| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Xomicron" |
| Date: |
07 May 2004 12:51:39 PM |
| Object: |
Universal Health Care? |
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care, they may tell you
how much they have to pay per visit to their doctor's office or the monthly
bill for their prescription drugs. But these are not the costs of medical
care. These are the prices paid.
The difference between prices and costs is not just a fine distinction made
by economists. Prices are what pay for costs -- and if they do not pay
enough to cover the costs, then centuries of history in countries around
the world show that the supply is going to decline in quantity or quality,
or both. In the case of medical care, the supply is a matter of life and
death.
The average medical student graduates with a debt of more than $100,000.
The cost per doctor of running an office is more than $100 an hour. The
average cost of developing a new pharmaceutical drug is $800 million. These
are among the costs of medical care.
When politicians talk about "bringing down the cost of medical care," they
are not talking about reducing any of these costs by one cent. They are
talking about forcing prices down through one scheme or another.
All the existing efforts to control the rising expenses of medical care --
whether by government, insurance companies, or health maintenance
organizations -- are about holding down the amount of money they have to
pay out, not about reducing any of the real costs.
Many of the same politicians who are gung ho for imposing price controls on
prescription drugs, or for importing Canadian price controls by importing
American medicines from Canada, have not the slightest interest in stopping
frivolous lawsuits against doctors, hospitals, or drug companies -- which
are huge costs.
Price control zealots likewise seldom have any interest in reducing the
amount of federal requirements for getting a drug approved for sale to the
public -- a process that can easily drag on for a decade or more, costing
millions of dollars, and also costing the lives of those who die while
waiting for the drug to be approved by bureaucrats at the Food and Drug
Administration.
For political purposes, what "bringing down the cost of medical care" means
is some quick fix that will win votes at the next election, regardless of
what the repercussions are thereafter.
What are those repercussions?
If the bureaucratic hassles that doctors have to go through make their huge
investment in time and money going to medical school not seem worthwhile,
some can retire early and some can take jobs no longer involving treating
patients. Either way, the supply of medical care can begin to decline, even
in the short run.
In the long run, medical school may no longer look like such a good
investment to many in the younger generation. Britain, which has had
government-run medical care for more than half a century, has to import
doctors from the Third World, where medical school standards are lower.
So long as there are warm bodies with "M.D." after their names, there is no
decline in supply, as far as politicians are concerned. Only the patients
will find out, the hard way, what declining quality means.
No law passed by more than 500 members of Congress is going to be simple or
even consistent. There are already 125,000 pages of Medicare regulations.
"Universal health care" can only mean more.
I saw a vivid example of what bureaucratic medical care meant back in 1959,
when I had a summer job at the headquarters of the U.S. Public Health
Service in Washington. Around 5 o'clock one afternoon, a man had a heart
attack on the street near our office.
He was taken to the nurse's room and asked if he was a federal employee. If
he was, he could be sent to the large, modern medical facility there in the
Public Health Service headquarters. But he was not a government employee,
so an ambulance was summoned from a local hospital.
By the time this ambulance made its way through miles of downtown
Washington rush-hour traffic, the man was dead. He died waiting for a
doctor, in a building full of doctors. That is what bureaucracy means.
Making a government-run medical care system mandatory -- "universal" is the
pretty word for mandatory -- means that we will all have no choice but to
be caught up in that bureaucratic maze.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20040504.shtml
.
|
|
| User: "Citizen" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
15 May 2004 06:10:42 AM |
|
|
Guy wrote:
"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in message
news:isfpc.41255$kc2.614059@nnrp1.uunet.ca...
Bob <sd@sd.net> wrote in news:Xns94E9B2DF487F2SD@68.6.19.6:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in
news:Ym1pc.14$H_3.1@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
Cite? Where is your proof that "flock to the U.S. for surgery and other
medical treatment"?
Happens all the time. Many Canadians I know say they come to the US if
they
need and major treatment. The waiting list is too long and it can take
months to see a doctor.
Same thing can happen here in the US for some high-demand specialists.
-----------------------
That's very true, I was sent to a cardiac specialist awhile back when I
was under a great deal of stress and working too hard - too many hours.
It was a 2 month wait for an appointment.. My doctor had to jump
through hoops to get me an appointment within a week or two.
Also, a 1 -2 month wait to get to a dentist with a standard dental plan
through the company I worked for at that time. (I've had the same with
with several empoyers, it is a large dental insurace company)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 11:24:24 PM |
|
|
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in
news:isfpc.41255$kc2.614059@nnrp1.uunet.ca:
Bob <sd@sd.net> wrote in news:Xns94E9B2DF487F2SD@68.6.19.6:
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in
news:Ym1pc.14$H_3.1@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
Cite? Where is your proof that "flock to the U.S. for surgery and
other medical treatment"?
Happens all the time. Many Canadians I know say they come to the US if
they need and major treatment. The waiting list is too long and it can
take months to see a doctor.
So say you. Now where is the proof?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Michael Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 10:50:04 AM |
|
|
Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
I tore a muscle in my right leg in March 2003. I was hospitalised for
4 days and received excellent care. On a follow up visit to the
hospital 2 weeks later, the doctor expressed some concern that the leg
was not healing well and ordered an MRI. I had to wait a month for the
MRI appointment and then just 2 days before the appointed hour, the
hospital called me and told me the machine had broken down and that the
appointment was re-scheduled 2 days later.
I could have gone to the USA and had the MRI within 24-48 hours of the
doctor saying I should have one.... at an exorbitant cost... in
expensive US$. There are "MRI factories" just south of the border that
actually advertise on TV in Canada to attract patients. In part they
prey on the fear people have that if they don't get the test/procedure
ASAP, they will get worse. In my case, this was not a concern to me as
I understand that healing rates in people are different and I was not in
pain or about to loose a limb.
Why did I have to wait a month when I could have had one in 24-48
hours? Because an MRI machine is ludicrously expensive! Part of the
reason is that the USA, the major market of medical high-technology, has
a much longer, more expensive and unreasonable nit-picky approval
process for this kind of technology. 20-25% of the cost of an MRI
machine is in the compliance making them much more expensive then they
need to be. The Europeans also have to build them to the US spec if
they want to go after that market so there is no US model and everybody
else model that is cheaper. The manufacturers count on this as part of
the expense of doing business and thus they jack up the profit margins
on the machine to cover the R&D and compliance expenses.
