Passing Health Care Reform in the Senate
- Thread starter FiveParadox
- Start date
But my question still remains, ironsides. Why does spending huge amounts of money produce such poor results in USA?
Exactly, and the older I get the better care I want and need. Not looking for the economy model anymore.
Not true. In USA you pay much more than any other developed country and you don’t get your money’s worth (you get lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality etc.).
Only when it comes to prenatal care are we lacking. I cannot argue as to why the lower child mortality rates. You would think it would be near or at the top. Countries with government health plans tended to have the lowest infant mortality rate due to early child care. Now here I agree with you, but it is not a reason to upset the whole health system. Wouldn't cost to much to give every pregnant women complete prenatal care. The child will have health care up to age of 18, under the present system.
Like most things, you can have any 2 of these 3 criteria: good, cheap, fast.
US medicine is good and fast, but it sure aint cheap.
Canadian medicine is good and cheap, but it isn't fast.
At least we're not in the cheap and fast, but not good category.
I'm okay with where we are, thanks.
US medicine is good and fast, but it sure aint cheap.
Canadian medicine is good and cheap, but it isn't fast.
At least we're not in the cheap and fast, but not good category.
I'm okay with where we are, thanks.
TenPenny, there can be such a thing as being too fast. US medicine is too fast, they are quick to order a whole bunch of expensive tests at the drop of a hat.
I saw a feature on CNN, this man decided to see how the health care systems in different countries work. In each country, he went to the doctor, complaining of a vague pain in the shoulder.
In USA, they immediately ordered a whole bunch of tests, altogether costing around 50,000 $. In Canada, they told him that it will be a year before he can get an appointment with an orthopedic surgeon for such a minor complaint as this.
In Britain they didn’t even bother with that. They told him, well it is just a minor pain, live with it.
This vividly illustrates why health care costs in USA are so high.
I saw a feature on CNN, this man decided to see how the health care systems in different countries work. In each country, he went to the doctor, complaining of a vague pain in the shoulder.
In USA, they immediately ordered a whole bunch of tests, altogether costing around 50,000 $. In Canada, they told him that it will be a year before he can get an appointment with an orthopedic surgeon for such a minor complaint as this.
In Britain they didn’t even bother with that. They told him, well it is just a minor pain, live with it.
This vividly illustrates why health care costs in USA are so high.
Make excercise mandatory then health care costs aren't an issue. There is enough fat in the US to power Denver for 4 years.
Tapes of the floor of the U.S. National Legislature.
If you get cancer, you have a less chance of survival than in the United States.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=G44NCvNDLfc
If you get cancer, you have a less chance of survival than in the United States.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=G44NCvNDLfc
ABC's John Stossel Destroys/Pulverizes/Crushes Obama's anti-American 'Health Care' Plan
YouTube - ABC's John Stossel Destroys/Pulverizes/Crushes Obama's anti-American 'Health Care' Plan
YouTube - ABC's John Stossel Destroys/Pulverizes/Crushes Obama's anti-American 'Health Care' Plan
Liberal lies about national health care, Part 7
[SIZE=-1]Posted: October 07, 2009
5:57 pm Eastern
by Ann Coulter
[SIZE=-1]© 2009 [/SIZE][/SIZE]
Note: This is the latest in Coulter's multi-part series debunking "liberal lies" about health care.
18) America's lower life expectancy compared to countries with socialist [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]health [COLOR=blue !important]care[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] proves that their medical systems are superior.
President Obama has too much intellectual pride to make such a specious argument, so instead we have to keep hearing it from his half-wit supporters.
These Democrats are all over the [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]map[/COLOR][/COLOR]
on where precisely Americans place in the life-expectancy rankings. We're 24th, according to Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Barbara Boxer; 42nd, according to Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell; 35th, according to Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson; and 47th, according to Rep. Dennis Kucinich. So the U.S. may have less of a "life expectancy" problem than a "Democratic math competency" problem.
But also, as described in last week's column, the citizenry's health is not the same thing as the citizenry's health-care system.
Besides America's high rate of infant mortality – based on biology and lifestyle choices, not medical care – Americans are also more likely to overeat or smoke than people in other developed nations. And the two biggest killers in the Western world are obesity and smoking.
Liberals shouldn't have to be reminded how fat Americans are, inasmuch as they are always chortling about it. A 2004 New York Times article leeringly quoted a foreign doctor, saying: "We Europeans, whenever we came to America, we always noticed the enormous number of obese people on the streets." I note that these are the same people who openly worship Michael Moore.
Somewhat surprisingly to those of us who have long admired France for its humanitarian smoking laws, until the mid-1980s, Americans had had the highest rate of smoking in the developed world. This makes patriotic Americans like me wonder if there's a way to get Michael Moore to start smoking. (You know, just to keep his weight down or whatever.)
To be fair, the French are still being exposed to large amounts of smoke due to all the [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]cars[/COLOR][/COLOR] being set on fire by Muslims.
In 2003, America led the world in smoking-related deaths among women – followed by Hungary. Simply excluding all smoking-related deaths from the World Health Organization's comparison of life expectancies at age 50 in 20 developed nations would raise U.S. women's life expectancy from 17th to 7th place and lift American men from 14th to 9th place.
Americans are also more likely to die in military combat than the whimpering, pant-wetting cowards our military has spent the past 70 years defending – I mean, than "our loyal European allies." This is a [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]health [COLOR=blue !important]risk[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Europeans have managed to protect themselves against by living in a world that contains the United States military.
These are risk factors that have nothing to do with the health-care system. To evaluate the quality of our health care, you have to compare apples to apples by looking at outcomes for specific [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]medical [COLOR=blue !important]conditions[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR].
Although the United States has a higher incidence of heart [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]disease[/COLOR][/COLOR], cancer and diabetes compared to Europe – because of lifestyle choices and genetics – it also has better survival rates across the board for all these medical problems.
The most revealing international comparisons look at cancer survival rates, because of the universally extensive record-keeping for this disease.
A European study found that, compared to 18 [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]European [COLOR=blue !important]countries[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], the U.S. had strikingly higher five-year survival rates in all 12 cancers studied, except for one: [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]stomach [COLOR=blue !important]cancer[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]. Even there, the survival rates were close – and the difference was attributed to the location of the cancer in the stomach.
For all types of cancers, European men have only a 47.3 percent five-year survival rate, compared to 66.3 percent survival rate for American men. The greatest disparity was in prostate cancer, which American men are 28 percent more likely to survive than European men.
European women are only 55.8 percent likely to live five years after contracting any kind of cancer, compared to 62.9 percent for American women.
In five cancers – breast, prostate, thyroid, testicular and skin [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]melanoma[/COLOR][/COLOR] – American survival rates are higher than 90 percent. Europeans hit a 90 percent survival rate for only one of those – testicular cancer.
Most disturbingly, many cancers in Europe are discovered only upon the victim's death – twice as many as in the U.S. Consequently, the European study simply excluded cancers that were first noted on the death certificate, so as not to give the U.S. too great an advantage.
There are no national registries for heart disease, as there are for cancer, making survival-rate comparisons more difficult. But treatments can be measured, and, again, Americans are far more likely to be on medication for heart disease and high cholesterol – medications that extend the lives of millions, developed by those evil, profit-grubbing American drug [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]companies[/COLOR][/COLOR].
To get to the comparison they like (America is not as good as Sweden!), liberals have to slip in the orange of "life expectancy," and hope no one will mention monster truck races, Krispy Kremes and Virginia Slims. As the old saying goes: Life doesn't last longer in socialist countries; it just feels like it.
[SIZE=-1]Posted: October 07, 2009
5:57 pm Eastern
by Ann Coulter
[SIZE=-1]© 2009 [/SIZE][/SIZE]
Note: This is the latest in Coulter's multi-part series debunking "liberal lies" about health care.
18) America's lower life expectancy compared to countries with socialist [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]health [COLOR=blue !important]care[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] proves that their medical systems are superior.
President Obama has too much intellectual pride to make such a specious argument, so instead we have to keep hearing it from his half-wit supporters.
These Democrats are all over the [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]map[/COLOR][/COLOR]
on where precisely Americans place in the life-expectancy rankings. We're 24th, according to Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Barbara Boxer; 42nd, according to Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell; 35th, according to Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson; and 47th, according to Rep. Dennis Kucinich. So the U.S. may have less of a "life expectancy" problem than a "Democratic math competency" problem.
But also, as described in last week's column, the citizenry's health is not the same thing as the citizenry's health-care system.
Besides America's high rate of infant mortality – based on biology and lifestyle choices, not medical care – Americans are also more likely to overeat or smoke than people in other developed nations. And the two biggest killers in the Western world are obesity and smoking.
Liberals shouldn't have to be reminded how fat Americans are, inasmuch as they are always chortling about it. A 2004 New York Times article leeringly quoted a foreign doctor, saying: "We Europeans, whenever we came to America, we always noticed the enormous number of obese people on the streets." I note that these are the same people who openly worship Michael Moore.
Somewhat surprisingly to those of us who have long admired France for its humanitarian smoking laws, until the mid-1980s, Americans had had the highest rate of smoking in the developed world. This makes patriotic Americans like me wonder if there's a way to get Michael Moore to start smoking. (You know, just to keep his weight down or whatever.)
To be fair, the French are still being exposed to large amounts of smoke due to all the [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]cars[/COLOR][/COLOR] being set on fire by Muslims.
In 2003, America led the world in smoking-related deaths among women – followed by Hungary. Simply excluding all smoking-related deaths from the World Health Organization's comparison of life expectancies at age 50 in 20 developed nations would raise U.S. women's life expectancy from 17th to 7th place and lift American men from 14th to 9th place.
Americans are also more likely to die in military combat than the whimpering, pant-wetting cowards our military has spent the past 70 years defending – I mean, than "our loyal European allies." This is a [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]health [COLOR=blue !important]risk[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] Europeans have managed to protect themselves against by living in a world that contains the United States military.
