quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

.... Moore who isn't here to defend himself. To be honest, I personally find the guy sort of obnoxious and grandstanding - but he's got his facts together in this case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

.... Moore who isn't here to defend himself. To be honest, I personally find the guy sort of obnoxious and grandstanding - but he's got his facts together in this case.

But Moore hasn't always had his facts together; that's one way he devalues any argument he tries to make.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

And I guess we can't allow him to improve on his methods either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

.... Moore who isn't here to defend himself. To be honest, I personally find the guy sort of obnoxious and grandstanding - but he's got his facts together in this case.

But Moore hasn't always had his facts together; that's one way he devalues any argument he tries to make.

Using the Bush Administration's 2007 figures as the basis of his argument seems to stand up pretty well. Gupta got nailed by his own accusations of Cherry Picking when it was revealed that Gupta was using numbers from 2004!

fb, I wasn't saying that Sicko is not factual (I have no idea how accurate it is), but he has been "wobbly" on occasion, in the past

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Generally, we The People, on paper, control the actions of Artificial Legal Entities into the world of Commerce.

So the question at hand is: What VALUE to the *delivery* of health care does a profit based middleman ( as a Health Insurer in this instance ) bring to The People?

I see a $ 14,000.00 a year bill for my family's coverage. If I don't earn, I don't have the money to pay for it.

And I'm not seeing any added value.

Anyone?

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveish

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

What?That republicans have no integrity?lol Have you been on vacation?

I would like to be this sure that I'd never done anything questionable. ~noticing the stone in Owner's hand~

I'm not republican, not democrat, not green, not anything political ... but I know an asshole when I see one (not that I'm calling you an asshole, and not that I'm not). Remove one particular adjective (conservative, liberal, black, white) in your argument and insert another, and there you have all of humanity, pal. Complaints are interchangable.

There are hypocrites and liars and general-purpose bad guys pelleted all over the spectrum. You paint all conservatives as guilty of these incidents, when in fact each individual is responsible for his or her own vat of hot oil.

Your bullying behavior and loud talking does not inspire the desire to join your cause. Your words and demeanor are inciteful. If you are concerned with your views, and if you think yours is the one true way, perhaps influencing others by example would be more effective to your cause.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rook42

A great majority of physicians are not in medicine for the money.

A) Given the amount of frivolous litigation out there, there are headaches in medicine that cannot be believed. A doctor may overdiagnose a patient not out of economic reasons, but out of fear of litigation. The efficiency of a universal healthcare system where the physician is not accountable for false damages cannot only be attributed to its collective nature.

B) Do you think the large section of life given over towards medical school to be a trivial thing of no value? If it's such a lucrative field, then more would be individuals in it. The fact of the matter is, you sacrifice a large part of your personal life and time.

C) Compound this large amount of time given "up front", as well insurance/risk concerns, and add the question of the opportunity cost of a medical education. Doctors are not people that "fall" into medicine as a last resort(Unlike many other occupations), nor are they those that lack skills applicable to other occupations. An individual that can bear with the hell of medical school can find FAR greater cash-to-time value in business, or at least medical administration. From my own observations, the individuals in medicine tend to either have emotional reasons for becoming doctors, or valued the structure that a medical career gives. Or the status that it gives, for that matter(Although I see this as vulgar as becoming a doctor due to financial motive).

D) "asssuming this is true"(Healthcare in foreign nations is better in quality)
American medical schools have THE best training in the world. And the people they are treating STILL have the worst eating and lifestyle habits in the world.
Are the administrative costs of the insurance companies cutting into care? Yes. To claim this is due to the greed of physicians is a bit of a logical leap, though. As well, there are other costs- such as a mother bringing their children to an emergency room whenever they have a cold. There's something to be said for culture and individual accountability- to say that other countries have better coverage without accounting for third party factors would be a bit naive. And those third party factors may be even more exacerbated under another system than they are in the current one- introducing the hand of the government does not tend to discourage the freeloader effect.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zensee
The nay sayers keep insisting that it can't be done. Thing is it has been done, can be done and damned well should be, in any country that wants to wear the honorific "civilised".

quote:

My family is from elsewhere and I can assure you multi-generational USA types that everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - from elsewhere thinks that americans are socio-political-economic morons.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rook42

A great majority of physicians are not in medicine for the money.
If this were true then why do more than half of the graduating physicians choose the more lucrative specialty fields in preference to GP?


A) Given the amount of frivolous litigation out there,
I hope you are not suggesting that the case of a surgeon cutting off the wrong leg is a frivolous thing.


there are headaches in medicine that cannot be believed. A doctor may overdiagnose a patient not out of economic reasons, but out of fear of litigation.
Is it possible that some might over diagnose out of greed?

The efficiency of a universal healthcare system where the physician is not accountable for false damages cannot only be attributed to its collective nature.
Are you saying that universal health care would shield a doctor from liability?

B) Do you think the large section of life given over towards medical school to be a trivial thing of no value?
Med school is two years long just as are most other PhD. programs.  This is followed by two years of internship (on the job training) for which they are well paid.


If it's such a lucrative field, then more would be individuals in it.
The accreditation of med school is controlled by the AMA and thus the number of graduates.

The fact of the matter is, you sacrifice a large part of your personal life and time.

C) Compound this large amount of time given "up front", as well insurance/risk concerns, and add the question of the opportunity cost of a medical education. Doctors are not people that "fall" into medicine as a last resort(Unlike many other occupations), nor are they those that lack skills applicable to other occupations. An individual that can bear with the hell of medical school can find FAR greater cash-to-time value in business, or at least medical administration.
Not many PhD.s step into a six figure salary two years out of school.


From my own observations, the individuals in medicine tend to either have emotional reasons for becoming doctors, or valued the structure that a medical career gives.
I am not convinced that a medical career is any more structured than any other PhD led career.

Or the status that it gives, for that matter(Although I see this as vulgar as becoming a doctor due to financial motive).

D) "asssuming this is true"(Healthcare in foreign nations is better in quality)
American medical schools have THE best training in the world. And the people they are treating STILL have the worst eating and lifestyle habits in the world.
Are the administrative costs of the insurance companies cutting into care? Yes. To claim this is due to the greed of physicians is a bit of a logical leap, though. As well, there are other costs- such as a mother bringing their children to an emergency room whenever they have a cold. There's something to be said for culture and individual accountability-
The only people I see constantly carping about "individual accountability" are those who seek it not in themselves but only in others.

to say that other countries have better coverage without accounting for third party factors would be a bit naive. And those third party factors may be even more exacerbated under another system than they are in the current one- introducing the hand of the government does not tend to discourage the freeloader effect.
I keep hearing about the "freeloader effect" only as it applies to the poor and ignorant but never to the rest of society that freeloads.  By freeloading I would include stock options, mortgage interest deduction, differed compensation, CD's and 401K's just to name a few. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: uwinceismile

intellectual dishonesty rears its ugly head yet again:::

more thrifty(we`re still paying for Regan`s spending spree

reagan cut taxes,,just as kennedy did before him,,and with the same result,, the largest net revenue to the govt.....
and congress promptly started writing checks,,as fast as the ink would dry,,,,,
do some homework bro,,and see who was in charge of congress back then (for 32 uninterrupted yrs )
i spell it for you slowly,,  d  e  m o  c  r  a  t  s  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
philo, This is not only the problem but the reason the status quo won't change. You feel free to make a point about any hypocrisies that exist on either side. Hypocrisies, not positions of policy subject to opinion.
How about this for an answer regarding Moore; "Yeah - he did come off as a hypocrite, but the attention he brought to the subject is still meritorious." Response - yup - won't argue with you.