As a small country [compared to the US market], Canada really can't
afford to buy 2 or 3 MRI machines for each hospital. The businessmen in
Buffalo that operate the MRI clinic have 4 of them running 2 shifts.
Why? because they make a *profit* on them! The can afford to pay good
wages and buy the latest technology because they can charge accordingly
and smile all the way to the bank.
Further, the USA pays higher wages for nurses, support staff, medical
technicians, radiologists, etc. They actively recruit in Canada thus
there is a continuing drain on the health care system as those who are
profit driven, rather then patient driven, migrate south in search of
the almighty dollar [which is entirely their prerogative].
So you have a smaller market in Canada, with more limited resources and
staffing shortages, thus one has to wait in line to get service from the
health care system.... or you head south of the border and take a big
hit in the wallet to get "instant" service.... or taxes are raised to
increase health care spending and we all know how popular raising taxes
in any country.
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 11:03:55 AM |
|
|
In news:%T5pc.40746$kc2.610596@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all a good
laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
I tore a muscle in my right leg in March 2003. I was hospitalised for
4 days and received excellent care. On a follow up visit to the
hospital 2 weeks later, the doctor expressed some concern that the leg
was not healing well and ordered an MRI. I had to wait a month for
the MRI appointment and then just 2 days before the appointed hour,
the hospital called me and told me the machine had broken down and
that the appointment was re-scheduled 2 days later.
I could have gone to the USA and had the MRI within 24-48 hours of the
doctor saying I should have one.... at an exorbitant cost... in
expensive US$. There are "MRI factories" just south of the border
that actually advertise on TV in Canada to attract patients. In part
they prey on the fear people have that if they don't get the
test/procedure ASAP, they will get worse. In my case, this was not a
concern to me as I understand that healing rates in people are
different and I was not in pain or about to loose a limb.
Why did I have to wait a month when I could have had one in 24-48
hours? Because an MRI machine is ludicrously expensive!
And your government can't or won't provide a piece of equipment that is
found standard in most U.S. hospitals. Yet, you pay taxes far in excess of
what we pay in the U.S.
Part of the
reason is that the USA, the major market of medical high-technology,
has a much longer, more expensive and unreasonable nit-picky approval
process for this kind of technology. 20-25% of the cost of an MRI
machine is in the compliance making them much more expensive then they
need to be. The Europeans also have to build them to the US spec if
they want to go after that market so there is no US model and
everybody else model that is cheaper. The manufacturers count on
this as part of the expense of doing business and thus they jack up
the profit margins on the machine to cover the R&D and compliance
expenses.
Who do you think is going to cover the R&D and compliance expenses, and why
are the compliance rules unnecessary?
As a small country [compared to the US market], Canada really can't
afford to buy 2 or 3 MRI machines for each hospital.
Then the Canadian system is less efficient, is that what you're saying?
The businessmen
in Buffalo that operate the MRI clinic have 4 of them running 2
shifts. Why? because they make a *profit* on them!
Yeah, well that's sort of the reason people go into business.
The can afford
to pay good wages and buy the latest technology because they can
charge accordingly and smile all the way to the bank.
Hmmm... They can afford to pay good wages, and buy the latest
technologies... My! What a world!
Further, the USA pays higher wages for nurses, support staff, medical
technicians, radiologists, etc.
OH NO!!
They actively recruit in Canada thus
there is a continuing drain on the health care system as those who are
profit driven, rather then patient driven, migrate south in search of
the almighty dollar [which is entirely their prerogative].
Competition.... Canada is a sort of capitalism, right?
So you have a smaller market in Canada, with more limited resources
and staffing shortages, thus one has to wait in line to get service
from the health care system....
So how much of your taxes are used in the health care system?
or you head south of the border and
take a big hit in the wallet to get "instant" service.... or taxes
are raised to increase health care spending and we all know how
popular raising taxes in any country.
I'm trying to compare the individual efficiencies of the systems... I can't
say that I would favor socialized medicine from what I have seen in Canada,
the U.K., and other places. Naturally the U.S. system is in dire need of
repair, we have too many people that are still uninsured, but that doesn't
mean that "Universal Health Care" will do anything but worsen the situation.
--
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Vice President Speaks at VFW 103rd National Convention, White House
(8/26/2002).
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Michael Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 07:22:00 PM |
|
|
Light Templar wrote:
In news:%T5pc.40746$kc2.610596@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all a good
laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
<snip>
I tore a muscle in my right leg in March 2003. I was hospitalised for
4 days and received excellent care. On a follow up visit to the
hospital 2 weeks later, the doctor expressed some concern that the leg
was not healing well and ordered an MRI. I had to wait a month for
the MRI appointment and then just 2 days before the appointed hour,
the hospital called me and told me the machine had broken down and
that the appointment was re-scheduled 2 days later.
I could have gone to the USA and had the MRI within 24-48 hours of the
doctor saying I should have one.... at an exorbitant cost... in
expensive US$. There are "MRI factories" just south of the border
that actually advertise on TV in Canada to attract patients. In part
they prey on the fear people have that if they don't get the
test/procedure ASAP, they will get worse. In my case, this was not a
concern to me as I understand that healing rates in people are
different and I was not in pain or about to loose a limb.
Why did I have to wait a month when I could have had one in 24-48
hours? Because an MRI machine is ludicrously expensive!
And your government can't or won't provide a piece of equipment that is
found standard in most U.S. hospitals. Yet, you pay taxes far in excess of
what we pay in the U.S.
The Mcmaster facility has 3 or 4 MRI machines. The government is
trying to do the 'economy of scale' and 'specialisation' thing thus that
MRI centrer serves all of Hamilton [pop 1,65,000]. I do believe, then
when you factor in the cost of health care insurance in the USA [which
is included in our taxes] that we pay less taxes than you do. However,
I do not have hard data available and am going by what I have heard
which may not be very accurate.
<snip>
20-25% of the cost of an MRI
machine is in the compliance making them much more expensive then they
need to be. The Europeans also have to build them to the US spec if
they want to go after that market so there is no US model and
everybody else model that is cheaper. The manufacturers count on
this as part of the expense of doing business and thus they jack up
the profit margins on the machine to cover the R&D and compliance
expenses.
Who do you think is going to cover the R&D and compliance expenses, and why
are the compliance rules unnecessary?
