What makes arguing with liberals so frustrating #1

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes, because in the years that America rose out of a collapsed economy into a world superpower, it was the Conservative policies that were in place...

why be so afraid to tell us what years and what policies you are talking about?? What does your fear tell you, liberal.

 

[Vidi]

Yes, because in the years that America rose out of a collapsed economy into a world superpower, it was the Conservative policies that were in place...

why be so afraid to tell us what years and what policies you are talking about?? What does your fear tell you, liberal.

The fact that you dont know those years are from the Great Depression until the 1950-60's speaks volumes.

 

[IndependntLogic]

It's funny. Liberals say that Conservatives don't address issues. That they dodge, change the subject use moral equivalency (e.g. Rush is fine because Look! A Liberal guy did something similar!), just sling petty insults or labels and finally, when frustrated, Cut & Run. Which Many Conservatives here definitely do.
Conservatives claim Liberals do all these things. Which many Liberals here definitely do.
Both sides have posters here that do these things.

So what? Every group will have weak members. What's important is that conservatism is an intellectual philosophy that apparently is responsible for America's greatness, while liberalism is subversively based on purely destructive free lunch liberalism.

And let's not forget that independent means independent of the IQ needed to decide between freedom and government. Would you call yourself logical if you did not know up from down?

Apparently you lack the intellect to understand what Independent means. Independents have the ability to do more than just blindly follow myriad beliefs because Rush, Glenn, FOX or whomever tells us that is how we should think. Unlike the lemmings, we are able to criticize Obama when he has it coming and praise him when he has earned. Followers (whether Conserv or Lib) can do one or the other but not both - that would violate what they have been told to think and do.
While Conservatism has certainly contributed certain values I believe have contributed to our country's greatness, only a lemming would think it is the sole factor or political philosophy that has done so. Liberals have contributed a LOT to the greatness of our country and what makes us unique in the world. Of course, those incapable of Independent thought could never understand or acknowledge that.

 

[percysunshine]

1,463 posts?

2,926 of them are probably from liberals.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And if you're working 50 hours a week and your employer doesn't offer health insurance? What then?

Don't say it doesnt happen, it happened to me from 2009-2010. Purchasing outside of the employer provided would have meant my family would have starved.

All the more reason to get the employer out of it so that insurance becomes affordable for all working people again. We usually got our insurance through employers too because it was somewhat cheaper that way and/or we could get better coverage.

Nevertheless, there was usually a 30 to 60-day waiting period before your coverage started on a new sign up back then and Hubby had just changed jobs so was in that waiting period when he had a gas blow out and sustained third degree burns on his left hand when lighting the furnace one night. We stuck it in ice water and headed for the emergency room where he was treated, and because he was drugged for the pain, was kept over night. These days, the cost for that plus several follow up appointments would have been in the many thousands. For us the cost was reasonable and we were able to pay it off in a few installments.

That is the difference between the free market system and one that the government has meddled in and corrupted.

You cant possibly make health care affordable without price controls and thats just more big government meddling.

Really? So how is it that every other commodity on the market manages to be affordable without the government coming in and taking control? And don't even TRY to tell me it's because healthcare is so goddamned important and essential that it's different from everything else. Food is a lot more essential than healthcare, but it's also imminently affordable and certainly doesn't have government price controls.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes, because in the years that America rose out of a collapsed economy into a world superpower, it was the Conservative policies that were in place...

why be so afraid to tell us what years and what policies you are talking about?? What does your fear tell you, liberal.

The fact that you dont know those years are from the Great Depression until the 1950-60's speaks volumes.

The fact that you think that success came from LIBERAL policies tells us . . . exactly what everyone has already deduced about you.

 

[Avatar4321]

It's funny. Liberals say that Conservatives don't address issues. That they dodge, change the subject use moral equivalency (e.g. Rush is fine because Look! A Liberal guy did something similar!), just sling petty insults or labels and finally, when frustrated, Cut & Run. Which Many Conservatives here definitely do.
Conservatives claim Liberals do all these things. Which many Liberals here definitely do.
Both sides have posters here that do these things.

So what? Every group will have weak members. What's important is that conservatism is an intellectual philosophy that apparently is responsible for America's greatness, while liberalism is subversively based on purely destructive free lunch liberalism.

And let's not forget that independent means independent of the IQ needed to decide between freedom and government. Would you call yourself logical if you did not know up from down?

