RE: Obama Care (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DomKen -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 6:09:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
There is no question that it was designed to move people out of "employer" provided health care and into govt provided heath care. Regardless of how bad govt healthcare may be.

Actually Medicare is good and Tricare is excellent but when does a few lies stop you.




DomKen -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 6:14:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

A system like Norway, Canada, UK and so on.  But thats for you folks, I got the VA already for me.   Now if I could get nutsackers out of there, it would work like it should.


How in the hell do you qualify for VA benefits? I am a vet and when I tried to use the VA system, I was told I had too many assets. And the amount of assets you must fall under is not huge!

It depends on when you served. If you served after, IIRC, 1984 you have to have retired or have a service related injury to use the VA using Tricare. Before then you should be able to just show your DD-214 and get service.




mnottertail -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 6:18:28 AM)

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?  There are several reasons for higher cancer rates in Europe, and higher death rates, their industrial areas are packed in amongst them for the largest.

Lets look at england v new england

http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/state.htm

The argument is specious as well as dishonest.  They are doing better in nearly every area, than we are. Cherry picking stats without normalizing the foundations and their causality are a typical error of the innumerate nutsackers.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 7:03:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Since you seem to have ignored my answer to this claptrap the first time around, I'll restate it.
% of money spent on healthcare does not measure quality of healthcare.
I'll say it again. Amount of money spent on healthcare is NOT a measure of the quality of healthcare. Would saying it a third time help you?

There are ample studies confirming this. Go read some.

Botox. Breast enlargements. Obesity treatment. Body Mods. % of healthcare figures includes elective surgery in the US. Whereas nationalized medicine in britain - doesnt.

And YOU were saying that the cost of your healthcare was warranted because of better care and better survival rates.
And Ron's link proves you wrong.

And I'm asking that you prove your case because we appear to have contrary evidence from a non-biased source.

You pay more than twice what other first-world countries pay in healthcare and don't appear to gain any real benefit for paying such sums.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Do look those figures up and present here please. Because last I looked, of the 13 top causes of death, prognosis by symptom the us had better outcomes in 11 of the top 13 causes of death, covering 93.7% of the causes of death

Really??? Creditable link please??

You have MARGINAL better results... very marginal.
Does that warrant more than DOUBLE the costs??
Most people would argue that the costs don't warrant the miniscule extra benefits.




Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 2:50:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Since you seem to have ignored my answer to this claptrap the first time around, I'll restate it.
% of money spent on healthcare does not measure quality of healthcare.
I'll say it again. Amount of money spent on healthcare is NOT a measure of the quality of healthcare. Would saying it a third time help you?

There are ample studies confirming this. Go read some.

Botox. Breast enlargements. Obesity treatment. Body Mods. % of healthcare figures includes elective surgery in the US. Whereas nationalized medicine in britain - doesnt.

And YOU were saying that the cost of your healthcare was warranted because of better care and better survival rates.
And Ron's link proves you wrong.

And I'm asking that you prove your case because we appear to have contrary evidence from a non-biased source.

You pay more than twice what other first-world countries pay in healthcare and don't appear to gain any real benefit for paying such sums.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Do look those figures up and present here please. Because last I looked, of the 13 top causes of death, prognosis by symptom the us had better outcomes in 11 of the top 13 causes of death, covering 93.7% of the causes of death

Really??? Creditable link please??

You have MARGINAL better results... very marginal.
Does that warrant more than DOUBLE the costs??
Most people would argue that the costs don't warrant the miniscule extra benefits.



Ron's link doesn't has not a damn thing about US v Uk survival rates. Did you even click the link?

And again since you are so lazy to actually look: Elective surgery comprises 4+% of us health care spending. On that basis, our rates are only 50% more expensive than the uk - and we deliver cancer care that is, on average 36% better than the UK. And the truth is, its actually better than that.

So go ahead and tell me - if you have cancer would you rather get treated in the US or Britain. Because the odds are you'll live 2 years longer in the US.




Owner59 -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:07:22 PM)

Reached 6 million today......[sm=dancer.gif]




mnottertail -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:13:20 PM)

Yeah, still not causal to anything.  I will simply say (since we are devoid of causality) that the reason the UKs survival rates are much lower after detection is that their average age is much higher than ours because of their much longer life expectancy, and their constant proximity to industrial toxins while undergoing their treatments,  and those are the major contributing factors to the higher rates.

In any case, their system of healtcare is equal to or better than ours. There is no drawback due to their healthcare system.




Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:14:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Reached 6 million today......[sm=dancer.gif]



Thats the spin. And here's the reality:

1 million people that didnt' have insurance before.
New democratic proposals to 'fix' obamacare include eliminating signup deadline, new copper plan, competition across state lines.
People without insurance still more than when obama took office.

Premiums up, on average 56% according to Ehealth insurance.
Insurance companies already warning of rate hikes for next year.

Bill still wildlly unpopular with the american public and likely to result in the loss of the senate for the democrats...




Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:19:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, still not causal to anything.  I will simply say (since we are devoid of causality) that the reason the UKs survival rates are much lower after detection is that their average age is much higher than ours because of their much longer life expectancy, and their constant proximity to industrial toxins while undergoing their treatments,  and those are the major contributing factors to the higher rates.

In any case, their system of healtcare is equal to or better than ours. There is no drawback due to their healthcare system.



Yeah. Thats scientific. You might as well insist that English health care is inferior to american healthcare because vampires drink their blood at night. Thats why the actual results of actual medicine are so much poorer.


Its funny. Brits die of cancer because of industrial poisoning
They die of diabetes because of industrial poisoning.
they die of heart disease because of industrial poisoning.

The brits have a labor government. You'd think they'd do something to clean up that rampant poison that is coursing through every river, brook, farm, and wind in england.

[/sarcasm]




Owner59 -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:20:13 PM)

And more and more REAL (as in reality)stories of families and singles getting life saving care.....



How many lives has the non-existent republican health-care plan saved?




mnottertail -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:28:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, still not causal to anything.  I will simply say (since we are devoid of causality) that the reason the UKs survival rates are much lower after detection is that their average age is much higher than ours because of their much longer life expectancy, and their constant proximity to industrial toxins while undergoing their treatments,  and those are the major contributing factors to the higher rates.

In any case, their system of healtcare is equal to or better than ours. There is no drawback due to their healthcare system.



Yeah. Thats scientific. You might as well insist that English health care is inferior to american healthcare because vampires drink their blood at night. Thats why the actual results of actual medicine are so much poorer.


Its funny. Brits die of cancer because of industrial poisoning
They die of diabetes because of industrial poisoning.
they die of heart disease because of industrial poisoning.

The brits have a labor government. You'd think they'd do something to clean up that rampant poison that is coursing through every river, brook, farm, and wind in england.

[/sarcasm]


Oh how foolish are these vacuous sources, the government of the UK at this time is decidedly Tory (thats a conservative for you non-English comprhension majors.  That's why Polite is sashaying out here and Peon is taking exception and Moonhead is hiding.
  Your asswipe is making you the laughinstock of 50 states and 17 foreign countries.

You haven't causally related anything you slobber out here ever, I wouldn't be dancing on graves yet, because they are your own.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 3:38:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Ron's link doesn't has not a damn thing about US v Uk survival rates. Did you even click the link?

And again since you are so lazy to actually look: Elective surgery comprises 4+% of us health care spending. On that basis, our rates are only 50% more expensive than the uk - and we deliver cancer care that is, on average 36% better than the UK. And the truth is, its actually better than that.

So go ahead and tell me - if you have cancer would you rather get treated in the US or Britain. Because the odds are you'll live 2 years longer in the US.

Yes, I actually looked at it in detail.
We beat you on almost everything.

I'm not going to cherry-pick some very specific cases to twist the results.

As for your question....
If I had to pay DOUBLE the premiums all my life to live barely 2 years longer, I can certainly think of better things to spend all that money on - including a better standard of living where I probably wouldn't get the cancer in the first place. So that would completely negate your results.
And if you looked at that link Ron gave, I'd be living for 2.4 years longer anyways compared to living in the US.
So that again negates your argument.

By your own post, the US are twice as obese than Europeans are.
"Obesity is now linked to greater risk of death from heart disease, stroke, diabetes, high blood pressure, all of the most prevalent cancers, and worse treatment outcomes after heart surgery, trauma and burn surgery, and transplants. It is not simply that rates of diseases are higher; the treatment outcomes are significantly worse for cigarette smokers and obese patients."
So you are self-inflicting more damage to yourselves than we are.

The US are world-ranked higher than us for -
Coronary Heart Disease, Lung Cancers, Alzheimers/Dementia, Lung Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Road Traffic Accidents, Hypertension, Suicide, Kidney Disease, Poisonings, Lymphomas, Pancreas Cancer, Endocrine Disorders, Inflammatory/Heart and Violence.
Do you realise that the US have 15 out of the top 20 worst rates of death compared to the UK?
And you maintain that it's worth paying more than double than what we do for healthcare??

Oh jeeezz. Come out of cloud cuckoo land FFS before you hurt yourself.



Pssst... We've had a conservative/lib-dem coalition government for over 4 years now. Do keep up!! [:D]


ETA: You wanna talk about water quality??
The UK ranks 7th in the top 10 for EPI. The US doesn't even feature in the top 10!
Source: http://www.therichest.com/expensive-lifestyle/location/top-10-countries-with-the-best-tap-water/
And on this site, the UK ranks 11th with a B grade whereas the US comes in at 13th with a C grade.
Source: http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/environment/water-quality-index.aspx

So we even beat you on that one too!! [:D]




Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 5:55:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Ron's link doesn't has not a damn thing about US v Uk survival rates. Did you even click the link?

And again since you are so lazy to actually look: Elective surgery comprises 4+% of us health care spending. On that basis, our rates are only 50% more expensive than the uk - and we deliver cancer care that is, on average 36% better than the UK. And the truth is, its actually better than that.