Where did I say they were unnecessary? The compliance costs are higher
than they need to be as the USA is a litigious society so every
possibility has to be considered by those who might5 get sued if there
is a problem. Yes R&D and compliance costs need to be covered.... but
when compliance take 3-5 years and a number of staff... that increases
costs.
As a small country [compared to the US market], Canada really can't
afford to buy 2 or 3 MRI machines for each hospital.
Then the Canadian system is less efficient, is that what you're saying?
No really. The province tends to place 3 or 4 machines in larger
centrers so that economy of scale can be used rather than having one
machine in the basement of each hospital.
The businessmen
in Buffalo that operate the MRI clinic have 4 of them running 2
shifts. Why? because they make a *profit* on them!
Yeah, well that's sort of the reason people go into business.
Naturally and I don't disparage them for that... they deserve to make a
return on their investment. However, there is a difference between a
profit driven MRI service and one that is provided as a public benefit.
The can afford
to pay good wages and buy the latest technology because they can
charge accordingly and smile all the way to the bank.
Hmmm... They can afford to pay good wages, and buy the latest
technologies... My! What a world!
Is this the same Light I am used to debating? Are you having a bad day
as you replies seem rather acerbic today :)
Further, the USA pays higher wages for nurses, support staff, medical
technicians, radiologists, etc.
OH NO!!
And well they should pay higher wages as they have profits to take
those waged out of rather then capped allocations.
They actively recruit in Canada thus
there is a continuing drain on the health care system as those who are
profit driven, rather then patient driven, migrate south in search of
the almighty dollar [which is entirely their prerogative].
Competition.... Canada is a sort of capitalism, right?
Yes we are a capitalist based economy but when last did you see any
government service being required to turn a profit??
So you have a smaller market in Canada, with more limited resources
and staffing shortages, thus one has to wait in line to get service
from the health care system....
So how much of your taxes are used in the health care system?
Honestly I have no idea. I do know that I get a pay cheque deduction
for OHIP that works out to be about $365/year or a dollar a day to cover
anything that I may need from health care. I also purchase
supplementary health care insurance at $98 C$/month to cover private
room, optical, dental and prescriptions [the major highlights as there
are other minor items in that package as well].
or you head south of the border and
take a big hit in the wallet to get "instant" service.... or taxes
are raised to increase health care spending and we all know how
popular raising taxes in any country.
I'm trying to compare the individual efficiencies of the systems...
Well I can't speak directly to that with facts and figures but logic
would dictate that a profit driven business *must* be more efficient in
order to maximise returns... and a government funded system is bound to
be less efficient both because there is no profit motive and government
run things tend to have a higher administrative overhead.
I can't
say that I would favor socialized medicine from what I have seen in Canada,
the U.K., and other places. Naturally the U.S. system is in dire need of
repair, we have too many people that are still uninsured, but that doesn't
mean that "Universal Health Care" will do anything but worsen the situation.
The answer may be what some have proposed in Canada... a 2 tier system.
Basic socialised medical care is available for ALL citizens while
those with the $$$$ can go to for-profit treatment centrers.
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guy" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 11:18:07 PM |
|
|
"L. Michael Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> wrote in message
news:Tndpc.40972$kc2.613384@nnrp1.uunet.ca...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:%T5pc.40746$kc2.610596@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all a
good
laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
<snip>
<<more stuff snipped>>
Well I can't speak directly to that with facts and figures but logic
would dictate that a profit driven business *must* be more efficient in
order to maximise returns... and a government funded system is bound to
be less efficient both because there is no profit motive and government
run things tend to have a higher administrative overhead.
There are at least two studies that dispute this. According to these
studies, Americans are paying over $200 billion per year in *extra*
administration costs to support the myriad private and government health
insurance plans compared to Canada's single-payer system. This huge pile of
money is for paper shuffling, and contributes NOTHING to health care. If
Canadians can barely afford the present system, they definitely couldn't
afford an American system.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/349/8/768
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1623
I can't
say that I would favor socialized medicine from what I have seen in
Canada,
the U.K., and other places. Naturally the U.S. system is in dire need
of
repair, we have too many people that are still uninsured, but that
doesn't
mean that "Universal Health Care" will do anything but worsen the
situation.
The answer may be what some have proposed in Canada... a 2 tier system.
Basic socialised medical care is available for ALL citizens while
those with the $$$$ can go to for-profit treatment centrers.
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 08:09:57 PM |
|
|
In news:Tndpc.40972$kc2.613384@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all a good
laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:%T5pc.40746$kc2.610596@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all
a good laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
<snip>
I tore a muscle in my right leg in March 2003. I was hospitalised
for 4 days and received excellent care. On a follow up visit to the
hospital 2 weeks later, the doctor expressed some concern that the
leg was not healing well and ordered an MRI. I had to wait a month
for the MRI appointment and then just 2 days before the appointed
hour, the hospital called me and told me the machine had broken
down and that the appointment was re-scheduled 2 days later.
I could have gone to the USA and had the MRI within 24-48 hours of
the doctor saying I should have one.... at an exorbitant cost... in
expensive US$. There are "MRI factories" just south of the border
that actually advertise on TV in Canada to attract patients. In
part they prey on the fear people have that if they don't get the
test/procedure ASAP, they will get worse. In my case, this was not
a concern to me as I understand that healing rates in people are
different and I was not in pain or about to loose a limb.
Why did I have to wait a month when I could have had one in 24-48
hours? Because an MRI machine is ludicrously expensive!
And your government can't or won't provide a piece of equipment that
is found standard in most U.S. hospitals. Yet, you pay taxes far
in excess of what we pay in the U.S.
The Mcmaster facility has 3 or 4 MRI machines. The government is
trying to do the 'economy of scale' and 'specialisation' thing thus
that MRI centrer serves all of Hamilton [pop 1,65,000]. I do
believe, then when you factor in the cost of health care insurance in
the USA [which is included in our taxes] that we pay less taxes than
you do. However, I do not have hard data available and am going by
what I have heard which may not be very accurate.
20-25% of the cost of an MRI
machine is in the compliance making them much more expensive then
they need to be. The Europeans also have to build them to the US
spec if they want to go after that market so there is no US model
and everybody else model that is cheaper. The manufacturers count
on this as part of the expense of doing business and thus they jack
up the profit margins on the machine to cover the R&D and compliance
expenses.
Who do you think is going to cover the R&D and compliance expenses,
and why are the compliance rules unnecessary?