You really suck at arguing.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes, because in the years that America rose out of a collapsed economy into a world superpower, it was the Conservative policies that were in place...

why be so afraid to tell us what years and what policies you are talking about?? What does your fear tell you, liberal.

The fact that you dont know those years are from the Great Depression until the 1950-60's speaks volumes.

The fact that you don't realize that progressive policies are what prolonged the Great Depression for 12 years speaks volumes as well.

 

[Vidi]

why be so afraid to tell us what years and what policies you are talking about?? What does your fear tell you, liberal.

The fact that you dont know those years are from the Great Depression until the 1950-60's speaks volumes.

The fact that you don't realize that progressive policies are what prolonged the Great Depression for 12 years speaks volumes as well.

Keep believing the hype.

 

[Avatar4321]

The fact that you dont know those years are from the Great Depression until the 1950-60's speaks volumes.

The fact that you don't realize that progressive policies are what prolonged the Great Depression for 12 years speaks volumes as well.

Keep believing the hype.

I prefer facts, you can keep the hype to yourself.

 

[Bfgrn]

How MANY times do I have to destroy this dogmatic driven MYTH? It has been dis-proven on numerous threads, yet you still chant the same crap, over and over and over...

Please explain why you refuse to accept facts Foxfyre?

America has the most 'private sector' health care in the world. AND the most expensive per capita than ANY nation on earth. And the most expensive 'private sector' health care in the world does not even provide the best outcomes for American citizens.

What makes you believe our federal government can do things any more efficiently and less expensively?
I challenge you to provide evidence of any federal program which operates on time and within budget.

Exactly. He can't do it, but he has the leftwing talking points memorized and has apparently made himself believe they can't be challenged.

The ONLY way ANY country can provide healthcare more cheaply than the private sector is by rationing that healthcare and/or shifting the cost to something else to make the books on the healthcare appear balanced. Before the government got involved, the U.S. healthcare system was affordable for more people. We all paid out of pocket for the routine doctor's visit, the routine vaccinations and shots, the treatment for that broken finger in the E.R. And it didn't break the bank either. Those who couldn't pay got treated anyway and got a bill in the mail that they could pay out over time if necessary. There were privately owned charity clinics and hospitals for the few truly indigent.

The day that Medicare went into effect, followed by Medicaid some years later, the costs began sharply rising and have spiraled out of control the more the government has become involved.

But arguing with liberals is frustrating because apparently none want to even think about that, much less take a close look at it. It would be way too upsetting to the leftist/liberal mantra so they just deny it without having a clue whether it is accurate or not.

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency

CBO | The Health Care System for Veterans: An Interim Report

VA: The Best Care Anywhere

Johns Hopkins Medicine - Is Medicare Cost Effective?

If you can be well without health, you may be happy without virtue.
Edmund Burke

 

[thereisnospoon]

What makes you believe our federal government can do things any more efficiently and less expensively?
I challenge you to provide evidence of any federal program which operates on time and within budget.

Exactly. He can't do it, but he has the leftwing talking points memorized and has apparently made himself believe they can't be challenged.

The ONLY way ANY country can provide healthcare more cheaply than the private sector is by rationing that healthcare and/or shifting the cost to something else to make the books on the healthcare appear balanced. Before the government got involved, the U.S. healthcare system was affordable for more people. We all paid out of pocket for the routine doctor's visit, the routine vaccinations and shots, the treatment for that broken finger in the E.R. And it didn't break the bank either. Those who couldn't pay got treated anyway and got a bill in the mail that they could pay out over time if necessary. There were privately owned charity clinics and hospitals for the few truly indigent.

The day that Medicare went into effect, followed by Medicaid some years later, the costs began sharply rising and have spiraled out of control the more the government has become involved.

But arguing with liberals is frustrating because apparently none want to even think about that, much less take a close look at it. It would be way too upsetting to the leftist/liberal mantra so they just deny it without having a clue whether it is accurate or not.

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency

CBO | The Health Care System for Veterans: An Interim Report

VA: The Best Care Anywhere

Johns Hopkins Medicine - Is Medicare Cost Effective?

If you can be well without health, you may be happy without virtue.
Edmund Burke

Those are OPINIONS, genius.
Plus, these places are not treating 300 million people.
Nice try though.
Now, back to finding evidence of ANY federal program or contract that operates within budget, with great efficiency and within time constraints.
Have at it.

 

[Foxfyre]

Exactly. He can't do it, but he has the leftwing talking points memorized and has apparently made himself believe they can't be challenged.