These are risk factors that have nothing to do with the health-care system. To evaluate the quality of our health care, you have to compare apples to apples by looking at outcomes for specific [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]medical [COLOR=blue !important]conditions[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR].
Although the United States has a higher incidence of heart [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]disease[/COLOR][/COLOR], cancer and diabetes compared to Europe – because of lifestyle choices and genetics – it also has better survival rates across the board for all these medical problems.
The most revealing international comparisons look at cancer survival rates, because of the universally extensive record-keeping for this disease.
A European study found that, compared to 18 [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]European [COLOR=blue !important]countries[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], the U.S. had strikingly higher five-year survival rates in all 12 cancers studied, except for one: [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]stomach [COLOR=blue !important]cancer[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]. Even there, the survival rates were close – and the difference was attributed to the location of the cancer in the stomach.
For all types of cancers, European men have only a 47.3 percent five-year survival rate, compared to 66.3 percent survival rate for American men. The greatest disparity was in prostate cancer, which American men are 28 percent more likely to survive than European men.
European women are only 55.8 percent likely to live five years after contracting any kind of cancer, compared to 62.9 percent for American women.
In five cancers – breast, prostate, thyroid, testicular and skin [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]melanoma[/COLOR][/COLOR] – American survival rates are higher than 90 percent. Europeans hit a 90 percent survival rate for only one of those – testicular cancer.
Most disturbingly, many cancers in Europe are discovered only upon the victim's death – twice as many as in the U.S. Consequently, the European study simply excluded cancers that were first noted on the death certificate, so as not to give the U.S. too great an advantage.
There are no national registries for heart disease, as there are for cancer, making survival-rate comparisons more difficult. But treatments can be measured, and, again, Americans are far more likely to be on medication for heart disease and high cholesterol – medications that extend the lives of millions, developed by those evil, profit-grubbing American drug [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]companies[/COLOR][/COLOR].
To get to the comparison they like (America is not as good as Sweden!), liberals have to slip in the orange of "life expectancy," and hope no one will mention monster truck races, Krispy Kremes and Virginia Slims. As the old saying goes: Life doesn't last longer in socialist countries; it just feels like it.
ironsides, if Ann Coulter criticizes liberal policies, then I know that they are the right policies, I would be worried if she supported liberal policies.
Anyway, at least she has the honesty to admit that USA has one of the lowest life expectance and highest infant mortality in the developed world; most of the right wing politicians completely ignore the issue when debating health care in USA.
But typical of a politician, she blames anything but your health care system for the substandard outcome (low life expectancy, high infant mortality).
Anyway, at least she has the honesty to admit that USA has one of the lowest life expectance and highest infant mortality in the developed world; most of the right wing politicians completely ignore the issue when debating health care in USA.
But typical of a politician, she blames anything but your health care system for the substandard outcome (low life expectancy, high infant mortality).
Hey, You seem to pick on women a lot. Sarah Palin is to dumb, Ann Coulter maybe smart, but is an out spoken conservative. Exactly where do you want your ideal women? :lol:
I happen to think she happens to be right in this case, it is not our health system that is wrong, it is our living styles and eating habits that do us in. I think we have been blaming the wrong things for our problem. No amount of health care will cure what a Krispy Cream will give you.
I happen to think she happens to be right in this case, it is not our health system that is wrong, it is our living styles and eating habits that do us in. I think we have been blaming the wrong things for our problem. No amount of health care will cure what a Krispy Cream will give you.
With all the bickering going on about health care down in the states i dont think they will ever get a national healthcare plan,
Curious how the potential for maybe a minor tax increase to cover healthcare for all is a major item but the billions of tax payer $$ spent per week on Americas military operations around the world is a non issue.seems like priorities should be the other way around.
Curious how the potential for maybe a minor tax increase to cover healthcare for all is a major item but the billions of tax payer $$ spent per week on Americas military operations around the world is a non issue.seems like priorities should be the other way around.
Last edited:
You have the cure for a Krispy Cream? I have no objection to see the U.S. bring all its troops home. Go back to a more isolationist policy again. We do not need foreign bases anymore (strategically speaking). If we ever do again, we have the power to extend our influence any time we want. But for now regrouping would be a good idea.
That's certainly the case here in Canada, and that's why there are long waiting lists for treatment - self inflicted ailments. Lung cancer, obesity, etc etc are the cause of the vast majority of our problems.
A couple of GPs that I know personally often comment that 75 to 80 percent of the patients they see (outside of the normal flu season) are self-inflicted problems. People with bad backs or sore knees, because they weigh 350 lbs, and refuse to do anything about it, or smokers who have breathing problems, or diabetics who won't manage their diets.
I disagree with conservative women, ironsides, like Palin or Coulter. I have no problem with women like Pelosi or Clinton.
And you may not think so, but there is plenty wrong with your health care system. Any system where more than 40 million people are uninsured leaves a lot to be desired.