Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

A Thought About Healthcare

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post


    And yet you just provided an example for an argument [ATTACH=CONFIG]28358[/ATTACH]
    No. I did cite an example - and then noted that it is not an argument either.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
      That policy kind of pissed me off, truth be told. I know there are "exceptions", but getting fined over $1000 was crippling to my family, which was living paycheck to paycheck even with outside help.

      Did you look into government contributions options for low-income families, and the hardship options for exemptions from the fine?


      Assuming you did both, then your situation is indeed an awful one and I can see why you would be angry. The sad reality is that any bureaucracy is going to "lose people" in the cracks. It's unfortunate, and there should be a mechanism for redress when that happens. Sadly, there usually is not.
      Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-17-2018, 10:48 AM.
      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by mossrose View Post
        Including former Newfie Premier Danny Williams, and many, many others.

        And here's an article with actual numbers in it, since carpe doesn't like anecdotal accounts.

        https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/63-000...tute-1.3486635
        OK - did you actually read the article? This sentence kind of jumped out at me...

        But one professor warns the data is based only on estimates, making it highly questionable.


        So did this:

        The report says "one explanation" for patients leaving the country may be the long wait times in Canada. It also notes that some patients may be sent out of country for treatment, at the expense of the public health care system, because the procedure or equipment they need are not available in their jurisdiction.


        So the data is estimates, and it muddles those who elect to go out of the country, and those who are intentionally sent out of the country by the Canadian Healthcare system.

        Look, I have no doubt that there are long wait times, and those three provinces seem especially susceptible (I have to wonder if Mossrose lives in one of them). I noticed Quebec is not on the list, which may partially explain why my cousin's experience and Mossrose's experience are so different.

        None of this changes the data that shows Canadian and UK satisfaction with their healthcare is WAY above U.S. satisfaction. And that pattern holds true for almost all countries with universal healthcare systems. You cannot just hand-wave that data away. So how do you explain it?
        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by mossrose View Post
          And they'd only have to wait 10 hours in an emergency room and 18-24 months for hip surgery or 6-8 months for an MRI or CT scan or 6 months to see a specialist.
          That is the case at present in parts of rural health care in the USA among the low income, and no emergency room within 50 to 100 miles.
          Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-17-2018, 10:54 AM.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
            Those are basically fake numbers as the professor quoted in the link says.

            In interviews I have seen with Canadian medical professionals, they pretty much laughed at and mocked the idea that any significant number of Canadians go to the US for care. If anything it is by far the other way around: A lot of people living in the US get on a plane back to their home countries for free care if it turns out they need something significant done.
            There is a solid, study-backed article about this here: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/my...ked-2012-08-09

            A few statistics from the study:

            - Less than 1% of Canadians go abroad for healthcare (about 1.5 million Americans go abroad for healthcare annually)
            - Most hospitals/clinics at/near the Canadian border report less than 1 Canadian per month seeking services.
            - Less than 0.5% of Canadian doctors come to the U.S. to work (I know U.S. doctors go north, but cannot find numbers)

            The study also tackles the wait times issue. They note it is largely because Canadians have shown fiscal restraint (something they could teach our politicians) and intentionally keep costs down by limiting supply. They also note that the wait times cited by most studies combine elective and urgent times in one number. Elective treatments have enormously long wait times. Non-elective treatments far less so (no numbers provided). If you recall, I wondered that about the study Mossrose provided. I could not find where they separated out those numbers. Apparently the reason I couldn't find it is because they didn't.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • #66
              Source: Facts about America’s health care quality that the world doesn’t know, 2013

              Let’s compare data for cancer, heart disease, and stroke, the most common sources of sickness and death in the US and Europe, and the diseases that generate the highest medical expenditures.

