The Sentimental Nature of the Liberal Socialist

[mattskramer]

Sorry, but our first responsibility is to our own children and family. Then we do as much as we can for others in addition. You forget that so much of the help others receive is through private charities....and that's ALOT. Call one. http://www.charitywatch.org/toprated.html

After we have taken care of the problems in our own backyard, so to speak, we can then turn more attention to the rest of the world. There is no point in taking on another country's problems (such as Mexico) if we just destroy ourselves in the process.

ps: i didn't originally bring up the Jesus aspect...MM did.

Be careful when donating.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/

 

[Shogun]

Sorry, but our first responsibility is to our own children and family. Then we do as much as we can for others in addition. You forget that so much of the help others receive is through private charities....and that's ALOT. Call one. http://www.charitywatch.org/toprated.html

After we have taken care of the problems in our own backyard, so to speak, we can then turn more attention to the rest of the world. There is no point in taking on another country's problems (such as Mexico) if we just destroy ourselves in the process.

ps: i didn't originally bring up the Jesus aspect...MM did.

How christian of you to disregard your fellow man. Indeed, I feel like running strait to a church and inviting jesus into my life by your witness...

and, if my ability to check out the first page is correct, it was you who was crying about christians being picked on. I would suggest that your faith is not being picked on so much as your political hypocracy, pharisee.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Be careful when donating.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/

That's good advice.

Here's some additional: be just as careful when "donating" your money to the GOVERNMENT.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

How christian of you to disregard your fellow man. Indeed, I feel like running strait to a church and inviting jesus into my life by your witness...

and, if my ability to check out the first page is correct, it was you who was crying about christians being picked on. I would suggest that your faith is not being picked on so much as your political hypocracy, pharisee.

You're so full of it. Get a grip dude.

 

[Shogun]

You're so full of it. Get a grip dude.

go actually read your bible before crying about how put down you are becuase of your dogma. With a testimony like yours it's obvious why people scoff at your religion.


Indeed, remind me how much of a capitolist who wouldnt give a **** about his fellow man Jesus was...

Jesus the Capitolist

 

[mattskramer]

That's good advice.

Here's some additional: be just as careful when "donating" your money to the GOVERNMENT.

True enough. The private sector and public sector has plenty of fraud and waste.

 

[Shogun]

 

[Larkinn]

More interesting readin on how great Canad's socilaized medicine program is

I never said that Canadas healthcare was perfect. It can use improving, so can Britain, France, Italy, the US, etc. The point is merely, that it is better than the US.

Can you proved they are waiting longer i the U.s. then in countries with universal coverage?

The point was merely that imo its not a big deal to have to wait for elective surgery. It only matters when its urgent.

so how does that aid in a prevention approach if it takes longer to see the doctor?

Because more people see doctors...this isn't about the individual, its about the group. About the average over the entire population.

Otherwise known as a subsidy, the second of which you mentioned. Where again to subsidies come from?

Unlike you, I don't think government is a bad word.

so you would rather everybody have just okay care as in Canada instead of most haveing excellent care

If it lowers the average death rate (which it does), yes.

Not a very good example as it's based on, let's see, absolutely nothing.

It was an example to prove a point. Its called a hypothetical.

