We’re number 37! USA USA USA!!

[Cecilie1200]

The ranking comes from the World Health Organization, the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. I believe their ranking system covers the pertinent points and should be considered accurate.

So you also believe that a higher weight should be placed on consistency of care rather than quality of care?

Actually, I should have put it another way. Instead of saying "I believe their ranking system covers the pertinent points and should be considered accurate", I should have said that the rankings come from well a established entity and should be considered and reviewed. I'm inclined to believe that an organization such as the United Nations would look at each nation under the same microscope and draw a fair conclusion. I'll admit, I haven't read the report. One has to wonder, France is no third world country. Just what is it that they have that we don't?

Socialism, that's what they have that we don't. Had you bothered to read any of the gazillion threads in which we ALREADY dissected this stupid-shit, biased, agenda-driven report from 10 freaking years ago - or bothered to read the report itself, for that matter - you would know that one of their primary considerations for how spiffy a healthcare system was (even more important than how good the doctors and hospitals were, how healthy the people were, etc.) was how socialized it was. Yeah, no bias THERE.

You could probably be more gullible, but I think it would require special surgery.

 

[Some Guy]

Great video, and obviously disturbing to the RW given their hysterical response. Nothing makes the RW fringe more upset than something or someone causing them to think.

So you agree that the quality of the health care isn't important either, only that everyone gets the same treatment. Surely then, we could eliminate all doctors and hospitals from the US so no one can get any treatment. After all, there's nothing fairer than universal treatment for none.

Thanks for your input! You are a valued member of this prestigious board.

 

[Vanquish]

Well, the fact that there ARE no objective sources of information means that we should dismantle our entire healthcare system based on a source that we KNOW to be utterly falsified. Brilliant. I'm betting you were head of the class at your vocational tech school with a logical mind like that.

Nah. I get paid to argue in front of the Supreme Court of Alabama. I could continue to post my accomplishments, but I'd come off as immodest or dishonest (to those who had no wish to accept some random guy's word over the internet, not that I'd blame them).

Great job with the insult though....it really helps divert from not having something worthwhile to say. In your defense, that's what most posters on this forum do...so you're not falling below standards for this place.

As for dismantling our entire healthcare system...that's ridiculous. You don't dismantle a whole car because it doesnt have a temperature gauge or a gas tank gauge. Problems with current methods of measurement dont equate to starting over...even though that's the republican talking point of the day.

And wasn't the point that OTHER countries can't be measured correctly comparatively? Why take apart our Ford Taurus when it's the Chinese Chika that doesn't have a fuel gauge?

Try not to insult someone when you post. You might get farther. I break this rule myself sometimes, but 2 wrongs dont make a right.

 

[Zona]

But we pay more than any other industrialized country for our #37 ranking

The US is the only country where you can go bankrupt just for getting sick. 60% of personal bankruptcies are because of healthcare costs not financial mismanagement. And the majority of that 60% have healthcare

"but why do people from other country's come here for health care".....simple answer...THEY ARE RICH AND CAN AFFORD IT. Whenever the idiots say this, just remind them, no one is disputing the care our doctors give, we are saying everyone should have access to it, not just the rich.

 

[Some Guy]

"but why do people from other country's come here for health care".....simple answer...THEY ARE RICH AND CAN AFFORD IT. Whenever the idiots say this, just remind them, no one is disputing the care our doctors give, we are saying everyone should have access to it, not just the rich.

Right. Obviously it's a lot easier to say "everyone should have access" than actually figuring out a sustainable model for that. Quite simply, it's not possible while maintaining the level of care. If you're willing to considerably sacrifice the quality of care, then we could get everyone insured.

 

[DiamondDave]

But we pay more than any other industrialized country for our #37 ranking

The US is the only country where you can go bankrupt just for getting sick. 60% of personal bankruptcies are because of healthcare costs not financial mismanagement. And the majority of that 60% have healthcare

"but why do people from other country's come here for health care".....simple answer...THEY ARE RICH AND CAN AFFORD IT. Whenever the idiots say this, just remind them, no one is disputing the care our doctors give, we are saying everyone should have access to it, not just the rich.

Everyone DOES have access to it you ignorant fucktard

But it is not someone else's responsibility to take care of your personal needs, your personal well being, and the expenses you personally need to do it

 

[Wry Catcher]

Great video, and obviously disturbing to the RW given their hysterical response. Nothing makes the RW fringe more upset than something or someone causing them to think.

So you agree that the quality of the health care isn't important either, only that everyone gets the same treatment. Surely then, we could eliminate all doctors and hospitals from the US so no one can get any treatment. After all, there's nothing fairer than universal treatment for none.