Where did I say they were unnecessary? The compliance costs are
higher than they need to be as the USA is a litigious society so every
possibility has to be considered by those who might5 get sued if there
is a problem.
That's hardly the medical system's fault. As I recall, it was the more
liberal faction of the country that wanted the legal situation we now have.
There is, of course, a cure for that without adopting socialized or
universal medical care.
Yes R&D and compliance costs need to be covered.... but
when compliance take 3-5 years and a number of staff... that
increases costs.
As a small country [compared to the US market], Canada really can't
afford to buy 2 or 3 MRI machines for each hospital.
Then the Canadian system is less efficient, is that what you're
saying?
No really. The province tends to place 3 or 4 machines in larger
centrers so that economy of scale can be used rather than having one
machine in the basement of each hospital.
Yet, people are having to wait, sometimes months, in order to have a medical
test on an MRI. Correct? So, are these economies of scale working for the
people?
The businessmen
in Buffalo that operate the MRI clinic have 4 of them running 2
shifts. Why? because they make a *profit* on them!
Yeah, well that's sort of the reason people go into business.
Naturally and I don't disparage them for that... they deserve to make
a return on their investment. However, there is a difference between
a profit driven MRI service and one that is provided as a public
benefit.
In what way? What difference does it make if I pay $2,000.00 for the MRI,
or I pay $500 for the MRI, and $1,500.00 in taxes? I'm out $2,000.00
either way.
The can afford
to pay good wages and buy the latest technology because they can
charge accordingly and smile all the way to the bank.
Hmmm... They can afford to pay good wages, and buy the latest
technologies... My! What a world!
Is this the same Light I am used to debating? Are you having a bad
day as you replies seem rather acerbic today :)
I get that way occasionally. :c) It comes from people telling me that I'm
evil for driving an SUV, for ONLY paying $110,000.00 in taxes when OBVIOUSLY
I can afford more, and for being selfish for not wishing to adopt socialized
medicine. I know that that's not you, so my attitude is obviously
misdirected, but you were handy. :c)
Further, the USA pays higher wages for nurses, support staff,
medical technicians, radiologists, etc.
OH NO!!
And well they should pay higher wages as they have profits to take
those waged out of rather then capped allocations.
Higher wages don't help the quality of living for the employees?
They actively recruit in Canada thus
there is a continuing drain on the health care system as those who
are profit driven, rather then patient driven, migrate south in
search of the almighty dollar [which is entirely their prerogative].
Competition.... Canada is a sort of capitalism, right?
Yes we are a capitalist based economy but when last did you see any
government service being required to turn a profit??
When have I ever seen a government service being run efficiently?
Detroit/Wayne County Metropolitan Airport has turned a profit for years.
Government institutions are run on the cash accounting system, rather than
the accrual accounting system.
The distinction isn't immediately important, so if you want to know the
difference ask, but I won't go into detail except to say that under
government accounting, there are what are known as non-profit centers, and
profit centers. Most state and local governments in the U.S. carry at
least some profit centers. Traffic control, for example, is most often
considered a profit center as they take in more revenue (fines) than they
spend to maintain the department. Of course, the department would never
admit it, but the officers are pressured to meet certain quotas in the
issuance of tickets. The Airport I mentioned earlier has been required to
turn a profit for quite some time. The County Hospital, which was once
down by the mental instituton, Eloise, was closed down because it couldn't
turn a profit, Eloise, another county venture, was also closed down for the
same reason. Both were considered profit centers by Wayne County.
Sorry about not answering this in one post, but something came up.
--
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Vice President Speaks at VFW 103rd National Convention, White House
(8/26/2002).
.
|
|
|
| User: "SMChristenson" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
15 May 2004 07:07:49 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 15 May 2004 01:09:57 +0000, Light Templar wrote:
When have I ever seen a government service being run efficiently?
Detroit/Wayne County Metropolitan Airport has turned a profit for years.
Profit? Air travel is government subsidized like all transport.
I've heard that the typical US hospital has 200 office workers to a
Canadian 20. Let me tell you about the $400 bill we had last year and the
EIGHT MONTHS it took to resolve it. We had THREE different health plans
in ELEVEN MONTHS with the _SAME_FRIGGIN'_EMPLOYER_ (with two parent
corporation turnovers).
No, the employer-based system is broken. Not troublesome. Broken.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
15 May 2004 07:22:30 AM |
|
|
In news:pan.2004.05.15.12.07.48.201048@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
On Sat, 15 May 2004 01:09:57 +0000, Light Templar wrote:
When have I ever seen a government service being run efficiently?
Detroit/Wayne County Metropolitan Airport has turned a profit for
years.
Profit? Air travel is government subsidized like all transport.
Detroit/Wayne County Metropolitan Airport is, or was run, by Wayne County.
It turns a profit of $400,000,000.00 per year, on average. I think the
profits have been down since 9/11 though.
I've heard that the typical US hospital has 200 office workers to a
Canadian 20. Let me tell you about the $400 bill we had last year
and the EIGHT MONTHS it took to resolve it. We had THREE different
health plans in ELEVEN MONTHS with the _SAME_FRIGGIN'_EMPLOYER_ (with
two parent corporation turnovers).
No, the employer-based system is broken. Not troublesome. Broken.
It's worked for me for 58 years, so you have to convince me that the
Canadian system is better overall.
--
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Vice President Speaks at VFW 103rd National Convention, White House
(8/26/2002).
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 07:38:24 PM |
|
|
In news:Tndpc.40972$kc2.613384@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all a good
laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:%T5pc.40746$kc2.610596@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all
a good laugh with the following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
<snip>
I tore a muscle in my right leg in March 2003. I was hospitalised
for 4 days and received excellent care. On a follow up visit to the
hospital 2 weeks later, the doctor expressed some concern that the
leg was not healing well and ordered an MRI. I had to wait a month
for the MRI appointment and then just 2 days before the appointed
hour, the hospital called me and told me the machine had broken
down and that the appointment was re-scheduled 2 days later.
I could have gone to the USA and had the MRI within 24-48 hours of
the doctor saying I should have one.... at an exorbitant cost... in
expensive US$. There are "MRI factories" just south of the border
that actually advertise on TV in Canada to attract patients. In
part they prey on the fear people have that if they don't get the
test/procedure ASAP, they will get worse. In my case, this was not
a concern to me as I understand that healing rates in people are
different and I was not in pain or about to loose a limb.