The ONLY way ANY country can provide healthcare more cheaply than the private sector is by rationing that healthcare and/or shifting the cost to something else to make the books on the healthcare appear balanced. Before the government got involved, the U.S. healthcare system was affordable for more people. We all paid out of pocket for the routine doctor's visit, the routine vaccinations and shots, the treatment for that broken finger in the E.R. And it didn't break the bank either. Those who couldn't pay got treated anyway and got a bill in the mail that they could pay out over time if necessary. There were privately owned charity clinics and hospitals for the few truly indigent.

The day that Medicare went into effect, followed by Medicaid some years later, the costs began sharply rising and have spiraled out of control the more the government has become involved.

But arguing with liberals is frustrating because apparently none want to even think about that, much less take a close look at it. It would be way too upsetting to the leftist/liberal mantra so they just deny it without having a clue whether it is accurate or not.

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency

CBO | The Health Care System for Veterans: An Interim Report

VA: The Best Care Anywhere

Johns Hopkins Medicine - Is Medicare Cost Effective?

If you can be well without health, you may be happy without virtue.
Edmund Burke

Those are OPINIONS, genius.
Plus, these places are not treating 300 million people.
Nice try though.
Now, back to finding evidence of ANY federal program or contract that operates within budget, with great efficiency and within time constraints.
Have at it.

One of our very best friends here is a doctor at the local VA hospital. She is a caring, competent doctor, but says the VA system is anything but a model of efficiency, and shudders to think what it would be like if the whole system was run like that. She has a chronic heart condition that requires frequent hospitalization and also has had a couple of other surgeries in recent years. She could go to the VA by virtue of her position there, but she opts for other hospitals in town where she knows she will get better care.

And while I 100% support the VA to take care of our service men and women who put their lives on the line on behalf of their country, we can and should do better for them.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Exactly. He can't do it, but he has the leftwing talking points memorized and has apparently made himself believe they can't be challenged.

The ONLY way ANY country can provide healthcare more cheaply than the private sector is by rationing that healthcare and/or shifting the cost to something else to make the books on the healthcare appear balanced. Before the government got involved, the U.S. healthcare system was affordable for more people. We all paid out of pocket for the routine doctor's visit, the routine vaccinations and shots, the treatment for that broken finger in the E.R. And it didn't break the bank either. Those who couldn't pay got treated anyway and got a bill in the mail that they could pay out over time if necessary. There were privately owned charity clinics and hospitals for the few truly indigent.

The day that Medicare went into effect, followed by Medicaid some years later, the costs began sharply rising and have spiraled out of control the more the government has become involved.

But arguing with liberals is frustrating because apparently none want to even think about that, much less take a close look at it. It would be way too upsetting to the leftist/liberal mantra so they just deny it without having a clue whether it is accurate or not.

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency

CBO | The Health Care System for Veterans: An Interim Report

VA: The Best Care Anywhere

Johns Hopkins Medicine - Is Medicare Cost Effective?

If you can be well without health, you may be happy without virtue.
Edmund Burke

Those are OPINIONS, genius.
Plus, these places are not treating 300 million people.
Nice try though.
Now, back to finding evidence of ANY federal program or contract that operates within budget, with great efficiency and within time constraints.
Have at it.

Sweden. Oh yeah and Indonesia. Want more or want to address those two first?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency

CBO | The Health Care System for Veterans: An Interim Report

VA: The Best Care Anywhere

Johns Hopkins Medicine - Is Medicare Cost Effective?

If you can be well without health, you may be happy without virtue.
Edmund Burke

Those are OPINIONS, genius.
Plus, these places are not treating 300 million people.
Nice try though.
Now, back to finding evidence of ANY federal program or contract that operates within budget, with great efficiency and within time constraints.
Have at it.

Sweden. Oh yeah and Indonesia. Want more or want to address those two first?

Hey Toto, this ain't Sweden.
And just because you blurt out "Sweden" doesn't make it true..
Now, don't play stupid with me. You know God Damned well I was referring to US FEDERAL programs.
Now, you still have an assignment. Go find one US federal program that meets those standards mentioned above.
Oh...two plus two DOES NOT EQUAL five...Your outcome based education is a FAIL.
One other thing. Next time you answer a question, back it up with facts or your reply is no answer at all.

