Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
sealy here you are again,. you know it sort of reminds of the Jimmy Carter ronald Reagan Debate a Little "There you go Again" soo in that spirit here you are
Of course, the Labour government inherited a run-down health service. It suffered from years of under-investment, and it was inadequate to meet patient needs at the end of the 20th century, let alone the 21st. But the first two years under Labour were really tough for the NHS. They underestimated how much it would take to put it right. They did not invest. They did not increase the number of training places to ensure registered nurses. They staged our pay award and then they started to listen. Funding has been increased. The NHS Plans in England, Scotland and Wales are a serious attempt to kick-start modernisation.
Christine Hancock: A sad indictment of our health care system - Commentators, Opinion - The Independent
Canada's health care program is one of the most expensive in the developed world but it delivers relatively poor access to physicians, technology and care. The reality is that Canada's approach to Medicare is the problem; changing the policies would markedly improve the performance of Canada's health care system, says Nadeem Esmail of the Fraser Institute.
A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS
Want me to keep going? The fact is sealy these single payer systems that your so fond of that are supposed make everything so wonderful actually makes things worse. What good is saying you have health insurance when you have no place to use it? You obviously have never had the chance to go to the VA or ride on an Amtrack have you? Well when GM is up and going again perhaps buying a car from GM might give you some idea of a Govt. run program. I know it's difficult for you to hear but you do not have ANY right under the constitution for healthcare.
auditor, thats where regulation comes in, rather than mandating that I as an individual have health care converage provided for me by the all knowing all seeing Father Uncle Sam. The individuals priced out of the market because there is limited competetion and would be a simple matter of Govt. regulation that would allow for more competetion thus lowering cost delivery. Those individuals that do not care to have healthcare insurance for whatever reason should not be mandated to do so. If everyone were so concerned with everyone else having healthcare as a method of lowering costs , then they do so at the expense of service delivery and choice. My point is this its great to say you have healthcare but if you die waiting because service delivery has suffered what have you accomplished?
auditor, thats where regulation comes in, rather than mandating that I as an individual have health care converage provided for me by the all knowing all seeing Father Uncle Sam. The individuals priced out of the market because there is limited competetion and would be a simple matter of Govt. regulation that would allow for more competetion thus lowering cost delivery. Those individuals that do not care to have healthcare insurance for whatever reason should not be mandated to do so. If everyone were so concerned with everyone else having healthcare as a method of lowering costs , then they do so at the expense of service delivery and choice. My point is this its great to say you have healthcare but if you die waiting because service delivery has suffered what have you accomplished?
Well, under this wonderful system, I can purchase health insurance for around $10,000 per year. I also get a deductible that will bring my out of pocket costs to $5000 per year. That's just for me. Because of my health situation, I'm not working as much as I used to, so I can't afford the $15,000 per year.
So now, I will pay what I can out of pocket for the immediate care that I need. If, however, my liver goes, and I need a transplant, I will die. You can talk about all the great choice you have with the current system, but for me, I have no choice. I'll take the government stepping in at this point. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for healthcare, but I shouldn't be denied because the insurance companies find any way they can to deny coverage to those who need it most.
sealy I use information from all sources and unlike some on here I dont dismiss content based on it's origins if is relevant and is based in fact. In fact sealy and you know this to be true I have been known to use everything from NYT to Huffington post if the content were fact based and you did not hear me say one ill word as to political leanings of its origins. So if you prefer other sources then I'll provide you some.
Heres a little story from the Detroit News Hardly what you would call a Republican think tank
In an effort to provide health insurance to all Americans, President Barack Obama appears eager to give government a greater role in health care insurance. But before doing so, he would be wise to consider Canadians' struggles with government-run health insurance, where delays within the Canadian health care system have grown to the point that some Canadians have turned to the courts in hopes of gaining better access to health care.
Let's start with the facts about Canada's Medicare program.
First, it is not cheap. While less expensive than the U.S. health care system, Canada maintains, on an age-adjusted basis, the second most expensive universal access health insurance system in the developed world (of 28 such systems).
Advertisement
Yet Canadians endure service that ranges from mediocre to terrible. Physicians are in short supply, as are medical technologies like MRI machines, CT scanners and lithotriptors. Canada is also slow to invest in medical technology, while many pieces of medical and diagnostic equipment in Canada are outdated and in need of replacement.