Why did I have to wait a month when I could have had one in 24-48
hours? Because an MRI machine is ludicrously expensive!
And your government can't or won't provide a piece of equipment that
is found standard in most U.S. hospitals. Yet, you pay taxes far
in excess of what we pay in the U.S.
The Mcmaster facility has 3 or 4 MRI machines. The government is
trying to do the 'economy of scale' and 'specialisation' thing thus
that MRI centrer serves all of Hamilton [pop 1,65,000]. I do
believe, then when you factor in the cost of health care insurance in
the USA [which is included in our taxes] that we pay less taxes than
you do. However, I do not have hard data available and am going by
what I have heard which may not be very accurate.
<snip>
20-25% of the cost of an MRI
machine is in the compliance making them much more expensive then
they need to be. The Europeans also have to build them to the US
spec if they want to go after that market so there is no US model
and everybody else model that is cheaper. The manufacturers count
on this as part of the expense of doing business and thus they jack
up the profit margins on the machine to cover the R&D and compliance
expenses.
Who do you think is going to cover the R&D and compliance expenses,
and why are the compliance rules unnecessary?
Where did I say they were unnecessary? The compliance costs are
higher than they need to be as the USA is a litigious society so every
possibility has to be considered by those who might5 get sued if there
is a problem. Yes R&D and compliance costs need to be covered.... but
when compliance take 3-5 years and a number of staff... that
increases costs.
As a small country [compared to the US market], Canada really can't
afford to buy 2 or 3 MRI machines for each hospital.
Then the Canadian system is less efficient, is that what you're
saying?
No really. The province tends to place 3 or 4 machines in larger
centrers so that economy of scale can be used rather than having one
machine in the basement of each hospital.
The businessmen
in Buffalo that operate the MRI clinic have 4 of them running 2
shifts. Why? because they make a *profit* on them!
Yeah, well that's sort of the reason people go into business.
Naturally and I don't disparage them for that... they deserve to make
a return on their investment. However, there is a difference between
a profit driven MRI service and one that is provided as a public
benefit.
The can afford
to pay good wages and buy the latest technology because they can
charge accordingly and smile all the way to the bank.
Hmmm... They can afford to pay good wages, and buy the latest
technologies... My! What a world!
Is this the same Light I am used to debating? Are you having a bad
day as you replies seem rather acerbic today :)
Further, the USA pays higher wages for nurses, support staff,
medical technicians, radiologists, etc.
OH NO!!
And well they should pay higher wages as they have profits to take
those waged out of rather then capped allocations.
They actively recruit in Canada thus
there is a continuing drain on the health care system as those who
are profit driven, rather then patient driven, migrate south in
search of the almighty dollar [which is entirely their prerogative].
Competition.... Canada is a sort of capitalism, right?
Yes we are a capitalist based economy but when last did you see any
government service being required to turn a profit??
So you have a smaller market in Canada, with more limited resources
and staffing shortages, thus one has to wait in line to get service
from the health care system....
So how much of your taxes are used in the health care system?
Honestly I have no idea. I do know that I get a pay cheque deduction
for OHIP that works out to be about $365/year or a dollar a day to
cover anything that I may need from health care.
Except you have to include the taxes that goes toward your medical system.
By that standard, I pay zero for medical expenses, except a $10.00 copay for
perscriptions. That covers everything I need from health care, since I have
no ongoing perscriptions, I'd say that I pay less than $50.00 per year.
I also purchase
supplementary health care insurance at $98 C$/month to cover private
room, optical, dental and prescriptions [the major highlights as there
are other minor items in that package as well].
Most who are insured don't pay for medical insurance, or it is at least
partially covered by the employer. So, how do we do a comprehensive and
meaningful comparison of out-of-pocket costs via taxes/medical expense
between the U.S.? I just looked and couldn't see any direct information.
or you head south of the border and
take a big hit in the wallet to get "instant" service.... or taxes
are raised to increase health care spending and we all know how
popular raising taxes in any country.
I'm trying to compare the individual efficiencies of the systems...
Well I can't speak directly to that with facts and figures but logic
would dictate that a profit driven business *must* be more efficient
in order to maximise returns... and a government funded system is
bound to be less efficient both because there is no profit motive and
government run things tend to have a higher administrative overhead.
That's my take on it exactly, so why should we adopt such a system in the
U.S.?
I can't
say that I would favor socialized medicine from what I have seen in
Canada, the U.K., and other places. Naturally the U.S. system is
in dire need of repair, we have too many people that are still
uninsured, but that doesn't mean that "Universal Health Care" will
do anything but worsen the situation.
The answer may be what some have proposed in Canada... a 2 tier
system. Basic socialised medical care is available for ALL citizens
while
those with the $$$$ can go to for-profit treatment centrers.
So discrimination by economic standard?
--
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Vice President Speaks at VFW 103rd National Convention, White House
(8/26/2002).
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "SMChristenson" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 06:27:56 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 May 2004 10:40:56 +0000, Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
And the U.S. flocks to Canada for their drugs. WHY is that? That's a
simple enough question.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 06:41:43 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism on Fri, 14 May 2004 06:27:56 -0500, SMChristenson
<smchris@visi.com> let us all know that:
On Fri, 14 May 2004 10:40:56 +0000, Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
And the U.S. flocks to Canada for their drugs. WHY is that? That's a
simple enough question.
3 letters: F.D.A.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 06:58:08 AM |
|
|
In news:pan.2004.05.14.11.27.54.505692@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
On Fri, 14 May 2004 10:40:56 +0000, Light Templar wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
And the U.S. flocks to Canada for their drugs. WHY is that?
That's a
simple enough question.
And it has a simple enough answer. Drugs in Canada are cheaper than drugs
in the US. Now, can you answer my question without further dodging?
--
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Vice President Speaks at VFW 103rd National Convention, White House
(8/26/2002).
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Poster Boy" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 08:59:30 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 May 2004 10:40:56 GMT, "Light Templar"
<I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
In news:c81mq5$7ct$1@bolt.sonic.net,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
Yet, the Canadians flock to the U.S. for surgery and other medical
treatment. WHY is that? That's a simple enough question.
Actually, the reverse is also true. One Montreal hospital, for
example, is jammed with U.S. patients because of its treatment for
prostate cancer. I supposel it depends on your definition of "flock,"
but there does seem to be a lot of Americans "flocking" to Canada for
treatment, too.