So go ahead and tell me - if you have cancer would you rather get treated in the US or Britain. Because the odds are you'll live 2 years longer in the US.

Yes, I actually looked at it in detail.
We beat you on almost everything.

I'm not going to cherry-pick some very specific cases to twist the results.

As for your question....
If I had to pay DOUBLE the premiums all my life to live barely 2 years longer, I can certainly think of better things to spend all that money on - including a better standard of living where I probably wouldn't get the cancer in the first place. So that would completely negate your results.
And if you looked at that link Ron gave, I'd be living for 2.4 years longer anyways compared to living in the US.
So that again negates your argument.

By your own post, the US are twice as obese than Europeans are.
"Obesity is now linked to greater risk of death from heart disease, stroke, diabetes, high blood pressure, all of the most prevalent cancers, and worse treatment outcomes after heart surgery, trauma and burn surgery, and transplants. It is not simply that rates of diseases are higher; the treatment outcomes are significantly worse for cigarette smokers and obese patients."
So you are self-inflicting more damage to yourselves than we are.

The US are world-ranked higher than us for -
Coronary Heart Disease, Lung Cancers, Alzheimers/Dementia, Lung Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Road Traffic Accidents, Hypertension, Suicide, Kidney Disease, Poisonings, Lymphomas, Pancreas Cancer, Endocrine Disorders, Inflammatory/Heart and Violence.
Do you realise that the US have 15 out of the top 20 worst rates of death compared to the UK?
And you maintain that it's worth paying more than double than what we do for healthcare??

Oh jeeezz. Come out of cloud cuckoo land FFS before you hurt yourself.



Pssst... We've had a conservative/lib-dem coalition government for over 4 years now. Do keep up!! [:D]


ETA: You wanna talk about water quality??
The UK ranks 7th in the top 10 for EPI. The US doesn't even feature in the top 10!
Source: http://www.therichest.com/expensive-lifestyle/location/top-10-countries-with-the-best-tap-water/
And on this site, the UK ranks 11th with a B grade whereas the US comes in at 13th with a C grade.
Source: http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/environment/water-quality-index.aspx

So we even beat you on that one too!! [:D]



Yah Britain.

However, unlike you I have no problem:

a). Acknowledging that water quality, industrial poisoning, and obesity are in fact NOT measures of the quality of healthcare.

If you want to have a debate on the merits of clean water - I will happy to have that debate with you in another thread. This, however, is a thread on health care.

Again. If you want to have a debate that far more people die in the United States from Violence - well you really will have to try hard. Because I agree with you.
Just as I hope you will finally agree with me that the numbers of shootings and suicides are NOT measures of the quality of healthcare.

b). Once again, how long you live is not a proxy for the quality of health care. Americans are 3x as fat as englishmen. America has more cumulative years of smoking per capita. Americas have vastly higher incidences of violence, automobile accidents and suicides.

Have some intellectual honesty man. You might as well use dick size as the measure of health care quality. Its just as good a measure. Which means... not at all.

As for your coalition government- if thats the best you've got that I'm wrong because the governent is only PARTLY labor - well I'm afraid that pretty weak sauce.




Politesub53 -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 6:03:22 PM)

FR "As for your coalition government- if thats the best you've got that I'm wrong because the governent is only PARTLY labor - well I'm afraid that pretty weak sauce."

Three times in around thirty minutes you have proved you havent got a clue.

Not about the meaning of Ethnic Cleansing.
Not about my Politics.
Not about our current government.

Why do you lmagine we would think anything else you post is accurate ?




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 6:16:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Reached 6 million today......[sm=dancer.gif]


(Yeah except, 5,743,354 of them all have the same social security number).




thishereboi -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 7:22:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

A system like Norway, Canada, UK and so on.  But thats for you folks, I got the VA already for me.   Now if I could get nutsackers out of there, it would work like it should.



Does Canada have a separate health care system for their vets? I would think if we are going to a single payer system, there wouldn't be a need for the VA anymore. Service members would be covered like everyone else.




RemoteUser -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 7:33:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

Does Canada have a separate health care system for their vets?


At the rate we're going, we won't have boo shit for them, because Harper is a fucktard.




Lucylastic -> RE: Obama Care (3/27/2014 10:10:36 PM)

Regarding cancer detection...what are the figures for people who find out they have cancer but die because they did 'nt have the money to get treatment




Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Care (3/28/2014 12:02:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Regarding cancer detection...what are the figures for people who find out they have cancer but die because they did 'nt have the money to get treatment



The three studies I provided all included those numbers Lucy. In fact if you normalize American data to only include those that actualy got treatment, the american numbers are significantly better.

A couple of the studies published the methodologies used when the cause of death (cancer) was only established at the autopsy.

This happens in European health care as well.




Lucylastic -> RE: Obama Care (3/28/2014 1:08:58 AM)

I dunno wether to offer you a breathmint or toilet paper.
The bs you spout .....its turning my stomach
One could hypothetically wish the spouters ass grow tastebuds




Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125