 

[Bfgrn]

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency

CBO | The Health Care System for Veterans: An Interim Report

VA: The Best Care Anywhere

Johns Hopkins Medicine - Is Medicare Cost Effective?

If you can be well without health, you may be happy without virtue.
Edmund Burke

Those are OPINIONS, genius.
Plus, these places are not treating 300 million people.
Nice try though.
Now, back to finding evidence of ANY federal program or contract that operates within budget, with great efficiency and within time constraints.
Have at it.

One of our very best friends here is a doctor at the local VA hospital. She is a caring, competent doctor, but says the VA system is anything but a model of efficiency, and shudders to think what it would be like if the whole system was run like that. She has a chronic heart condition that requires frequent hospitalization and also has had a couple of other surgeries in recent years. She could go to the VA by virtue of her position there, but she opts for other hospitals in town where she knows she will get better care.

And while I 100% support the VA to take care of our service men and women who put their lives on the line on behalf of their country, we can and should do better for them.

You are a piece of work Foxfyre. You accuse me of presenting 'OPINIONS'... and what is your rebuttal??? A OPINION...singular, ONE person. Your typical anecdotal 'I know a doctor' or 'I have a grandma'

I provide facts, studies and CBO reports, but you know a doctor...

The problem with arguing with conservatives is any facts that don't fit their dogmatic mind HAS to be somehow denied, rejected or ignored.

From the first article I posted:

In fact, the VA is used to stretching a buck. It has to deliver all the care that its patients need without exceeding its annual budget set by Congress.

It's a challenge, but Drucker said the VA has figured out a way to do things economically. Like doctors at the Mayo Clinic, most VA doctors receive a salary, so they have no incentive to order unnecessary tests and procedures to make more money. That saves the VA huge sums of money that can be reinvested in necessary care.

Also, the VA has an electronic medical record system that's the envy of many. Drucker said doctors can get detailed information about patients even if they were treated at a VA clinic across the country.

"Staff do not have to transport records," he said. "They don't have to look for them; they're just available on the computer screen in front of the provider who can use that information immediately to make a medical decision about a patient."

The electronic records have allowed them to improve patient quality and eliminate a lot of wasteful spending.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Do I need to go on Foxfyre? Do I have to completely embarrass you?

 

[Foxfyre]

Those are OPINIONS, genius.
Plus, these places are not treating 300 million people.
Nice try though.
Now, back to finding evidence of ANY federal program or contract that operates within budget, with great efficiency and within time constraints.
Have at it.

One of our very best friends here is a doctor at the local VA hospital. She is a caring, competent doctor, but says the VA system is anything but a model of efficiency, and shudders to think what it would be like if the whole system was run like that. She has a chronic heart condition that requires frequent hospitalization and also has had a couple of other surgeries in recent years. She could go to the VA by virtue of her position there, but she opts for other hospitals in town where she knows she will get better care.

And while I 100% support the VA to take care of our service men and women who put their lives on the line on behalf of their country, we can and should do better for them.

You are a piece of work Foxfyre. You accuse me of presenting 'OPINIONS'... and what is your rebuttal??? A OPINION...singular, ONE person. Your typical anecdotal 'I know a doctor' or 'I have a grandma'

I provide facts, studies and CBO reports, but you know a doctor...

The problem with arguing with conservatives is any facts that don't fit their dogmatic mind HAS to be somehow denied, rejected or ignored.

From the first article I posted:

In fact, the VA is used to stretching a buck. It has to deliver all the care that its patients need without exceeding its annual budget set by Congress.

It's a challenge, but Drucker said the VA has figured out a way to do things economically. Like doctors at the Mayo Clinic, most VA doctors receive a salary, so they have no incentive to order unnecessary tests and procedures to make more money. That saves the VA huge sums of money that can be reinvested in necessary care.

Also, the VA has an electronic medical record system that's the envy of many. Drucker said doctors can get detailed information about patients even if they were treated at a VA clinic across the country.

"Staff do not have to transport records," he said. "They don't have to look for them; they're just available on the computer screen in front of the provider who can use that information immediately to make a medical decision about a patient."

The electronic records have allowed them to improve patient quality and eliminate a lot of wasteful spending.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Do I need to go on Foxfyre? Do I have to completely embarrass you?

Well continue to bask in your grand illusions that anything you say embarrasses me. I offered an opinion of somebody who is actively working in the system. You offer link after link of what. Somebody else's opinion. One says that the VA has improved and I would agree that it has. Sometimes thngs are so bad that improvement is the only direction they can go. I'm sure there are some VA hospitals that do a good job. The one here does pretty well for what it is. But still virtually ALL their medical staff chooses other hospitals in town when they need serious hospitalization/treatment. That should tell you something.