              American cancer patients, both men and women, have superior survival rates for all major cancers. For some specifics, per Verdecchia, the breast cancer mortality rate is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the US, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer mortality rates are strikingly worse in the UK, Norway, and elsewhere than in the US; mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher than in the US. Removing “lead-time bias,” where simply detecting cancer earlier might falsely demonstrate longer survival, death rates from prostate and breast cancer from the early 1980’s to 2005 declined much faster in the US than in the 15 other OECD nations studied (Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and UK). The inescapable conclusion from objective data is that US patients have superior outcomes from nearly all cancers.

              Treatment for heart disease is also superior in the United States.

              First, a comparison of the US to ten Western European nations (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland) showed that 60.7 percent of Americans diagnosed with heart disease were actually receiving medication for it, while only 54.5 percent of Western Europeans were treated (a statistically significant difference).

              Likewise, US patients needing surgery for heart disease receive it more frequently than heart patients in countries with nationalized insurance. For example, twice as many bypass procedures and four times as many angioplasties are performed per capita in the US as in the UK. A separate comparison between Canadian and American patients showed the same pattern: of patients diagnosed with coronary heart disease, a higher percentage of US patients actually received treatment.

              But is there evidence that Americans with heart disease actually benefit from receiving treatment more frequently compared to patients elsewhere? The answer is yes. Specifically, the US shows a significantly greater reduction in death rates from heart disease than Western European nations, the European Union as a whole, and Japan.

              A separate study showed that Americans had a significantly longer five-year survival after acute heart attack than Canadians. The authors concluded that “our findings are strongly suggestive of a survival advantage for the US cohort based on more aggressive revascularization.”

              Another comparison study showed that fewer Americans than UK residents die (per capita) from heart attack despite the far higher burden of risk factors in Americans for these fatal events. In fact, the heart disease mortality rate in England was 36 percent higher than that in the US. These superior outcomes from US medical care are particularly impressive, considering that American patients have far more risk factors (diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease) that worsen outcomes and death rates after heart attack and after heart surgery.

              The US shows a far greater reduction in death rates from stroke, the third leading cause of death and the leading cause of disability in adults in the US and most Western European nations, than almost all Western European nations and the European Union overall.

              One reason for better results of stroke care is that modern therapy has been more widely available and was available years earlier in the US than in countries with nationalized insurance. Even given the disadvantages inherent to American patients (physically inactive, obese, and with high blood pressure – all significantly higher than comparison countries), studies still prove better medical care for stroke in the US.

              What about treatment for chronic diseases like hypertension and diabetes?

              To assess the quality of care for high blood pressure, or hypertension, we must look at two sets of data. First, once hypertension is diagnosed, is it treated or does it go untreated? About two-thirds to three-fourths of patients with high blood pressure in Canada and Europe were left untreated, compared to less than half in the US, with England having the lowest level of treatment, followed by Sweden and Germany, Spain, Italy and Canada, all far behind the US in a comparison study. In a different study, 88.3 percent of patients aged 18 to 64 in the US diagnosed as hypertensive received treatment, compared to 84.1 percent of the Canadians with hypertension, a pattern also seen in older patients.

              Second, hypertension treatment in the US has been more successful in controlling blood pressure than elsewhere. One comparison showed that control in treated patients at 140/90 blood pressure, as well as at a higher standard of 160/95, was highest in the US, outperforming Canada, England, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Spain.

              In a separate analysis of over 21,000 patients already visiting doctors for hypertension in five Western European nations (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK) and the US, the best rate of success was in the US (63 percent), compared with 31 percent to 46 percent of patients in the European countries. The facts show that more successful blood pressure control was seen in the US for both women and men under treatment, differences that are statistically significant. As for why, the conclusion by the authors is not surprising: “lower treatment thresholds and more intensive treatment contribute to better hypertension control in the United States” …that is, because of the delivery of better medical care in America.

              No disease has more far-reaching and more serious consequences than diabetes, a disease near the top of the list of the world’s most important health challenges, fueled by a relentless rise in obesity. The risk for death in diabetics is about twice that without diabetes, and disease outcomes are also significantly worse. While “type 2” diabetes (90 to 95 percent of diabetes) is preventable by an individual’s own choices (weight loss and increased exercise), medical care focuses on control of blood glucose to limit organ damage and complications.