Obama should heed Canadian medical lessons | detnews.com | The Detroit News
auditor, thats where regulation comes in, rather than mandating that I as an individual have health care converage provided for me by the all knowing all seeing Father Uncle Sam. The individuals priced out of the market because there is limited competetion and would be a simple matter of Govt. regulation that would allow for more competetion thus lowering cost delivery. Those individuals that do not care to have healthcare insurance for whatever reason should not be mandated to do so. If everyone were so concerned with everyone else having healthcare as a method of lowering costs , then they do so at the expense of service delivery and choice. My point is this its great to say you have healthcare but if you die waiting because service delivery has suffered what have you accomplished?
Well, under this wonderful system, I can purchase health insurance for around $10,000 per year. I also get a deductible that will bring my out of pocket costs to $5000 per year. That's just for me. Because of my health situation, I'm not working as much as I used to, so I can't afford the $15,000 per year.
So now, I will pay what I can out of pocket for the immediate care that I need. If, however, my liver goes, and I need a transplant, I will die. You can talk about all the great choice you have with the current system, but for me, I have no choice. I'll take the government stepping in at this point. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for healthcare, but I shouldn't be denied because the insurance companies find any way they can to deny coverage to those who need it most.
auditor, thats where regulation comes in, rather than mandating that I as an individual have health care converage provided for me by the all knowing all seeing Father Uncle Sam. The individuals priced out of the market because there is limited competetion and would be a simple matter of Govt. regulation that would allow for more competetion thus lowering cost delivery. Those individuals that do not care to have healthcare insurance for whatever reason should not be mandated to do so. If everyone were so concerned with everyone else having healthcare as a method of lowering costs , then they do so at the expense of service delivery and choice. My point is this its great to say you have healthcare but if you die waiting because service delivery has suffered what have you accomplished?
Well, under this wonderful system, I can purchase health insurance for around $10,000 per year. I also get a deductible that will bring my out of pocket costs to $5000 per year. That's just for me. Because of my health situation, I'm not working as much as I used to, so I can't afford the $15,000 per year.
So now, I will pay what I can out of pocket for the immediate care that I need. If, however, my liver goes, and I need a transplant, I will die. You can talk about all the great choice you have with the current system, but for me, I have no choice. I'll take the government stepping in at this point. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for healthcare, but I shouldn't be denied because the insurance companies find any way they can to deny coverage to those who need it most.
Translation: let someone else pay for my healthcare.
You will get less, but you won't pay less. That's the way it works everywhere else in the world, babe.
Canada has entire bureaucracies dedicated to nothing but managing waiting lists for elective procedures.
auditor, thats where regulation comes in, rather than mandating that I as an individual have health care converage provided for me by the all knowing all seeing Father Uncle Sam. The individuals priced out of the market because there is limited competetion and would be a simple matter of Govt. regulation that would allow for more competetion thus lowering cost delivery. Those individuals that do not care to have healthcare insurance for whatever reason should not be mandated to do so. If everyone were so concerned with everyone else having healthcare as a method of lowering costs , then they do so at the expense of service delivery and choice. My point is this its great to say you have healthcare but if you die waiting because service delivery has suffered what have you accomplished?
Well, under this wonderful system, I can purchase health insurance for around $10,000 per year. I also get a deductible that will bring my out of pocket costs to $5000 per year. That's just for me. Because of my health situation, I'm not working as much as I used to, so I can't afford the $15,000 per year.
So now, I will pay what I can out of pocket for the immediate care that I need. If, however, my liver goes, and I need a transplant, I will die. You can talk about all the great choice you have with the current system, but for me, I have no choice. I'll take the government stepping in at this point. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for healthcare, but I shouldn't be denied because the insurance companies find any way they can to deny coverage to those who need it most.
They don't seem to care.
I have people at my work who think they "earned" the heathcare they have with our company. God help them if they get a pre existing condition and have to switch companies. And its not like anyone works for one company until they retire.
People are greedy, selfish and ignorant. They're paying more than they should and getting less than they should. And they're swallowing the lies of the people who are doing this to them/us.
We're all in this together.
And a Democrat on Ed Schultz last night said the magic 60 that we want in the senate doesn't mean much, because the healthcare providers have already gotten to enough blue dog democrats. Max Baucus being one of them.
They will spend millions of dollars to defeat any politicians that try to get healthcare reform. The only chance we have is NOW. But we need Al Franken. Which is why Norm Coleman is stalling his inevidable defeat.
sealy I use information from all sources and unlike some on here I dont dismiss content based on it's origins if is relevant and is based in fact. In fact sealy and you know this to be true I have been known to use everything from NYT to Huffington post if the content were fact based and you did not hear me say one ill word as to political leanings of its origins. So if you prefer other sources then I'll provide you some.