I would like to see a study of VA medical personnel across the country and see how many would choose the hospital they work in for their own care. That could be a revelation, yes? At the same time I am not saying that the Veterans get no care or inadequate care at the VA. I am not suggesting that the VA be dismantled. Go to the local VA at any time of day or night and usually every bed is filled and the emergency room is jammed full. There is a need for it. I am just saying that private facilities are for the most part better.

One of your links compared the VA quality of care with what. . .Medicare. News flash for you, that is another government program. Realistically that is like comparing Dumb with Dumber.

And now let's look at costs. When you can show me that running the VA and Medicare program is more cost efficient than is private healhcare, get back to me.

Your method of debating is why arguing with liberals is so frustrating. You come up with a bunch of links that you think make your point, but you still do not articulate in your own words why you hold the opinions that you do or why your sources should be considered superior to anybody elses. In my opinion, because you are a liberal, you are unable to do that.

 

[Bfgrn]

One of our very best friends here is a doctor at the local VA hospital. She is a caring, competent doctor, but says the VA system is anything but a model of efficiency, and shudders to think what it would be like if the whole system was run like that. She has a chronic heart condition that requires frequent hospitalization and also has had a couple of other surgeries in recent years. She could go to the VA by virtue of her position there, but she opts for other hospitals in town where she knows she will get better care.

And while I 100% support the VA to take care of our service men and women who put their lives on the line on behalf of their country, we can and should do better for them.

You are a piece of work Foxfyre. You accuse me of presenting 'OPINIONS'... and what is your rebuttal??? A OPINION...singular, ONE person. Your typical anecdotal 'I know a doctor' or 'I have a grandma'

I provide facts, studies and CBO reports, but you know a doctor...

The problem with arguing with conservatives is any facts that don't fit their dogmatic mind HAS to be somehow denied, rejected or ignored.

From the first article I posted:

In fact, the VA is used to stretching a buck. It has to deliver all the care that its patients need without exceeding its annual budget set by Congress.

It's a challenge, but Drucker said the VA has figured out a way to do things economically. Like doctors at the Mayo Clinic, most VA doctors receive a salary, so they have no incentive to order unnecessary tests and procedures to make more money. That saves the VA huge sums of money that can be reinvested in necessary care.

Also, the VA has an electronic medical record system that's the envy of many. Drucker said doctors can get detailed information about patients even if they were treated at a VA clinic across the country.

"Staff do not have to transport records," he said. "They don't have to look for them; they're just available on the computer screen in front of the provider who can use that information immediately to make a medical decision about a patient."

The electronic records have allowed them to improve patient quality and eliminate a lot of wasteful spending.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Do I need to go on Foxfyre? Do I have to completely embarrass you?

Well continue to bask in your grand illusions that anything you say embarrasses me. I offered an opinion of somebody who is actively working in the system. You offer link after link of what. Somebody else's opinion. One says that the VA has improved and I would agree that it has. Sometimes thngs are so bad that improvement is the only direction they can go. I'm sure there are some VA hospitals that do a good job. The one here does pretty well for what it is. But still virtually ALL their medical staff chooses other hospitals in town when they need serious hospitalization/treatment. That should tell you something.

I would like to see a study of VA medical personnel across the country and see how many would choose the hospital they work in for their own care. That could be a revelation, yes? At the same time I am not saying that the Veterans get no care or inadequate care at the VA. I am not suggesting that the VA be dismantled. Go to the local VA at any time of day or night and usually every bed is filled and the emergency room is jammed full. There is a need for it. I am just saying that private facilities are for the most part better.

One of your links compared the VA quality of care with what. . .Medicare. News flash for you, that is another government program. Realistically that is like comparing Dumb with Dumber.

And now let's look at costs. When you can show me that running the VA and Medicare program is more cost efficient than is private healhcare, get back to me.

Your method of debating is why arguing with liberals is so frustrating. You come up with a bunch of links that you think make your point, but you still do not articulate in your own words why you hold the opinions that you do or why your sources should be considered superior to anybody elses. In my opinion, because you are a liberal, you are unable to do that.