37 out of 191 countries is far from short of the mark, that's the top 20%

38 Slovenia
39 Cuba
40 Brunei
41 New Zealand
42 Bahrain
43 Croatia
44 Qatar
45 Kuwait
46 Barbados
47 Thailand
48 Czech Republic
49 Malaysia
50 Poland
51 Dominican Republic
52 Tunisia
53 Jamaica
54 Venezuela
55 Albania
56 Seychelles
57 Paraguay
58 South Korea
59 Senegal
60 Philippines
61 Mexico
62 Slovakia
63 Egypt
64 Kazakhstan
65 Uruguay
66 Hungary
67 Trinidad and Tobago
68 Saint Lucia
69 Belize
70 Turkey
71 Nicaragua
72 Belarus
73 Lithuania
74 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
75 Argentina
76 Sri Lanka
77 Estonia
78 Guatemala
79 Ukraine
80 Solomon Islands
81 Algeria
82 Palau
83 Jordan
84 Mauritius
85 Grenada
86 Antigua and Barbuda
87 Libya
88 Bangladesh
89 Macedonia
90 Bosnia-Herzegovina
91 Lebanon
92 Indonesia
93 Iran
94 Bahamas
95 Panama
96 Fiji
97 Benin
98 Nauru
99 Romania
100 Saint Kitts and Nevis
101 Moldova
102 Bulgaria
103 Iraq
104 Armenia
105 Latvia
106 Yugoslavia
107 Cook Islands
108 Syria
109 Azerbaijan
110 Suriname
111 Ecuador
112 India
113 Cape Verde
114 Georgia
115 El Salvador
116 Tonga
117 Uzbekistan
118 Comoros
119 Samoa
120 Yemen
121 Niue
122 Pakistan
123 Micronesia
124 Bhutan
125 Brazil
126 Bolivia
127 Vanuatu
128 Guyana
129 Peru
130 Russia
131 Honduras
132 Burkina Faso
133 Sao Tome and Principe
134 Sudan
135 Ghana
136 Tuvalu
137 Ivory Coast
138 Haiti
139 Gabon
140 Kenya
141 Marshall Islands
142 Kiribati
143 Burundi
144 China
145 Mongolia
146 Gambia
147 Maldives
148 Papua New Guinea
149 Uganda
150 Nepal
151 Kyrgystan
152 Togo
153 Turkmenistan
154 Tajikistan
155 Zimbabwe
156 Tanzania
157 Djibouti
158 Eritrea
159 Madagascar
160 Vietnam
161 Guinea
162 Mauritania
163 Mali
164 Cameroon
165 Laos
166 Congo
167 North Korea
168 Namibia
169 Botswana
170 Niger
171 Equatorial Guinea
172 Rwanda
173 Afghanistan
174 Cambodia
175 South Africa
176 Guinea-Bissau
177 Swaziland
178 Chad
179 Somalia
180 Ethiopia
181 Angola
182 Zambia
183 Lesotho
184 Mozambique
185 Malawi
186 Liberia
187 Nigeria
188 Democratic Republic of the Congo
189 Central African Republic
190 Myanmar

Sorry for the list, but I feel this is sort of necessary to make this point.

There is the list of all the countries who come after the US in terms of healthcare. Now if I were to say "well we come above X country in healthcare" how many would you be proud of and say "well thats good" as opposed to saying "well ******* obviously we come above them". We are slightly above...Cuba? Slovenia? What the ****? Are you really so proud that we are above Nigeria, and Myanmar, and Somalia? Its sort of like congratulating a doctor on being literate....well no shit he is literate.

Sorry, but considering we are the richest country in the world, we spend the most per capita on healthcare, I think that coming just above Slovenia and Cuba, as 37th on the list is a travesty.

I dont' have a problem with that. You're going to pay more for better quality which the table says we have over almost every country.

Of the industrialized countries, we have the 2nd worst care. It is better than only New Zealands. I'm sorry, but saying we have a good healthcare system because it is better than Kenya's is ludicrous.

Your simply confusing terms. Who can use the technology has nothing to do with how effectively it is used.

when I said well I meant efficient, not effective.

yes and according to the table their helth care is of lesser quality.

No, actually, Canada ranks at #30. That would mean it is better quality.

and how is it you belibe govt would improve this?

Err isnt this pretty obvious? If its free people will go to the doctor more often. You've already acknowledged this.

I would argue this is the closest measure of quality of care the report provides. This is just once facet of the rank of the overall medical system quality and rank of the overall system are not teh same thing.

Responsiveness? How about the closest measure of quality of care would be overall health of the population, or death rate.

I will take this every day of the week over cost because people have a level of control over whether they can pay or not. they can improve their standing in life for example. But once you switch over to socialized medicine you take that control away and the quality for all goes down.

Quality for all goes down, and overall quality goes up. Interesting isn't it. By the way, in Britain and in some other places they have private healthcare as well which the rich can pay for. Just likely you wouldn't be able to...but thats ok, right, since you could have improved your standing.

On a personal note, there are a lot of people in the US who can't afford healthcare when they haven't had the chance to succeed yet. I think most people would consider me successful at this stage in my life. I am 23 and about to go to a fairly prestigious law school. But yet...I don't have health insurance. If anything happened to me now, I would be pretty well fucked.

again based on the individual ranks of quality this is patently false.

The individual ranks of quality DON"T MATTER. Its the overall which matters, which takes everything into consideration.

Again that is the simple disagreement for us. you believe cost is more important than qulaity and the table clearly shows that quality suffers under socialized medicine as well as the article above.

No, I believe that overall quality is what matters, not just quality for those who can afford it.

yes even in it's worst scoring category the U.S. is still in the top third.
1st in repsonsiveness is the top and 15th in goal attainment in the top 8%.

I really can't believe you keep pushing this...top third? Congratulations...we are in the top third...above Nigeria, Cuba, and Venezuala. Wow, that really comforts me. Are your standards really so abysmally low?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

You secular progressives think you can push your liberal socialist agenda by attacking Christians...your favorite new scapegoat.

Pls peddle that crap elsewhere.

