those costs. Quality of care also suffers in France, says Teil, because hospitals and doctors resist government requirements to report their success and failures.

By contrast, Tiel says privately-owned hospitals in the U.S. are motivated to measure and report their quality of care, which leads to better care.

As of 6 am Monday, the MSM hadn't reported this story. The only coverage was KCPW's Wednesday piece and a Sunday August 26 article in Salt Lake City's Deseret Morning News. Not even the Salt Lake Tribune covered this. That's five days for the MSM to notice this under-reported side of the “free” health care story.

Considering America's aging population and earlier Democratic stabs at socialism (the failing Medicare and Social Security), why wouldn't the media find Teil's opinions vitally important and interview her about France's ailing health care system, which she condemned as having "no incentives to be the best?" Good thing the Morning News spoke to her:

It was a democratic ideal that worked well when there was enough money to pay for it, says Teil, but it has become problematic as costs have risen, baby boomers have aged and the economy has stalled.

Maybe it's time to rethink the extent of France's notion of egalite when it comes to, for example, providing 100 percent of the costs for knee replacements and other "comfort services," she says. "We need to raise those issues to the population, because it's not sustainable anymore."

Contrary to the media standard portrayal of top-rated French health care, Teil stated that the system of “free” unlimited care requires high taxes, and with unlimited care, including costly sex-change operations, in vitro fertilization and alternative medicine, France has a dying system and should look to America for a fix, especially now that the French protested rationing benefits and the government stopped bailing out over-budget public hospitals.

As far as Democrats and advocates of “free” health care are concerned, it's a good thing that the media ignored a story about the sorry state of the "best" health care system in the world.

[03SonicBoom]

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner Commonwealth fund as reported by NY Times places us dead last overall, out of the 5 wealthiest countries, the only countries that were scrutinized. But we also do a lot of things well. It's the chronic stuff that requires regular visits to your doctor where we fail. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html "Quality. In a comparison with five other countries, the Commonwealth Fund ranked the United States first in providing the “right care” for a given condition as defined by standard clinical guidelines and gave it especially high marks for preventive care, like Pap smears and mammograms to detect early-stage cancers, and blood tests and cholesterol checks for hypertensive patients. But we scored poorly in coordinating the care of chronically ill patients, in protecting the safety of patients, and in meeting their needs and preferences, which drove our overall quality rating down to last place. American doctors and hospitals kill patients through surgical and medical mistakes more often than their counterparts in other industrialized nations." Check this out from Harvard. They did a poll of peoples perception of healthcare. It's simply an opinion poll and 68% of Republicans believe our system is the best. 52% Percent of Democrats think it's better in other countries. Does really help anyone here, but it's interesting info that may be usefull in other arguments. Most Republicans Think the U.S. Health Care System is the Best in the World. Democrats Disagree. - March 20, 2008 -2008 Releases - Press Releases - Harvard School of Public Health Finding a ranking is difficult, the WHO no longer seems to rank, but here's just a bit from newsweek, August 7th, 2009. I can't get the article because I'm not a subscriber, so it is possible they are using the old WHO numbers. Singapore is at #6 (read the singapore bit). So unless you think the U.S. shot up the laddeer, which even fluffy might question, things probably are about the same. Especially when you read the first article above from NY Times. Wealth of Nations : Countries WIth the Best Health Care Worldwide I'm willing to entertain the idea that lot's of people come here for healthcare, but there's no point in arguing until you provide me with evidense (like I'm going to take your word for it when the internet you use to post here can also help support your assertions). You should really stop making that claim until you can support it, you're just blowing smoke. And it's irritating.

Let me get this straight, you're trying to prove your point and your backing is 2 OPINION articles and a BLOG.

Originally Posted by catchtheroadrunner Here, since your so unable to help me out I had to research your argument for you. Medical Tourism ~ An Economic Boost to the United States "Medical tourism represents an opportunity for U.S. hospitals to diversify revenue - usually hospitals with dedicated international centers generate five to ten percent of total revenue from international patients. Inbound medical tourism to the U.S. is approximately $5 billion or 400,000 patients annually, according to the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions." Here is the current census report for the U.S. population as well as the entire globel. U.S. 307,280,874 World 6,780,177,744 22:42 GMT (EST+5) Aug 26, 2009 Twice as many people visit the U.S. then leave it for health care. 2 to 1, yet the population outside the U.S. is 21 times greater than the U.S. population. So I'm going to assert reasonably that most wealthy people, regardless of their country, stay home for pricey health care. The percentage of U.S. citizens going abroad for healthcare is .065. The formula I used was 200,000 x 100 / 307280874. The population of the global population that comes here is so much smaller than that, my computer gave me an error. The formula being 400,000 x 100 / 6472896870 (that number is the census global pop number minus the U.S. pop number) =. So what are you guys basing your claims on when you claim the U.S. is some sort of mecha for healthcare? Like 400,000 is such a big number (It's a number Doctor Evil would've used fresh out of his cryo coma). And those 400,000 spent 5 billion vs our 200,000 that spent 2 billion abroad. Our profit last year from inbound medical tourism was 1 billion dollars. In 2007 we spent 2.2 trillion within our system, on ourselves. I've made a visual for you below. 1,000,000,000 2,200,000,000,000 Inbound medical tourism brings us what I estimate (data are from different years) to be 1/2200 of our healthcare budget, or .0454 percent.

Those aren't the numbers I found.

In its 2008 report on medical tourism , Deloitte and Touche (D&T) suggested that in 2008 there would be more than 400,000 non-U.S. residents that would receive care in the United States and spend almost $5 billion for health services. International patients currently make up almost 3.5% of all inpatient procedures performed in the U.S. By 2011, D&T suggested that those numbers could rise to as much as 800,000 patients annually.

Economic Report: Inbound Medical Tourism in the United States

[04mustang232]

*cough*

The Canadian Press: Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors

Here is the Top ten myths about Canadian healthcare

The Top Ten Things People Believe About Canadian Health Care, But Shouldn't