Yep, Cuba is just awesome!

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
i said i'd rather be a poor cuban in cuba than a poor american in the u.s, if i was in dire need of medical attention.
That's great, but the reply you quoted had nothing to do with that...

The Cubans trying to flee are trying to get out of poverty. The American embargo against Cuba has had devastating affects on their economy.

You still can't have it both ways, either Cuba is great, or it isn't.

wow, really!
I knew you didn't understand that the embargo only meant the US will not trade with Cuba.

Fidel never went to Spain, A doctor from Spain came to Cuba. :lol:
So much for Cuban health care superiority.
 

CUBert

Time Out
Aug 15, 2010
1,259
2
38
Canada
It seems to be a waste of time explaining to you anything, you should do your own research though.. I'll help you out..

Healthcare in Cuba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An overall worsening in terms of disease and infant mortality rates was observed in the 1960s, but recovery occurred by the 1980s[2]. Things have since improved considerably. AIDS is only one-sixth as common on a per-capita basis as in the United States[3]. Like the rest of the Cuban economy, Cuban medical care suffered following the end of Soviet subsidies in 1991; the stepping up of the embargo at this time also had an effect

According to the World Health Organization, Cuba provides a doctor for every 170 residents,[49] and has the second highest doctor to patient ratio in the world after Italy.[50]

Medical professionals are not paid high salaries by international standards. In 2002 the mean monthly salary was 261 pesos, 1.5 times the national mean.[51] A doctor’s salary in the late 1990s was equivalent to about US$15–20 per month in purchasing power. Therefore, some prefer to work in different occupations, for example in the lucrative tourist industry where earnings can be much higher.

Health care in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some have argued that the system does not deliver equivalent value for the money spent. The USA pays twice as much yet lags behind other wealthy nations in such measures as infant mortality and life expectancy,

Currently, the USA has a higher infant mortality rate than most of the world's industrialized nations.[nb 1][8] The United States life expectancy lags 42nd in the world, after some other industrialized nations, lagging last of the G5 (Japan, France, Germany, UK, USA) and just after Chile (35th) and Cuba (37th).[9][10][11]

the USA is the "only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage" (i.e., some kind of private or public health insurance).[18][19] The same Institute of Medicine report notes that "Lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States."[18] while a 2009 Harvard study published in the American Journal of Public Health found a much higher figure of more than 44,800 excess deaths annually in the United States due to Americans lacking health insurance.[20][21] More broadly, the total number of people in the United States, whether insured or uninsured, who die because of lack of medical care was estimated in a 1997 analysis to be nearly 100,000 per year.[22]
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
It seems to be a waste of time explaining to you anything, you should do your own research though.. I'll help you out..


I should do my own research?

Then without any foreknowledge, fact checking, supporting evidence, you cut and paste wikiality? Yet again?



Oh man, thank gawd that coffee that just went through my nose wasn't hot.
 

YukonJack

Time Out
Dec 26, 2008
7,026
73
48
Winnipeg
Yuo convinced me CuBert! Even more than ever before, I wish that you will seek medical attention in Cuba when you need it.

And even more so, emigrate there whether you need medical attention or not.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
What I quoted were facts only
Says you and member written wikiality. A source so maligned by reality, that if cited in the footnotes of reports by students, from public school to university, the mark is an automatic fail

Go figure, you'll live and die by wikiality.
 

CUBert

Time Out
Aug 15, 2010
1,259
2
38
Canada
When facts contradict your belief just pretend it's only completely made up by college kids over wikipedia, regardless of the sources cited.. ok effective strategy.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
When facts contradict your belief
What belief? I know Cuban health care is more easily accessed then in the US. I'm also aware that Cuba isn't a free state, nor is their health care as advanced as your hero Moore would have the world believe. You know he even says Canadian Health care is free?

When facts contradict your reality, you simply ignore it, go off on a tangent, make stuff up, or argue points not in question.

just pretend it's only completely made up by college kids over wikipedia, regardless of the sources cited.. ok effective strategy.
Internal links and circular links mean nothing to me.

Cite a real study and I'll give it the attention it deserves.

Besides that, you're still trying to prove something not in question. Only because you haven't been able to actually back your beliefs that are in question.

Effective strategy, if you're prone to logical failures.
 

CUBert

Time Out
Aug 15, 2010
1,259
2
38
Canada
What belief? I know Cuban health care is more easily accessed then in the US. I'm also aware that Cuba isn't a free state, nor is their health care as advanced as your hero Moore would have the world believe. You know he even says Canadian Health care is free?

What is this argument for then?

When facts contradict your reality, you simply ignore it, go off on a tangent, make stuff up, or argue points not in question.

Isn't this nearly exactly what you're doing? Yes.

Internal links and circular links mean nothing to me.

Cite a real study and I'll give it the attention it deserves.

Besides that, you're still trying to prove something not in question. Only because you haven't been able to actually back your beliefs that are in question.

Effective strategy, if you're prone to logical failures.

I like how you're still arguing against facts :lol:
Why do I feel if it didn't contradict your argument you wouldn't be questioning the legitimacy of the source? :lol:
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
What is this argument for then?
Sh!ts and giggles. I have no hopes of changing your mind. Your ideology is likely all you have. No amount of fact, no matter how incontrovertible can possibly sway your thought process. I'm OK with that. I just like helping you expose your real agenda.

Isn't this nearly exactly what you're doing? Yes.
No.

I like how you're still arguing against facts :lol:
What facts?

Why do I feel if it didn't contradict your argument you wouldn't be questioning the legitimacy of the source? :lol:
Because that's what you would like to believe. But I don't source wikiality, ever. It's proven to be flawed, constantly and consistently.

Only people without the skills to actually do any of their own research use it. Hence your constant use of it. As I've said to you several times in this thread, try doing some of your own research, and your posts won't be as idiotic.

My fave was the one with the link to the Canadian/Cuban network, which I took apart in a very little time.
 

CUBert

Time Out
Aug 15, 2010
1,259
2
38
Canada
Wikipedia is a fine source . Sure it's not perfect but many times it'll provide accurate information. If you skeptical about something on Wikipedia it isn't hard to look it up elsewhere to check the validity.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Bear: here is a nice book for this thead......



 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Wikipedia is a fine source . Sure it's not perfect but many times it'll provide accurate information. If you skeptical about something on Wikipedia it isn't hard to look it up elsewhere to check the validity.
That's awesome, so how about you do that and post the findings...MmmK?

Until then, you're still trying to argue something not in question, because you can't support the other crap you keep touting as fact. It's called topic deviation, or diversion, or a red herring.

Now you're trying to argue about the validity of a source, not accepted by any level of academia, instead of the topic. That's a fact.

Try looking at the OP and the first string of your posts in this thread. You were made a fool of and without conceding, just switched to something you thought you could win.

Excellent tactic, if you're argument is weak and you can't support it.

Bear: here is a nice book for this thead......



Having been a member here for as long as I have, I'm already a pro at it.