              Receiving diabetes care is the first concern, and then attaining control is the second. In 2011, the WHO determined that of seven countries, the US had the highest proportion of adult diabetics who were actually receiving treatment for their known diabetes, as well as for their hypertension and for their high cholesterol.

              A 2007 comparison of Canadians and Americans showed the same -- a higher percentage of American diabetics than Canadian diabetics actually receive treatment. In the same WHO analysis, the US also performed best by several different quality measures, including blood glucose control, as well as effective management for all three key factors in diabetics (blood glucose, blood pressure, and blood cholesterol), approximately twice the success of England and Scotland. Here’s the bottom line: if you had diabetes, you were more likely to receive treatment and be treated successfully for the disease and the important risk factors for its serious sequelae in the US than in any other country studied.

              Objectively, the world’s leading medical journals are filled with studies demonstrating the excellence of American medical care in comparison to other systems more heavily controlled by government bodies, the very systems held as models by those asserting the need for radical change to US health care.

              These studies verify better survival from serious diseases like cancer, better access to treatment for the most important chronic diseases, and superior control of diseases that cause disability and death and are themselves significant risk factors for other deadly diseases … all this even though US life expectancy and disease outcomes are worsened because Americans harbor more risk factors than all other countries.

              http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...esnt-know.html

              © Copyright Original Source


              "Free" healthcare? You know the saying: you get what you pay for.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Source: Facts about America’s health care quality that the world doesn’t know, 2013

                Let’s compare data for cancer, heart disease, and stroke, the most common sources of sickness and death in the US and Europe, and the diseases that generate the highest medical expenditures.

                American cancer patients, both men and women, have superior survival rates for all major cancers. For some specifics, per Verdecchia, the breast cancer mortality rate is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the US, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer mortality rates are strikingly worse in the UK, Norway, and elsewhere than in the US; mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher than in the US. Removing “lead-time bias,” where simply detecting cancer earlier might falsely demonstrate longer survival, death rates from prostate and breast cancer from the early 1980’s to 2005 declined much faster in the US than in the 15 other OECD nations studied (Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and UK). The inescapable conclusion from objective data is that US patients have superior outcomes from nearly all cancers.

                Treatment for heart disease is also superior in the United States.

                First, a comparison of the US to ten Western European nations (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland) showed that 60.7 percent of Americans diagnosed with heart disease were actually receiving medication for it, while only 54.5 percent of Western Europeans were treated (a statistically significant difference).

                Likewise, US patients needing surgery for heart disease receive it more frequently than heart patients in countries with nationalized insurance. For example, twice as many bypass procedures and four times as many angioplasties are performed per capita in the US as in the UK. A separate comparison between Canadian and American patients showed the same pattern: of patients diagnosed with coronary heart disease, a higher percentage of US patients actually received treatment.

                But is there evidence that Americans with heart disease actually benefit from receiving treatment more frequently compared to patients elsewhere? The answer is yes. Specifically, the US shows a significantly greater reduction in death rates from heart disease than Western European nations, the European Union as a whole, and Japan.

                A separate study showed that Americans had a significantly longer five-year survival after acute heart attack than Canadians. The authors concluded that “our findings are strongly suggestive of a survival advantage for the US cohort based on more aggressive revascularization.”

                Another comparison study showed that fewer Americans than UK residents die (per capita) from heart attack despite the far higher burden of risk factors in Americans for these fatal events. In fact, the heart disease mortality rate in England was 36 percent higher than that in the US. These superior outcomes from US medical care are particularly impressive, considering that American patients have far more risk factors (diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease) that worsen outcomes and death rates after heart attack and after heart surgery.

                The US shows a far greater reduction in death rates from stroke, the third leading cause of death and the leading cause of disability in adults in the US and most Western European nations, than almost all Western European nations and the European Union overall.