Heres a little story from the Detroit News Hardly what you would call a Republican think tank
In an effort to provide health insurance to all Americans, President Barack Obama appears eager to give government a greater role in health care insurance. But before doing so, he would be wise to consider Canadians' struggles with government-run health insurance, where delays within the Canadian health care system have grown to the point that some Canadians have turned to the courts in hopes of gaining better access to health care.
Let's start with the facts about Canada's Medicare program.
First, it is not cheap. While less expensive than the U.S. health care system, Canada maintains, on an age-adjusted basis, the second most expensive universal access health insurance system in the developed world (of 28 such systems).
Advertisement
Yet Canadians endure service that ranges from mediocre to terrible. Physicians are in short supply, as are medical technologies like MRI machines, CT scanners and lithotriptors. Canada is also slow to invest in medical technology, while many pieces of medical and diagnostic equipment in Canada are outdated and in need of replacement.
Obama should heed Canadian medical lessons | detnews.com | The Detroit News
Canada spends barely over half of what we do in the US, and that is the reason they are having so many problems. Healthcare is not cheap, but we are on the other end of the spectrum. We pay the absolute highest amount for our healthcare, but many are left out completely. So, what you can derive from this is that both systems are bad. The Canadian system would be much better if Canadian's chose to spend just a little bit more. If they increased spending on healthcare by 50%, they would still be paying much less than what we pay in the US, and they would have all the choices they could want, along with top quality care and service.
Well, under this wonderful system, I can purchase health insurance for around $10,000 per year. I also get a deductible that will bring my out of pocket costs to $5000 per year. That's just for me. Because of my health situation, I'm not working as much as I used to, so I can't afford the $15,000 per year.
So now, I will pay what I can out of pocket for the immediate care that I need. If, however, my liver goes, and I need a transplant, I will die. You can talk about all the great choice you have with the current system, but for me, I have no choice. I'll take the government stepping in at this point. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for healthcare, but I shouldn't be denied because the insurance companies find any way they can to deny coverage to those who need it most.
They don't seem to care.
I have people at my work who think they "earned" the heathcare they have with our company. God help them if they get a pre existing condition and have to switch companies. And its not like anyone works for one company until they retire.
People are greedy, selfish and ignorant. They're paying more than they should and getting less than they should. And they're swallowing the lies of the people who are doing this to them/us.
We're all in this together.
And a Democrat on Ed Schultz last night said the magic 60 that we want in the senate doesn't mean much, because the healthcare providers have already gotten to enough blue dog democrats. Max Baucus being one of them.
They will spend millions of dollars to defeat any politicians that try to get healthcare reform. The only chance we have is NOW. But we need Al Franken. Which is why Norm Coleman is stalling his inevidable defeat.
poor little frwstwated temper tantrum throwing little democrats,, damn blue dog democrats tratiors,, why don't you just come out and say you want a dictatorship you damn fool.
sealy I use information from all sources and unlike some on here I dont dismiss content based on it's origins if is relevant and is based in fact. In fact sealy and you know this to be true I have been known to use everything from NYT to Huffington post if the content were fact based and you did not hear me say one ill word as to political leanings of its origins. So if you prefer other sources then I'll provide you some.
Heres a little story from the Detroit News Hardly what you would call a Republican think tank
In an effort to provide health insurance to all Americans, President Barack Obama appears eager to give government a greater role in health care insurance. But before doing so, he would be wise to consider Canadians' struggles with government-run health insurance, where delays within the Canadian health care system have grown to the point that some Canadians have turned to the courts in hopes of gaining better access to health care.
Let's start with the facts about Canada's Medicare program.
First, it is not cheap. While less expensive than the U.S. health care system, Canada maintains, on an age-adjusted basis, the second most expensive universal access health insurance system in the developed world (of 28 such systems).
Advertisement
Yet Canadians endure service that ranges from mediocre to terrible. Physicians are in short supply, as are medical technologies like MRI machines, CT scanners and lithotriptors. Canada is also slow to invest in medical technology, while many pieces of medical and diagnostic equipment in Canada are outdated and in need of replacement.
Obama should heed Canadian medical lessons | detnews.com | The Detroit News
Canada spends barely over half of what we do in the US, and that is the reason they are having so many problems. Healthcare is not cheap, but we are on the other end of the spectrum. We pay the absolute highest amount for our healthcare, but many are left out completely. So, what you can derive from this is that both systems are bad. The Canadian system would be much better if Canadian's chose to spend just a little bit more. If they increased spending on healthcare by 50%, they would still be paying much less than what we pay in the US, and they would have all the choices they could want, along with top quality care and service.
The money we would save could send every college kid to school for free.
Why should I pay for someone else's kid to go to college for free?
You people are incorrigible.