Stop being so xenophobic.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Michael Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 09:42:40 AM |
|
|
Ray Fischer wrote:
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Must be the embarrassment of having a kook as president! :)
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
14 May 2004 09:47:06 AM |
|
|
In news:PU4pc.40707$kc2.610374@nnrp1.uunet.ca,
L. Michael Roberts <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> gave us all a good
laugh with the following...
Ray Fischer wrote:
Light Templar <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote:
So... How good is a socialized medical system where you can't get
treated?
US Life expectancy: 77.1 years
Must be the embarrassment of having a kook as president! :)
Hahahaha! Yeah, that'll do it. I don't know why there is a 2.3 year
difference there, or that all or any of it is necessarily attributed to the
two health care systems, some other environmental, social, cultural factors,
but it really doesn't have anything to do with the question I asked.
Canadian life expectancy: 79.4 years
All the rest is *****.
--
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use
against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Vice President Speaks at VFW 103rd National Convention, White House
(8/26/2002).
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?-Cryogenic-=A9?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 01:15:15 PM |
|
|
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
On Wed, 12 May 2004 09:47:58 -0700, Daniel Kolle wrote:
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.05.08.13.23.50.439541@visi.com>...
On Fri, 07 May 2004 23:12:28 +0000, Xomicron wrote:
"David.Jones" <David@Jones.con> wrote in
news:409BDA55.92D901B6@Jones.con:
Xomicron wrote:
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care, they
may tell you how much they have to pay per visit to their
doctor's office or the monthly bill for their prescription
drugs. But these are not the costs of medical care. These are
the prices paid.
You mean like the real cost of the Hillary Clinton prescription
drug program Bush lied and said it would only cost 300 Billion
when knew it would actually cost 500 billion? These are the
prices paid, for lying. No reelection.
Then again it is obvious your lot do not care if one lies, and
actually support liars warmly, so hell he just might have a
shot. Conservatives are like that, truth has no value to your
lot.
Yet you have no proof he lied. Typical.
No, just the word of the government accountant who was told he'd
find his ***** on the unemployment line if he told anyone how the
numbers _really_ crunched.
Talking philosophy is silly when there are actuarial figures.
Count up the countries that have national health care vs. those
that don't and see where we lie:
<snip>
You must take into account, though, that we have around 280
million people now. Just a though.
Though(t) about what?
Are you suggesting that 300 million people _can't_ create a health
plan for 300 million people while a country with 30 million people
_can_ create a health plan for 30 million people?
Are you talking about Canada's "Healthcare" plan? I live in the
Detroit area, and I'd like to know something. If Canada's
healthcare plan is so good, then why do so many Canadians flock to
our area hospitals and doctors for health care and surgery? Henry
Ford Hospital is forevermore doing life saving surgery on Canadian
citizens that for whatever reason, doesn't want to have it done, or
is unable to have it done in a timely manner, in Canada.
It's cheaper in the USA. You have to place /some/ value on staying
alive.
Surgery is cheaper in the USA.... Then why do I need a Canada like
health care system installed in the US? Anyone know what the average
life/death rate during/after surgery in Canada is when compared to
the US?
I mean there has to be a reason of some sort. One woman I know was
saying that there is a critical shortage of medical professionals in
Canada right now, why is that?
Because they aren't paid well. Nurses in Canada are flocking out of Canada
for the money. Can't blame them.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
You should see the flocks, it's crazy. There are thousands of nurses
coming accross the border, really. NOT!
Quit pretending you know what you're talking about, you fool!
--
If you're in a war, instead of throwing a hand grenade at the enemy,
throw one of those small pumpkins. Maybe it'll make everyone think how
stupid war is, and while they are thinking, you can throw a real grenade
at them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "trollslayer@thecave" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 01:42:19 PM |
|
|
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
On Wed, 12 May 2004 09:47:58 -0700, Daniel Kolle wrote:
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.05.08.13.23.50.439541@visi.com>...
On Fri, 07 May 2004 23:12:28 +0000, Xomicron wrote:
"David.Jones" <David@Jones.con> wrote in
news:409BDA55.92D901B6@Jones.con:
Xomicron wrote:
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care, they
may tell you how much they have to pay per visit to their
doctor's office or the monthly bill for their prescription
drugs. But these are not the costs of medical care. These
are the prices paid.
You mean like the real cost of the Hillary Clinton
prescription drug program Bush lied and said it would only
cost 300 Billion when knew it would actually cost 500
billion? These are the prices paid, for lying. No reelection.
Then again it is obvious your lot do not care if one lies,
and actually support liars warmly, so hell he just might
have a shot. Conservatives are like that, truth has no value
to your lot.
Yet you have no proof he lied. Typical.
No, just the word of the government accountant who was told
he'd find his ***** on the unemployment line if he told anyone
how the numbers _really_ crunched.
Talking philosophy is silly when there are actuarial figures.
Count up the countries that have national health care vs. those
that don't and see where we lie:
<snip>
You must take into account, though, that we have around 280
million people now. Just a though.
Though(t) about what?
Are you suggesting that 300 million people _can't_ create a
health plan for 300 million people while a country with 30
million people _can_ create a health plan for 30 million people?
Are you talking about Canada's "Healthcare" plan? I live in the
Detroit area, and I'd like to know something. If Canada's
healthcare plan is so good, then why do so many Canadians flock to
our area hospitals and doctors for health care and surgery?
Henry Ford Hospital is forevermore doing life saving surgery on
Canadian citizens that for whatever reason, doesn't want to have
it done, or is unable to have it done in a timely manner, in
Canada.
It's cheaper in the USA. You have to place /some/ value on staying
alive.
Surgery is cheaper in the USA.... Then why do I need a Canada like
health care system installed in the US? Anyone know what the
average life/death rate during/after surgery in Canada is when
compared to the US?
I mean there has to be a reason of some sort. One woman I know was
saying that there is a critical shortage of medical professionals in
Canada right now, why is that?
Because they aren't paid well. Nurses in Canada are flocking out of
Canada for the money. Can't blame them.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
You should see the flocks, it's crazy. There are thousands of nurses
coming accross the border, really. NOT!
Quit pretending you know what you're talking about, you fool!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! The irony of you saying that is
hillarious.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?-Cryogenic-=A9?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 01:46:00 PM |
|
|
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
On Wed, 12 May 2004 09:47:58 -0700, Daniel Kolle wrote:
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.05.08.13.23.50.439541@visi.com>...