Thanks for your input! You are a valued member of this prestigious board.

There is nothing "prestigious" associated with this board. Nothing. It is a place to express opinion with no requirement or expectation to debate issues, provide evidence or post honestly.
You have posted a perfect example, asserting that I believe something - which I do not - and then moving on from this false premise to an absurd conclusion.

Want evidence that there is nothing "prestigious"? Read the post from Diamond Dave above (or any of his posts).

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, the fact that there ARE no objective sources of information means that we should dismantle our entire healthcare system based on a source that we KNOW to be utterly falsified. Brilliant. I'm betting you were head of the class at your vocational tech school with a logical mind like that.

Nah. I get paid to argue in front of the Supreme Court of Alabama. I could continue to post my accomplishments, but I'd come off as immodest or dishonest (to those who had no wish to accept some random guy's word over the internet, not that I'd blame them).

Oh, I have no problem believing that you're a lawyer. After all, look at how you just wasted everyone's time running your gums over something totally useless. What I have trouble believing is that you think that makes anyone view you as intelligent or deserving of respect.

Great job with the insult though....it really helps divert from not having something worthwhile to say. In your defense, that's what most posters on this forum do...so you're not falling below standards for this place.

Great job focusing on only the last part of the post. It really helps divert from not being able to answer the entire rest of it . . . Oh, wait, it doesn't. It just makes it that much more obvious.

As for dismantling our entire healthcare system...that's ridiculous. You don't dismantle a whole car because it doesnt have a temperature gauge or a gas tank gauge. Problems with current methods of measurement dont equate to starting over...even though that's the republican talking point of the day.

Well, no shit, Captain Obvious. I'm so glad I had you here to pompously lecture me on the brilliance of my own ******* position.

And wasn't the point that OTHER countries can't be measured correctly comparatively? Why take apart our Ford Taurus when it's the Chinese Chika that doesn't have a fuel gauge?

Actually, the point was that there was no way to compare ANY of the countries involved objectively. Just because the United States is generally more honest in its health reporting doesn't mean the WHO isn't still solely taking our word for it. And I don't believe I suggested that we should take apart our own system because other countries' systems suck . . . oh, wait. Brilliant legal mind that you are, you don't recognize sarcasm unless someone pins a flashing neon sign to it. My apologies for addressing you like a literate, thinking adult. I'll try to keep my unreasonable expectations under control where you're concerned.

Try not to insult someone when you post. You might get farther. I break this rule myself sometimes, but 2 wrongs dont make a right.

It never ceases to amuse me when I express contempt and disdain from someone, and they respond by instructing me how I can make them like me better. Contemplate getting over yourself, ego monkey, and then consider that I don't NEED to "get farther" when my goal was to make you understand that I think you're a half-wit. Clearly, I achieved exactly what I was aiming at.

 

[mightypeon]

While I did not read the report, concering the countries I would prefer over the US in terms of Health Care:
Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Finnland, Austria, Japan.
I would consider that Germany, France, UK, Spain, Canada, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and other common wealth countries are propably equal in term of what the "average person" gets.
However, of these countries, only the USA needs to have "free clinics" that do lottereys to get needed health care, so I can see a justicification for rating the US lower.
Basically, it seems that the US offers perhaps even the best care, provided that you are rich. If you are not covered, you are screwed in a way that is worse than what would happen in other industrilized states.
Also, what constitutes Rich, or, rich enough to get decent healthcare, seems to be a bit more than in lets say Germany. I am payin 64 Euro per month in health insurance, "end user fees" for the dentist or additonal medication will cost around 200 additonal bucks per year. This puts my healthcare costs at significantly under 1000 $ . As far as I know, in the US you pay waaaay more for the same.

 

[Political Junky]

Wonder why no other nation is modeling their health care after the US?

 

[Some Guy]

There is nothing "prestigious" associated with this board. Nothing. It is a place to express opinion with no requirement or expectation to debate issues, provide evidence or post honestly.
You have posted a perfect example, asserting that I believe something - which I do not - and then moving on from this false premise to an absurd conclusion.

Want evidence that there is nothing "prestigious"? Read the post from Diamond Dave above (or any of his posts).

I was being facetious, which i thought was pretty obvious.

If i'm incorrect in my assertion before about you taking the WHO's opinion as gospel, then by all means, express your opinion with some thoughtful reply rather than just spewing garbage in attempt to incite people. If you're not capable of putting together coherent thought though, then i apologize for expecting an impossible task from you.