                One reason for better results of stroke care is that modern therapy has been more widely available and was available years earlier in the US than in countries with nationalized insurance. Even given the disadvantages inherent to American patients (physically inactive, obese, and with high blood pressure – all significantly higher than comparison countries), studies still prove better medical care for stroke in the US.

                What about treatment for chronic diseases like hypertension and diabetes?

                To assess the quality of care for high blood pressure, or hypertension, we must look at two sets of data. First, once hypertension is diagnosed, is it treated or does it go untreated? About two-thirds to three-fourths of patients with high blood pressure in Canada and Europe were left untreated, compared to less than half in the US, with England having the lowest level of treatment, followed by Sweden and Germany, Spain, Italy and Canada, all far behind the US in a comparison study. In a different study, 88.3 percent of patients aged 18 to 64 in the US diagnosed as hypertensive received treatment, compared to 84.1 percent of the Canadians with hypertension, a pattern also seen in older patients.

                Second, hypertension treatment in the US has been more successful in controlling blood pressure than elsewhere. One comparison showed that control in treated patients at 140/90 blood pressure, as well as at a higher standard of 160/95, was highest in the US, outperforming Canada, England, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Spain.

                In a separate analysis of over 21,000 patients already visiting doctors for hypertension in five Western European nations (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK) and the US, the best rate of success was in the US (63 percent), compared with 31 percent to 46 percent of patients in the European countries. The facts show that more successful blood pressure control was seen in the US for both women and men under treatment, differences that are statistically significant. As for why, the conclusion by the authors is not surprising: “lower treatment thresholds and more intensive treatment contribute to better hypertension control in the United States” …that is, because of the delivery of better medical care in America.

                No disease has more far-reaching and more serious consequences than diabetes, a disease near the top of the list of the world’s most important health challenges, fueled by a relentless rise in obesity. The risk for death in diabetics is about twice that without diabetes, and disease outcomes are also significantly worse. While “type 2” diabetes (90 to 95 percent of diabetes) is preventable by an individual’s own choices (weight loss and increased exercise), medical care focuses on control of blood glucose to limit organ damage and complications.

                Receiving diabetes care is the first concern, and then attaining control is the second. In 2011, the WHO determined that of seven countries, the US had the highest proportion of adult diabetics who were actually receiving treatment for their known diabetes, as well as for their hypertension and for their high cholesterol.

                A 2007 comparison of Canadians and Americans showed the same -- a higher percentage of American diabetics than Canadian diabetics actually receive treatment. In the same WHO analysis, the US also performed best by several different quality measures, including blood glucose control, as well as effective management for all three key factors in diabetics (blood glucose, blood pressure, and blood cholesterol), approximately twice the success of England and Scotland. Here’s the bottom line: if you had diabetes, you were more likely to receive treatment and be treated successfully for the disease and the important risk factors for its serious sequelae in the US than in any other country studied.

                Objectively, the world’s leading medical journals are filled with studies demonstrating the excellence of American medical care in comparison to other systems more heavily controlled by government bodies, the very systems held as models by those asserting the need for radical change to US health care.

                These studies verify better survival from serious diseases like cancer, better access to treatment for the most important chronic diseases, and superior control of diseases that cause disability and death and are themselves significant risk factors for other deadly diseases … all this even though US life expectancy and disease outcomes are worsened because Americans harbor more risk factors than all other countries.

                http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...esnt-know.html

                © Copyright Original Source


                "Free" healthcare? You know the saying: you get what you pay for.
                Well, the "foxnews" source, coupled with it being clearly an opinion piece, set my "possible bias" radar pinging. So I read through the article, and wanted to review the sources cited, and I didn't find a single source or study specifically cited or linked. Indeed, the only link I found was the the author's own book, at the bottom of the article, and it takes you to a page where you can buy the book.