On Fri, 07 May 2004 23:12:28 +0000, Xomicron wrote:
"David.Jones" <David@Jones.con> wrote in
news:409BDA55.92D901B6@Jones.con:
Xomicron wrote:
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care, they
may tell you how much they have to pay per visit to their
doctor's office or the monthly bill for their prescription
drugs. But these are not the costs of medical care. These
are the prices paid.
You mean like the real cost of the Hillary Clinton
prescription drug program Bush lied and said it would only
cost 300 Billion when knew it would actually cost 500
billion? These are the prices paid, for lying. No reelection.
Then again it is obvious your lot do not care if one lies,
and actually support liars warmly, so hell he just might
have a shot. Conservatives are like that, truth has no value
to your lot.
Yet you have no proof he lied. Typical.
No, just the word of the government accountant who was told
he'd find his ***** on the unemployment line if he told anyone
how the numbers _really_ crunched.
Talking philosophy is silly when there are actuarial figures.
Count up the countries that have national health care vs. those
that don't and see where we lie:
<snip>
You must take into account, though, that we have around 280
million people now. Just a though.
Though(t) about what?
Are you suggesting that 300 million people _can't_ create a
health plan for 300 million people while a country with 30
million people _can_ create a health plan for 30 million people?
Are you talking about Canada's "Healthcare" plan? I live in the
Detroit area, and I'd like to know something. If Canada's
healthcare plan is so good, then why do so many Canadians flock to
our area hospitals and doctors for health care and surgery?
Henry Ford Hospital is forevermore doing life saving surgery on
Canadian citizens that for whatever reason, doesn't want to have
it done, or is unable to have it done in a timely manner, in
Canada.
It's cheaper in the USA. You have to place /some/ value on staying
alive.
Surgery is cheaper in the USA.... Then why do I need a Canada like
health care system installed in the US? Anyone know what the
average life/death rate during/after surgery in Canada is when
compared to the US?
I mean there has to be a reason of some sort. One woman I know was
saying that there is a critical shortage of medical professionals in
Canada right now, why is that?
Because they aren't paid well. Nurses in Canada are flocking out of
Canada for the money. Can't blame them.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
You should see the flocks, it's crazy. There are thousands of nurses
coming accross the border, really. NOT!
Quit pretending you know what you're talking about, you fool!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! The irony of you saying that is
hillarious.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
But the truth of what I say forces you to respond with garbage, eh?
--
If you're in a war, instead of throwing a hand grenade at the enemy,
throw one of those small pumpkins. Maybe it'll make everyone think how
stupid war is, and while they are thinking, you can throw a real grenade
at them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "trollslayer@thecave" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 01:54:40 PM |
|
|
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
On Wed, 12 May 2004 09:47:58 -0700, Daniel Kolle wrote:
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.05.08.13.23.50.439541@visi.com>...
On Fri, 07 May 2004 23:12:28 +0000, Xomicron wrote:
"David.Jones" <David@Jones.con> wrote in
news:409BDA55.92D901B6@Jones.con:
Xomicron wrote:
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care,
they may tell you how much they have to pay per visit to
their doctor's office or the monthly bill for their
prescription drugs. But these are not the costs of
medical care. These are the prices paid.
You mean like the real cost of the Hillary Clinton
prescription drug program Bush lied and said it would only
cost 300 Billion when knew it would actually cost 500
billion? These are the prices paid, for lying. No
reelection.
Then again it is obvious your lot do not care if one lies,
and actually support liars warmly, so hell he just might
have a shot. Conservatives are like that, truth has no
value to your lot.
Yet you have no proof he lied. Typical.
No, just the word of the government accountant who was told
he'd find his ***** on the unemployment line if he told anyone
how the numbers _really_ crunched.
Talking philosophy is silly when there are actuarial figures.
Count up the countries that have national health care vs.
those that don't and see where we lie:
<snip>
You must take into account, though, that we have around 280
million people now. Just a though.
Though(t) about what?
Are you suggesting that 300 million people _can't_ create a
health plan for 300 million people while a country with 30
million people _can_ create a health plan for 30 million
people?
Are you talking about Canada's "Healthcare" plan? I live in
the Detroit area, and I'd like to know something. If Canada's
healthcare plan is so good, then why do so many Canadians flock
to our area hospitals and doctors for health care and surgery?
Henry Ford Hospital is forevermore doing life saving surgery on
Canadian citizens that for whatever reason, doesn't want to have
it done, or is unable to have it done in a timely manner, in
Canada.
It's cheaper in the USA. You have to place /some/ value on
staying alive.
Surgery is cheaper in the USA.... Then why do I need a Canada
like health care system installed in the US? Anyone know what the
average life/death rate during/after surgery in Canada is when
compared to the US?
I mean there has to be a reason of some sort. One woman I know
was saying that there is a critical shortage of medical
professionals in Canada right now, why is that?
Because they aren't paid well. Nurses in Canada are flocking out of
Canada for the money. Can't blame them.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
You should see the flocks, it's crazy. There are thousands of nurses
coming accross the border, really. NOT!
Quit pretending you know what you're talking about, you fool!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! The irony of you saying that
is hillarious.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
But the truth of what I say forces you to respond with garbage, eh?
Truth? Bwahahahahahahaha! Explain this "truth". The fact IS Canadian Nurses
ARE going across the border for more money. That is a FACT fuckwit. There's
a BIG shortage of nurses here because of it.
Now, keep going. You're looking more fuckwitted with every post.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?-Cryogenic-=A9?=" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 02:40:21 PM |
|
|
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
On Wed, 12 May 2004 09:47:58 -0700, Daniel Kolle wrote:
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.05.08.13.23.50.439541@visi.com>...
On Fri, 07 May 2004 23:12:28 +0000, Xomicron wrote:
"David.Jones" <David@Jones.con> wrote in
news:409BDA55.92D901B6@Jones.con:
Xomicron wrote:
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care,
they may tell you how much they have to pay per visit to
their doctor's office or the monthly bill for their
prescription drugs. But these are not the costs of
medical care. These are the prices paid.
You mean like the real cost of the Hillary Clinton
prescription drug program Bush lied and said it would only
cost 300 Billion when knew it would actually cost 500
billion? These are the prices paid, for lying. No
reelection.