 

[Shogun]

You secular progressives think you can push your liberal socialist agenda by attacking Christians...your favorite new scapegoat.

Pls peddle that crap elsewhere.

it's "attacking" you to remind you of the REALITY of your dogma?


yup... depart from me, I dont know you



get used to hearing that.

 

[Larkinn]

Larkinn's referred report says that the U.S. is 37th in health care. It also says that Mexico ranks 61st. I think it is pertinent to reevaluate our standing in light of the fact that we are subsidizing about 10% of Mexico's health care since we have at least 12 mil. illegals in our country. (Mexico population = about 100million)

I'm sorry, do those Mexicans get free healthcare? Can many of them afford to pay healthcare? No? Then we aren't subsidizing them.

Hey... if the U.S. could feed the world by turning only a couple loaves of bread into enough to feed 5,000 we would FEED THE WORLD and then we could spend all that saved money on food for providing FREE HEALTH CARE FOR THE WORLD!!

What else would you like to have....in your sentimental liberal socialist dreams?

When did helping people out and saving their lives become something to make fun of? What happened to compassionate conservatism?

 

[maineman]

When did helping people out and saving their lives become something to make fun of? What happened to compassionate conservatism?

It is, and has always been, a myth.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

it's "attacking" you to remind you of the REALITY of your dogma?
that was "reality"? lol

yup... depart from me, I dont know you

get used to hearing that.
Oh, goodie.

/

 

[Larkinn]

It is, and has always been, a myth.

It isn't, it just does not show up on this board...and I think as this country becomes more and more polarized that kind of compassion is becoming rarer and rarer on both sides.

You secular progressives think you can push your liberal socialist agenda by attacking Christians...your favorite new scapegoat.

No...I would like to push my "liberal socialist agenda" (which is neither liberal nor socialist, but since several board members seem to have an addiction to generalizations, I'll go with it for now) by making Christians realize that it agrees with your religion, that compassion, caring, "turn the other cheek" and not "omg lets nuke the entire ME cause we are macho men", is what you say Christianity is all about. If it is that, and you are Christians, why do your political views not reflect that?

This is not an indictment of all Christians...Christians give more to charity per person than secularists do...they are to be commended for that...but for people to mock compassion and claim they are Christian seems very odd to me.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I'm sorry, do those Mexicans get free healthcare? Can many of them afford to pay healthcare? No? Then we aren't subsidizing them.
Yes, they do. All they have to do is walk into emergency and they get it for free because they cannot be turned down even if they can't pay for it. They go to emergency for things that other people would probably take to their doctor. Also, many swamp the free clinics which provide donated time and care.

When did helping people out and saving their lives become something to make fun of? What happened to compassionate conservatism?
It's still here. Our compassion is still alive and well. However, we must not forget the "conservative" part of the phrase.

/

 

[Shogun]

/

do you want me to quote the bible? does that also count as "attacking" your faith?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

do you want me to quote the bible? does that also count as "attacking" your faith?

I thought you wanted to "depart"? Pls feel free to do so.

 

[Larkinn]

Yes, they do. All they have to do is walk into emergency and they get it for free because they cannot be turned down even if they can't pay for it. They go to emergency for things that other people would probably take to their doctor. Also, many swamp the free clinics which provide donated time and care.

No, you can't go to the ER unless its an actual emergency. They will refuse you. Secondly a lot don't because they are afraid of being deported. There are free clinics, but the reason they are swamped is because there aren't very many of them and the level of care there isn't exactly through. It is much, much better than nothing, but it is not near the level of care someone with decent health insurance recieves.

It's still here. Our compassion is still alive and well. However, we must not forget the "conservative" part of the phrase.

Then why make fun of people who want to feed the hungry and give healthcare to the injured?

 

[Shogun]

I thought you wanted to "depart"? Pls feel free to do so.

for a self described christian you sure are dense enough to miss the significance of those words.

 

[Bern80]

I never said that Canadas healthcare was perfect. It can use improving, so can Britain, France, Italy, the US, etc. The point is merely, that it is better than the US.

Tell it to my friend who was living in pain wating two yeats for his knee replacement when could have it done in a month here.

The point was merely that imo its not a big deal to have to wait for elective surgery. It only matters when its urgent.

Elective has nothing do with it. It's the demand. There rarer the condition the less demand there will be from people for treatment. The more common the conditoin the more demdand there will be for it. It isn't the electives you will wait longer for. It's the most basic forms of care because there is more demand.

Because more people see doctors...this isn't about the individual, its about the group. About the average over the entire population.

Spoken like a true socialist.

Unlike you, I don't think government is a bad word.