 

[Vanquish]

Well, the fact that there ARE no objective sources of information means that we should dismantle our entire healthcare system based on a source that we KNOW to be utterly falsified. Brilliant. I'm betting you were head of the class at your vocational tech school with a logical mind like that.

Nah. I get paid to argue in front of the Supreme Court of Alabama. I could continue to post my accomplishments, but I'd come off as immodest or dishonest (to those who had no wish to accept some random guy's word over the internet, not that I'd blame them).

Oh, I have no problem believing that you're a lawyer. After all, look at how you just wasted everyone's time running your gums over something totally useless. What I have trouble believing is that you think that makes anyone view you as intelligent or deserving of respect.

I'm glad you have trouble believing it...since I never said it, nor do I believe it. I don't think that mere admission to the bar makes one irrefutable or intelligent. I do believe that it lends more credibility to their assertions in certain areas, having studied the area more. Would you tend to lend credence to a pig farmer when he speaks on the subject of raising pigs over a shoe-maker speaking on the same subject? Doesnt mean the cobbler can't prove the pig farmer wrong (say about what most pigs like to eat) but I'd at least begin my analysis leaning towards the farmer.

Great job focusing on only the last part of the post. It really helps divert from not being able to answer the entire rest of it . . . Oh, wait, it doesn't. It just makes it that much more obvious.

Huh? Now you're just parroting back what I accused you of.

Well, no shit, Captain Obvious. I'm so glad I had you here to pompously lecture me on the brilliance of my own ******* position.

And wasn't the point that OTHER countries can't be measured correctly comparatively? Why take apart our Ford Taurus when it's the Chinese Chika that doesn't have a fuel gauge?

Actually, the point was that there was no way to compare ANY of the countries involved objectively. Just because the United States is generally more honest in its health reporting doesn't mean the WHO isn't still solely taking our word for it. And I don't believe I suggested that we should take apart our own system because other countries' systems suck . . . oh, wait. Brilliant legal mind that you are, you don't recognize sarcasm unless someone pins a flashing neon sign to it. My apologies for addressing you like a literate, thinking adult. I'll try to keep my unreasonable expectations under control where you're concerned.

I suppose you weren't paying attention to the rest of the thread and only listening to yourself. Typical internet debate tactic. I was referring to the whole thread (notice I said "THE point" not "YOUR point).

Try not to insult someone when you post. You might get farther. I break this rule myself sometimes, but 2 wrongs dont make a right.

It never ceases to amuse me when I express contempt and disdain from someone, and they respond by instructing me how I can make them like me better. Contemplate getting over yourself, ego monkey, and then consider that I don't NEED to "get farther" when my goal was to make you understand that I think you're a half-wit. Clearly, I achieved exactly what I was aiming at.

The only thing you've succeeded at is wasting kilo-calories typing flawed logic, erroneous facts, and posturing. My posts make me out to be anything BUT a self-centered ego-monkey. All you seem to be able to do is insult people. Not surprising that you've had multiple people voice the same complaint about you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

There is nothing "prestigious" associated with this board. Nothing. It is a place to express opinion with no requirement or expectation to debate issues, provide evidence or post honestly.
You have posted a perfect example, asserting that I believe something - which I do not - and then moving on from this false premise to an absurd conclusion.

Want evidence that there is nothing "prestigious"? Read the post from Diamond Dave above (or any of his posts).

I was being facetious, which i thought was pretty obvious.

If i'm incorrect in my assertion before about you taking the WHO's opinion as gospel, then by all means, express your opinion with some thoughtful reply rather than just spewing garbage in attempt to incite people. If you're not capable of putting together coherent thought though, then i apologize for expecting an impossible task from you.

Nice spin. Next time post the entire 'conversation'; by editing your original remarks you provide evidence that honesty is not a value you possess.

 

[CMike]

Once again we are not really 37. There are NO stabdards, each Country is free in each category reported to use what ever system they want to report with.

For example.... Live Births. In the US EVERY child that is alive AT the moment of birth is listed as a live birth, even the ones that have no chance of surviving more then a couple hours on their own. In other Countries live birth may mean the kid is a week old before they declare it a live birth.

And every category is like that. One can NOT compare Countires when one can not even know what the standard for repo0rting is and it is not a standard system for ALL countries.

The ranking comes from the World Health Organization, the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. I believe their ranking system covers the pertinent points and should be considered accurate.

Based on what criteria?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Once again we are not really 37. There are NO stabdards, each Country is free in each category reported to use what ever system they want to report with.