Then again it is obvious your lot do not care if one lies,
and actually support liars warmly, so hell he just might
have a shot. Conservatives are like that, truth has no
value to your lot.
Yet you have no proof he lied. Typical.
No, just the word of the government accountant who was told
he'd find his ***** on the unemployment line if he told anyone
how the numbers _really_ crunched.
Talking philosophy is silly when there are actuarial figures.
Count up the countries that have national health care vs.
those that don't and see where we lie:
<snip>
You must take into account, though, that we have around 280
million people now. Just a though.
Though(t) about what?
Are you suggesting that 300 million people _can't_ create a
health plan for 300 million people while a country with 30
million people _can_ create a health plan for 30 million
people?
Are you talking about Canada's "Healthcare" plan? I live in
the Detroit area, and I'd like to know something. If Canada's
healthcare plan is so good, then why do so many Canadians flock
to our area hospitals and doctors for health care and surgery?
Henry Ford Hospital is forevermore doing life saving surgery on
Canadian citizens that for whatever reason, doesn't want to have
it done, or is unable to have it done in a timely manner, in
Canada.
It's cheaper in the USA. You have to place /some/ value on
staying alive.
Surgery is cheaper in the USA.... Then why do I need a Canada
like health care system installed in the US? Anyone know what the
average life/death rate during/after surgery in Canada is when
compared to the US?
I mean there has to be a reason of some sort. One woman I know
was saying that there is a critical shortage of medical
professionals in Canada right now, why is that?
Because they aren't paid well. Nurses in Canada are flocking out of
Canada for the money. Can't blame them.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
You should see the flocks, it's crazy. There are thousands of nurses
coming accross the border, really. NOT!
Quit pretending you know what you're talking about, you fool!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! The irony of you saying that
is hillarious.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
But the truth of what I say forces you to respond with garbage, eh?
Truth? Bwahahahahahahaha! Explain this "truth". The fact IS Canadian Nurses
ARE going across the border for more money. That is a FACT fuckwit. There's
a BIG shortage of nurses here because of it.
Now, keep going. You're looking more fuckwitted with every post.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
Prove it. Name one. Thought so! ROFL
You'd be a british fuckwit instead of a canadian fuckwit if the USA
wasn't right next door. LMAO
--
If you're in a war, instead of throwing a hand grenade at the enemy,
throw one of those small pumpkins. Maybe it'll make everyone think how
stupid war is, and while they are thinking, you can throw a real grenade
at them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "trollslayer@thecave" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 03:14:27 PM |
|
|
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
On Wed, 12 May 2004 09:47:58 -0700, Daniel Kolle wrote:
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.05.08.13.23.50.439541@visi.com>...
On Fri, 07 May 2004 23:12:28 +0000, Xomicron wrote:
"David.Jones" <David@Jones.con> wrote in
news:409BDA55.92D901B6@Jones.con:
Xomicron wrote:
If you ask most people about the cost of medical care,
they may tell you how much they have to pay per visit to
their doctor's office or the monthly bill for their
prescription drugs. But these are not the costs of
medical care. These are the prices paid.
You mean like the real cost of the Hillary Clinton
prescription drug program Bush lied and said it would
only cost 300 Billion when knew it would actually cost
500 billion? These are the prices paid, for lying. No
reelection.
Then again it is obvious your lot do not care if one
lies, and actually support liars warmly, so hell he just
might have a shot. Conservatives are like that, truth
has no value to your lot.
Yet you have no proof he lied. Typical.
No, just the word of the government accountant who was told
he'd find his ***** on the unemployment line if he told
anyone how the numbers _really_ crunched.
Talking philosophy is silly when there are actuarial
figures. Count up the countries that have national health
care vs. those that don't and see where we lie:
<snip>
You must take into account, though, that we have around 280
million people now. Just a though.
Though(t) about what?
Are you suggesting that 300 million people _can't_ create a
health plan for 300 million people while a country with 30
million people _can_ create a health plan for 30 million
people?
Are you talking about Canada's "Healthcare" plan? I live in
the Detroit area, and I'd like to know something. If Canada's
healthcare plan is so good, then why do so many Canadians
flock to our area hospitals and doctors for health care and
surgery? Henry Ford Hospital is forevermore doing life saving
surgery on Canadian citizens that for whatever reason,
doesn't want to have it done, or is unable to have it done in
a timely manner, in Canada.
It's cheaper in the USA. You have to place /some/ value on
staying alive.
Surgery is cheaper in the USA.... Then why do I need a Canada
like health care system installed in the US? Anyone know what
the average life/death rate during/after surgery in Canada is
when compared to the US?
I mean there has to be a reason of some sort. One woman I know
was saying that there is a critical shortage of medical
professionals in Canada right now, why is that?
Because they aren't paid well. Nurses in Canada are flocking out
of Canada for the money. Can't blame them.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
You should see the flocks, it's crazy. There are thousands of
nurses coming accross the border, really. NOT!
Quit pretending you know what you're talking about, you fool!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! The irony of you saying that
is hillarious.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
But the truth of what I say forces you to respond with garbage, eh?
Truth? Bwahahahahahahaha! Explain this "truth". The fact IS Canadian
Nurses ARE going across the border for more money. That is a FACT
fuckwit. There's a BIG shortage of nurses here because of it.
Now, keep going. You're looking more fuckwitted with every post.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
Prove it. Name one. Thought so! ROFL
You'd be a british fuckwit instead of a canadian fuckwit if the USA
wasn't right next door. LMAO
You're so fucking stupid. I AM an American. You lame ***** fuckwit. I'll just
point you to the proof. Look at ANY Canadian newspaper website and do a
search. You are such a fuckwitted moron, I doubt you have the intelligence
to look for yourself. Proven in another thread.
--
Buster
Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Universal Health Care? |
13 May 2004 04:03:19 PM |
|
|
In news:FaQoc.4828$CM2.1454@news01.roc.ny,
-Cryogenic-© <nospam@thank.you> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
-Cryogenic-© spewed forth with the following drivel:
trollslayer@thecave wrote:
Light Templar spewed forth with the following drivel:
In news:wDNoc.21997$EH6.7613@twister.socal.rr.com,
relic <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> gave us all a good laugh with the
following...
Light Templar wrote:
In news:pan.2004.05.13.12.51.53.178207@visi.com,
SMChristenson <smchris@visi.com> gave us all a good laugh with
the following...
| | | | | | |