I do, would not rather help yourself and achieve on your own instead of beind dependent on government? Your type of society will only be as good as it's lowest common denominator. Yes there are risks in living in a more capitilisitc society, but I would much rather have the opportunity to achieve whatever I want, then for the government to tell it's for the good of the group that I don't

It was an example to prove a point. Its called a hypothetical.

Hyptheitcals can't prove anything.

Sorry for the list, but I feel this is sort of necessary to make this point.

There is the list of all the countries who come after the US in terms of healthcare. Now if I were to say "well we come above X country in healthcare" how many would you be proud of and say "well thats good" as opposed to saying "well ******* obviously we come above them". We are slightly above...Cuba? Slovenia? What the ****? Are you really so proud that we are above Nigeria, and Myanmar, and Somalia?[/QUOTE]

Once you reach certain point on that list there is a drastic difference btween those above it and those below it in terms of quality of care. For the countries at the top the quality measurements are fairly negligible. It is wrong for example, to insinuate that the qulity of care that one received in teh US is vastly inferior to that of France.

Sorry, but considering we are the richest country in the world, we spend the most per capita on healthcare, I think that coming just above Slovenia and Cuba, as 37th on the list is a travesty.

And we will cease to be the richest country in the world if we moved to your type of society. And again you are misrepresnting the number. That number is an average of five factors that measure very different things. to me the overall rank means nothing, especially after looking at the table. the rank is extrememly misleading.

Of the industrialized countries, we have the 2nd worst care. It is better than only New Zealands. I'm sorry, but saying we have a good healthcare system because it is better than Kenya's is ludicrous.

Based on what? Again the factors that go into that ranking speak volumes. the two factors that skewed our overall ranking are overall health and price per capita. Now unless you just don't get basic economics the latter makes sense because we have the highest quality in terms of attentiveness and quick response to people's needs. You are going to pay more for better quality, period. The second of those factors Overall health has many factors that go into it as well. Primarily people's health habits. You don't need to see a doctor to learn how to be healthy. The physicians and facitlities have little to do with this. Where it counts(physicians, facilities, the attentiveness and speed with which we are able to treat people) is tops in the world.

when I said well I meant efficient, not effective.

Uh those are synonyms bud

No, actually, Canada ranks at #30. That would mean it is better quality.

No it doesn't again you are misrepresenting the numbers. Canada is ranked above us because when the factor are averaged out their inexpensiveness put them above us. that doesn' mean teh health care people get is better and indeed according teh chart it isn't

Err isnt this pretty obvious? If its free people will go to the doctor more often. You've already acknowledged this.

And people will wait longer to be diagnosed, which you acknowledged. Which is time they may not have.

Responsiveness? How about the closest measure of quality of care would be overall health of the population, or death rate.

Then we are talking about two different things. When I had cancer and was told i was going to die, do you really think i made decisions based on how much it was gonna cost or if I was treated by the best in the business?

Quality for all goes down, and overall quality goes up. Interesting isn't it. By the way, in Britain and in some other places they have private healthcare as well which the rich can pay for. Just likely you wouldn't be able to...but thats ok, right, since you could have improved your standing.

So basically you are willing to sacrafice one group of lives for another?

On a personal note, there are a lot of people in the US who can't afford healthcare when they haven't had the chance to succeed yet. I think most people would consider me successful at this stage in my life. I am 23 and about to go to a fairly prestigious law school. But yet...I don't have health insurance. If anything happened to me now, I would be pretty well fucked.

And at this point you still have the ablity to do something about that. If we were in a country with socialized medicine and you got cancer the likely of you dieing would be greater, free healthcare or not, because the quality fo care that you personally would be receiveing would ahve gone down.

The individual ranks of quality DON"T MATTER. Its the overall which matters, which takes everything into consideration.

Im sorry but that isn't simply incorrect. Plus it's a contradiction of this cost bent you are on. From the get go your whole argument has been cost, cost, cost. But now the overall picture is what's important. that number is alone is not an overall picture and in fact is quite misleading. Based on that number alone I should be inclined to think that if two people with similar condition go to a doctor in France and the U.S. the person in France is going to get better care for their ailment, but that isn't correct.

No, I believe that overall quality is what matters, not just quality for those who can afford it.

There are three overriding factors in that table. what I will call quality of actual care, cost, and overall health of the country.

Two factors go into the first which we are ranked 1 and 15 avg those out and in terms of quality of actual care we are 7th.

You are simply defining quality incorrectly. Really all your talkign about is affordability.

I really can't believe you keep pushing this...top third? Congratulations...we are in the top third...above Nigeria, Cuba, and Venezuala. Wow, that really comforts me. Are your standards really so abysmally low?

Fine, wehn you get sick we'll send you to Cuba or venezuela cause it's not that big a difference right?