                So, I cannot say that the numbers were made up or that the presentation is biased. I also cannot say it is not biased. I can say I am skeptical, and I am not inclined to go chasing down every claim made when the author cannot be bothered to cite sources or link to the related studies from which the numbers were pulled.
                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  That is the case at present in parts of rural health care in the USA among the low income, and no emergency room within 50 to 100 miles.
                  I never inferred that there aren't problems with the American health care system. However, the solution is not to change to socialized medical care. There must be another solution that would work better than any that are currently in place. All socialization does is throw taxpayer dollars down a bottomless hole.


                  Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    Well, the "foxnews" source, coupled with it being clearly an opinion piece, set my "possible bias" radar pinging. So I read through the article, and wanted to review the sources cited, and I didn't find a single source or study specifically cited or linked. Indeed, the only link I found was the the author's own book, at the bottom of the article, and it takes you to a page where you can buy the book.

                    So, I cannot say that the numbers were made up or that the presentation is biased. I also cannot say it is not biased. I can say I am skeptical, and I am not inclined to go chasing down every claim made when the author cannot be bothered to cite sources or link to the related studies from which the numbers were pulled.
                    I really, really hope that you get what you wish for.


                    Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                      There must be another solution that would work better than any that are currently in place.
                      Why? Are you saying of the dozens of advanced countries with dozens of different healthcare models, none of them have ever discovered the One Great System that you believe exists but have no evidence that it does?

                      All socialization does is throw taxpayer dollars down a bottomless hole.
                      I wouldn't call the well-being and health of citizens a bottomless hole.
                      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        So, two things. First, there ACA was structured to provide significant support for those who could not afford health insurance. That was one of the key reasons for the law in the first place. If a person applied, and could not afford it, their income is used to determine what they will actually pay and the government paid the rest. Second, there is a long list of hardship exemptions that would apply if someone did not have the insurance, and poverty level is one of the items on the list. So this appears to be a claim without a lot of merit.
                        A lot of folks living paycheck to paycheck fell through the cracks and discovered the hard way that despite the rhetoric it wasn't all that easy getting an exemption


                        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        Pure speculation. I have no idea where you could possibly go to find any data that would support this position, other than to point to the military budgets of various countries - which would be correlation and not causation. Personally, I think we put far too much money into our own military than we should - especially when it is the only part of our government (outside of black ops) that has successfully dodged a thorough audit now for over half a century.
                        It is hardly speculation to say if someone else is paying the bill for your defense that this allows you to spend your money elsewhere and if you had to pay for it yourself there won't be as much money for these other things.


                        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        Yeah - this is a common complaint/tactic of the right...
                        My favorite carpism. Let's all say it together folks, it's nothing but a right wing meme

                        00000000000000ars8a.gif
                        If handwaving off things you don't like was an
                        Olympic sport, carpe would easily take the gold

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                          Second, there is a long list of hardship exemptions that would apply if someone did not have the insurance, and poverty level is one of the items on the list. So this appears to be a claim without a lot of merit.
                          If there is "no merit" here, then why was I unable to get an exemption despite at times not even having money for food?
                          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            If there is "no merit" here, then why was I unable to get an exemption despite at times not even having money for food?
                            I'm guessing this was because the Republican politicians in your state choose to opt-out of the medicaid expansion, which meant you didn't qualify for the subsidies?
                            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                              I'm guessing this was because the Republican politicians in your state choose to opt-out of the medicaid expansion, which meant you didn't qualify for the subsidies?
                              This is the actual answer. carpe's post seemed to imply that they were a panacea that would prevent anybody from slipping through the cracks.
                              "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                                I never inferred that there aren't problems with the American health care system. However, the solution is not to change to socialized medical care. There must be another solution that would work better than any that are currently in place. All socialization does is throw taxpayer dollars down a bottomless hole.
                                Yes something the Democrats fight against everytime it is brought up Tort reform. get rid of frivolous lawsuits and you cut the cost of malpractice insurance which will cut the cost of health care.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 09:58 AM
                                4 responses
                                16 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                195 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                422 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Working...
                                X