Maybe you need to keep reading. Hear what Bill Brody, the former president of John Hopkins University says. He is a market-driven entrepreneur and one of only 14 presidents of John Hopkins since 1875. But he also has the intelligence to learn and evolve. You don't. Your anecdotal beliefs are based on fears and close-minded stereotyping.

BTW, I have posted this before on other threads where I have destroyed your ignorance. But you keep beating your head against the same walls. It is only one of many facts that destroy the dogmatic beliefs you MUST adhere to, because that is what you are told to believe.

In fact, Medicare is very efficient by any objective means:

According to the Urban Institute's Marilyn Moon, who testified before the Senate Committee on Aging, Medicare expenditures between 1970 and 2000 grew more slowly than those of the private sector. Initially, from 1965 through the 1980s, Medicare and private insurance costs doubled in tandem. Then Medicare tightened up, and per capita expenditures grew more slowly than private insurance, creating a significant gap. In the 1990s, private insurers got more serious about controlling their costs, and the gap narrowed. But by 2000, Medicare per capita expenditures remained significantly lower than the private sector.

It has been argued that, in part, Medicare's cost effectiveness arises from the fact that it does not need to expend funds on marketing and sales-functions that are obligatory for the success of competitive, private-sector health plans. Moreover, some argue that the competitive model for health insurance has not been successful. In a market-driven economy, the healthy can and will change health plans for savings of only a few dollars a month, while the sick must remain in their existing plan in order to retain their physicians. Such behaviors lead to asymmetric risk pools and cost inequities.

This was all sobering news to a market-driven entrepreneur such as yours truly. However, given the perverse incentives that frequently drive behavior in health care, my take-home lesson is that there are examples in the success of Medicare we can apply to other sectors of our population.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Dr. William R. Brody

Dr. William R. Brody, President of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, an acclaimed physician-scientist, entrepreneur, and university leader, joined the Salk Institute on March 2, 2009 after 12 years as president of The Johns Hopkins University. He is a national figure in efforts to encourage innovation and strengthen the U.S. economy through investments in basic research and education. Most recently, he has written and spoken extensively around the country to promote a fuller discussion of health care reform.

Renowned for his achievements in biomedical engineering, Dr. Brody has over 100 publications and two U.S. patents in the field of medical imaging, and has made contributions in medical acoustics, computed tomography, digital radiography, and magnetic resonance imaging. These contributions have led to his recognition by numerous national and international organizations. Dr. Brody is a member of the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Engineering, and a fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, the American College of Radiology, the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, the International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, the American Institute of Biomedical Engineering, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 2010, he was awarded the Gold Medal of the Radiological Society of North America for his contributions to medical imaging science.

A native of Stockton, California, Dr. Brody received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and his M.D. and Ph.D., also in electrical engineering, from Stanford University. Following post-graduate training in cardiovascular surgery and radiology at Stanford, the National Institutes of Health and the University of California, San Francisco, Dr. Brody was associate professor and then professor of radiology and electrical engineering at Stanford University (1977-1986). He has been a co-founder of three medical device companies, and served as the president and chief executive officer of Resonex Inc. from 1984 to 1987.

Dr. Brody serves as a member of the Scientific Management Review Board of the National Institutes of Health and on the board of directors of IBM and Novartis. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of Stanford University. He formerly served on the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, the Science Board of the Food and Drug Administration, on the Corporation of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and was a trustee of the Commonwealth Fund, the Whitaker Foundation, and the Minnesota Orchestra.

Dr. Brody is a private pilot holding airline transport pilot and flight instructor ratings. He and his wife, Wendy, have two grown children.

 

[Foxfyre]

I didn't question Brody's credentials. But where is his testimony that he has compared VA hospitals and care against other hospitals and other medical services and rates VA hospitals to be as good or superior to the others?

As usual Bfgrn, you seem to be incapable of articulating a point of view but depend on something you find on the internet that you hope makes your case for you. And THAT should embarrass you.

 

[Bfgrn]

I didn't question Brody's credentials. But where is his testimony that he has compared VA hospitals and care against other hospitals and other medical services and rates VA hospitals to be as good or superior to the others?

As usual Bfgrn, you seem to be incapable of articulating a point of view but depend on something you find on the internet that you hope makes your case for you. And THAT should embarrass you.

OH, so know you want to change YOUR terms. You are being owned as usual, so you have to make it about something else.

Let's get back to YOUR ignorance.

And now let's look at costs. When you can show me that running the VA and Medicare program is more cost efficient than is private healhcare, get back to me.