For example.... Live Births. In the US EVERY child that is alive AT the moment of birth is listed as a live birth, even the ones that have no chance of surviving more then a couple hours on their own. In other Countries live birth may mean the kid is a week old before they declare it a live birth.

And every category is like that. One can NOT compare Countires when one can not even know what the standard for repo0rting is and it is not a standard system for ALL countries.

The ranking comes from the World Health Organization, the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. I believe their ranking system covers the pertinent points and should be considered accurate.

Based on what criteria?

Based on surveys from each of the 193 member countries, on specific topics, illnesses and demographic date collected. Google the World Health Organization if you really care about the criteria.

The fact remains, the US, based on whatever criteria, is number 37. Rather than attack the messenger (WHO) a thinking, caring, intelligent, non-partisan would ask why? And, it goes without saying, but I will, that those who attack the messenger are non thinkers, uncaring, not too bright and wholly partisan.

 

[csbarry]

Once again we are not really 37. There are NO stabdards, each Country is free in each category reported to use what ever system they want to report with.

For example.... Live Births. In the US EVERY child that is alive AT the moment of birth is listed as a live birth, even the ones that have no chance of surviving more then a couple hours on their own. In other Countries live birth may mean the kid is a week old before they declare it a live birth.

And every category is like that. One can NOT compare Countires when one can not even know what the standard for repo0rting is and it is not a standard system for ALL countries.

The ranking comes from the World Health Organization, the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. I believe their ranking system covers the pertinent points and should be considered accurate.

Based on what criteria?

I'm not sure, but I would think that the criteria the WHO uses is what one would expect they should use, and I'm confident the criteria applies equally to each country..

 

[Zona]

But we pay more than any other industrialized country for our #37 ranking

The US is the only country where you can go bankrupt just for getting sick. 60% of personal bankruptcies are because of healthcare costs not financial mismanagement. And the majority of that 60% have healthcare

"but why do people from other country's come here for health care".....simple answer...THEY ARE RICH AND CAN AFFORD IT. Whenever the idiots say this, just remind them, no one is disputing the care our doctors give, we are saying everyone should have access to it, not just the rich.

Everyone DOES have access to it you ignorant fucktard

Words hurt sir. I am really feeeling bad now. Oh and Rush proved your point, if you have enough money, you think the health care situation here is fantastic.

Asshole.

 

[Cecilie1200]

While I did not read the report, concering the countries I would prefer over the US in terms of Health Care:
Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Finnland, Austria, Japan.
I would consider that Germany, France, UK, Spain, Canada, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and other common wealth countries are propably equal in term of what the "average person" gets.
However, of these countries, only the USA needs to have "free clinics" that do lottereys to get needed health care, so I can see a justicification for rating the US lower.
Basically, it seems that the US offers perhaps even the best care, provided that you are rich. If you are not covered, you are screwed in a way that is worse than what would happen in other industrilized states.
Also, what constitutes Rich, or, rich enough to get decent healthcare, seems to be a bit more than in lets say Germany. I am payin 64 Euro per month in health insurance, "end user fees" for the dentist or additonal medication will cost around 200 additonal bucks per year. This puts my healthcare costs at significantly under 1000 $ . As far as I know, in the US you pay waaaay more for the same.

And you are basing your assumption of wonderful health care in these other countries on what (leaving aside the fact that no one asked you to name countries at random, anyway)? Also, on what are you basing your "if you're not covered, you're screwed worse than in other countries" remark? How about we see some hard evidence, rather than just your opinion?

 

[CMike]

The ranking comes from the World Health Organization, the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. I believe their ranking system covers the pertinent points and should be considered accurate.

Based on what criteria?

Based on surveys from each of the 193 member countries, on specific topics, illnesses and demographic date collected. Google the World Health Organization if you really care about the criteria.

The fact remains, the US, based on whatever criteria, is number 37. Rather than attack the messenger (WHO) a thinking, caring, intelligent, non-partisan would ask why? And, it goes without saying, but I will, that those who attack the messenger are non thinkers, uncaring, not too bright and wholly partisan.

Based on whatever criteria is not an answer. I don't trust WHO and the international organizations.

That's why I am still asking based on what criteria?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wonder why no other nation is modeling their health care after the US?

Funny you should ask. While dimwits in the US drool over the socialized European and Canadian models, those countries have been adding US-style components to their systems in a quiet admission that they're screwing the pooch. And as soon as that info comes to light about one of them, you geniuses on the left go traipsing off to worship at the feet of someone else, only to repeat the same cycle.

What is it they say about doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results? Sign of insanity, isn't it?