American Third Position Political Party
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: The detached observer, or semi-bad day in the mountains
Next: Anyone here use a Panasonic DMW-LT55 Teleconverter?
From: Chris H on 24 Jan 2010 05:36 In message <4b5b5dc9$1(a)news.x-privat.org>, rendition <ren(a)stimpy.org> writes >Ray Fischer wrote: >> tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> >> >>>> According to an in depth discussion in another group The UK >>>>actually >>>> spends less per person on health care (including dental) in the UK than >>>> the USA spends per person. Also it covers EVERY person in the UK, not >>>> just 80% as per the USA. >>> Where do you get your 80% figure? Everyone in the US is covered by >>> some sort of health care program. >> Nope. > >See: emergency room. > >>> It may be a private insurance >>> program, Medicare, Medicaid, or some other government program. >> Sorry, but there are about 30+ million people in the US with no >>coverage at all. > >See; emergency room. Where do you go for non emergency medical help if you have no insurance? -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 24 Jan 2010 05:37 In message <4b5b6002$1(a)news.x-privat.org>, rendition <ren(a)stimpy.org> writes >Ray Fischer wrote: >> rendition <ren(a)stimpy.org> wrote: >>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> >>>>>> According to an in depth discussion in another group The UK actually >>>>>> spends less per person on health care (including dental) in the UK than >>>>>> the USA spends per person. Also it covers EVERY person in the UK, not >>>>>> just 80% as per the USA. >>>>> Where do you get your 80% figure? Everyone in the US is covered by >>>>> some sort of health care program. >>>> Nope. >>> See: emergency room. >> See: Idiot rightard who doesn't realize that emergency room bills >>must be paid. >> > >Well of course they must, but then I never made such a statement, did I >lying Ray? > >You're a real bucket of barf. So who has to pay the emergency room bills? What bills? -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 24 Jan 2010 05:35 In message <68qml5128fvmmbghtbb6p7sdh2ot7sitmh(a)4ax.com>, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> writes >On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 17:31:05 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> >wrote: > >>In message <4b5b0a58$0$30934$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, Peter >><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> writes >>>"Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message news:sdzdhdCBKvWLFAjF@p >>>haedsys.demon.co.uk... >>> >>>> As I discovered this morning (and from the last 50 years of personal >>>> experience) it is not rationed. The "rationed" and "death panels" is a >>>> myth concocted by the US anti-Obama people. It is not something Brits >>>> would recognise. >>>> >>> >>>Basically true, >> >>It is true. I am British, living in the UK and had cause to use the NHS >>this morning. >> >>>but many myths are based upon some fact. Health care is rationed, to >>>some extent. I know of no system that gives unlimited treatment to all >>>comers. >> >>The UK tries to as do many other systems. It does fall over sometimes in >>practice. >> >>> Common sense tells us that is fiscally impossible. Here in the US, >>>under our current system rationing is partially based upon ability to >>>pay. >> >>Quite so. >> >>>No one really believes that the medical treatment given to our poverty >>>level patients is the same as for those who can afford to pay. >> >>In the UK there is no difference. > >If there is no difference, then how can for-pay hospitals and doctors >stay in business? No one would pay for private treatment if free >treatment was equal to for-pay treatment. The *medical* treatment is the same. The environment is more like a hotel and fits in around your schedule. For many in business they want what the want when they want it. SO they pay for a nice room, at a time convenient to them with visiting hours of when they want etc. >You have a fairly good system over there. Don't over-egg the cake, >though. It does have many problems. It is not perfect. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: Chris H on 24 Jan 2010 05:46 In message <4b5bc99e$0$1618$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, Ray Fischer <rfischer(a)sonic.net> writes >ceviche <raw(a)fish.sea> wrote: >>Frank Sereno <fsereno(a)domain.invalid> wrote: > >>> One thing to point out is that the source that keeps being quoted >>> for the dental problems in the UK is a member of the opposition >>> party. He is going to make every effort to make things look bad >>> because it is beneficial to his political party. I've come to the >>> point where I believe all politicians are liars and crooks. >> >>Can you deny factually, or merely shoot the messenger? > >Easy. > >Look at life expectancy and infant mortality by country. Those are >good measures of how well a nation's health care system works. > >The US does not rank very highly, well below other industrial nations, >even while paying twice as much to cover fewer people. Now that is a fact. The reason why it pays a lot more for a lot less is it is commercial and the insurance companies are involved. They all want to make a profit. Prices for medical care are artificially high to make a profit. State medical systems don't need to make a profit. Also they don't charge inflated costs. This would make them about 30% better value to start with just on approximate profit margins) never mind inflated costs. That said the NHS is not perfect either. However whilst the discussion rages in the UK 100% of the population get health care and in the USA about a fifth of the population have none. I wonder why those who oppose the Governments "free" medical plans want to stop about a fifth of the US population having medical care... That is a far more effective hit on the US than AL Qeada have managed so far. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: tony cooper on 24 Jan 2010 08:08
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:31:43 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote: >In message <4b5b7a92$0$1677$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, Ray Fischer ><rfischer(a)sonic.net> writes >>tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> In the UK they would if they were fit enough for the operation and it >>>>>>>> would improve their life. That said AFAIK all patients get screened for >>>>>>>> operations as no one wants to do pointless operations. However these >>>>>>>> decisions are taken on medical grounds. >>>>>>> That's rationing of the pie. The customer doesn't decide, the government >>>>>>> employee does. >>>>>> Not at all the medical staff decide on MEDICAL grounds. >>> >>>If you have a bum knee, some doctor in the NHS will decide if you will >>>get a replacement joint or not. >> >>And in the US it's the insurance company that decides. > >So the UK is a medical decision and the US is a commercial one. Is Ray Fischer someone you believe? Insurance companies do not make decisions about whether or not a client has a knee replacement. Ever. They only have a say-so with procedures that are considered to be elective. An elective procedure is something like a gastric bypass. An obese patient may want a gastric bypass, but the insurance company may not pay for the procedure unless the obesity is considered to be life-threatening or tied to other medical complications. Insurance companies make decisions about how long a patient's hospital stay can be and how much physical therapy will be covered. Those are commercial decisions, but the insurance company cannot refuse to cover a non-elective procedure. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |