Universal Healthcare & Canada -- Canadiens as to please explain

[LadyJeanne]

I wouldn't wish MS on anyone.

One of my dearest friends lives with MS. I see how hard it is, and she's also one of the lucky ones. I'm truly sorry for what you're going through.

 

[rgraham666]

*HUGS* for Jammies.

Alex, you have to stop reading the liberal media. They pick the worst spots of a system and write it up as if it were the normal state of affairs.

 

[cloudy]

That is an unfair summation of the fact I don't want my child's health care to be worse than it is right now. LJ and you are having fun twisting my words. If anyone WANTS to have increased wait times and poor services there is something wrong with them. If my daughter hadn't been treated as quickly as she was, she could very well be dead, selfish me for being happy she was treated quickly.


I'm done with this, so feel free to keep kicking me if it makes you happy.

~Alex

and selfish me for wanting my son's heart surgery to be done.

You don't have a monopoly on pain, you know. How dare you assume that you and yours are the only ones that have had to deal with anything like that.

 

[amicus]

Not that it matters, but the usual socialist ploy of painting freedom as discompassionate becomes tedious after a while.

Concern and care for illness and injury is a personal characteristic displayed by loved ones, family members, friends, relatives and the scope of those with whom you make a community.

Government is an organization of paid employees, bureaucrats, who follow written guidelines and laws set down by that community.

You err, terribly, when you expect government to be compassionate towards the individual; it is outside the province of automatons.

In a free market system, supplying medical care or any other commodity, you at least have the possibility of finding honorable people who do have feelings about your condition and concerns.

I was so pleased with the doctor and nurse that cared for me that I went back just to deliver a copy of one of my books in gratitude. They are still my friends along with having a professional relationship.

This foggy notion that socialized medicine is a compassionate effort is pure balderdash. Both the quality and quantity of medical care declines; the best professionals migrate elsewhere as they will not perform under a slave system.

Most of you appear to be 'freeloaders' who simply want something for nothing as if just being born gave you the right to demand service from others.

For the losers out there who are not competent enough to compete freely with your peers to achieve your goals, move to Canada, they have no honor at all and will welcome fellow bloodsuckers from anywhere.

amicus...

 

[LadyJeanne]

Most of you appear to be 'freeloaders' who simply want something for nothing as if just being born gave you the right to demand service from others.

And what exactly gave you that idea? Alex feeling it's her right to have the best care for her child and too bad for the 45M Americans who get nothing under our current system? Jammies, who has to pay $1300 for her MS meds per month and whose insurance company just changed their policies and reduced her benefits? Cloudy, whose family is uninsured despite being working and taxpaying members of society? The Persian Gulf Vets who are uninsured and get no VA benefits - are they wanting something for just being born? Or I, who have plenty of insurance and have contributed to my company's 48% growth in annual revenues, but am concerned about my aging parents?

Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. Keep riding - if you're lucky, you won't end up getting thrown and end up broke trying to pay your medical bills.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I still think that the best approach is to provide it to those currently uninsured, not to take away the private health care that others have. States should follow Arizona's and Vermont's lead.

 

[amicus]

And what exactly gave you that idea? Alex feeling it's her right to have the best care for her child and too bad for the 45M Americans who get nothing under our current system? Jammies, who has to pay $1300 for her MS meds per month and whose insurance company just changed their policies and reduced her benefits? Cloudy, whose family is uninsured despite being working and taxpaying members of society? The Persian Gulf Vets who are uninsured and get no VA benefits - are they wanting something for just being born? Or I, who have plenty of insurance and have contributed to my company's 48% growth in annual revenues, but am concerned about my aging parents?

Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. Keep riding - if you're lucky, you won't end up getting thrown and end up broke trying to pay your medical bills.

Now, now LadyJeanne...don't show your claws for everyone to see. This is a discussion about socialized medicine, universal health care, not a personal vendetta against someone who advocates a free market rather than a slave society.

You always dip down into the subjective vituperation of a barnyard dog fight defending his territory.

I think a system that provides affordable adequate health care for all is something to work towards. In doing so, I maintain that we must keep to the basic traditions of a free people and allow them to choose.

There is no choice for patients, doctors and other medical personnel in a government run system, it is all about the use force and I always, much to your chagrin, oppose the use of force in human affairs.

Amicus...

 

[LadyJeanne]

You always dip down into the subjective vituperation of a barnyard dog fight defending his territory.

Someone has to do it, lest so-called free market advocates continue to leave 45M people out in the cold as they have been doing for years. Those people don't have lobbyists and continue to be unrepresented, unlike the so-called free market corporations, pharmas and insurers that receive tax breaks.

 

[minsue]

You always dip down into the subjective vituperation of a barnyard dog fight defending his territory.

Ahem.....pot, I hate to tell you, but you're black

Brief pickings of "subjective vituperation" (though I'd have called it vitriol, meself ) just from one post ~

Most of you appear to be 'freeloaders' who simply want something for nothing

For the losers out there who are not competent enough to compete freely with your peers to achieve your goals

no honor at all

fellow bloodsuckers

If only the rest of us could be so honorable and civilized as you, gentle Ami.

 

[cloudy]

Ahem.....pot, I hate to tell you, but you're black

Brief pickings of "subjective vituperation" (though I'd have called it vitriol, meself ) just from one post ~

If only the rest of us could be so honorable and civilized as you, gentle Ami.

 

[Liar]

I think a system that provides affordable adequate health care for all is something to work towards. In doing so, I maintain that we must keep to the basic traditions of a free people and allow them to choose.

And I maintain that freedom of choice is worthless without decent options.

In a free and deregulated healthcare market the economically potent consumer will have a good selection of decent options to choose from. The economically weak consumer will not be interresting for those free doctors to cater. Even if there is a demand for healthcare, there will not be a supply, (except the odd idealist) because it's not worth the long and expensive medical education and investment to run a business that pays shit. So the options available, if there are any, will be sub standard.

And where that leads, with health issues among the unemployed and less paid workers, one can only speculate. But it's a fair guess that for the good of the society at large, those people need to stay reasonably healthy.

And wether you like it or not, amicus, you live in a society.

 

[minsue]

And wether you like it or not, amicus, you live in a society.

*gasping and pointing*

Blaspheeeeemer!

 

[matriarch]

Ahem.....pot, I hate to tell you, but you're black

Brief pickings of "subjective vituperation" (though I'd have called it vitriol, meself ) just from one post ~


If only the rest of us could be so honorable and civilized as you, gentle Ami.

My heroine.

I think I must forward the compassionate, hard working, get-nothing-without-paying-for-it Ami's post about the 'lack of compassion' in a government/automaton run health system, to the many friends of mine, men and women, who chose to do nursing, within the national health system in the UK, simply because they thought it was the best way to help the most people, and most of them at great financial hardship. Strange how their innate compassion for others (not necessarily of their families and immediate community) seems to dictate their lives. I'm sure they'll be delighted to hear what hard-nosed, non-compassionate, slaves they really are. And this line especially, "This foggy notion that socialized medicine is a compassionate effort is pure balderdash. Both the quality and quantity of medical care declines; the best professionals migrate elsewhere as they will not perform under a slave system. " will absolutely delight them, I'm sure.

And all the senior consultants, who spend part of their time working within the National Health System, I'm sure, would be similarly impressed to hear what money/greed driven creatures they are.

I do believe that our beloved Ami has insulting arrogance down to the finest of arts. Would that I could emulate his skill. Alas, I appear to be far too concerned with the feelings of others. Shame.

But you just carry on, you silly little man, I'm sure you will continue to show me and the rest of the AH-ers, how selfish, self-centred and egotistical the human psyche can become. Let me know when you think you can get no lower on the scale of humanity, then maybe I'll start reading your worthless posts again.

Good day to you.

 

[LadyJeanne]

And I maintain that freedom of choice is worthless without decent options.

In a free and deregulated healthcare market the economically potent consumer will have a good selection of decent options to choose from. The economically weak consumer will not be interresting for those free doctors to cater. Even if there is a demand for healthcare, there will not be a supply, (except the odd idealist) because it's not worth the long and expensive medical education and investment to run a business that pays shit. So the options available, if there are any, will be sub standard.

And where that leads, with health issues among the unemployed and less paid workers, one can only speculate. But it's a fair guess that for the good of the society at large, those people need to stay reasonably healthy.

And wether you like it or not, amicus, you live in a society.

Here's where it leads:

Lack of Health Insurance Limits the Care Patients Receive

The uninsured do not receive the health care they need. The IOM found that lack of health insurance reduces access to care and places the uninsured at greater risk of poor health and premature death.

* Less preventive care. Uninsured adults are less likely to receive preventive services such as screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer. When they do receive these preventive services, they receive them less frequently than recommended.

* Higher cancer mortality. Uninsured cancer patients, on average, die sooner than insured cancer patients, largely because of delays in diagnosis.

* Inadequate care for chronic diseases. Uninsured adults with chronic diseases - such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, end-stage renal disease, HIV infection, and mental illness - are less likely to receive appropriate care to manage their health conditions.

* Second-rate hospital care. Uninsured patients who are hospitalized for a range of conditions are more likely to die in the hospital, receive fewer services, and to experience substandard care and injury when admitted to a hospital than insured patients.

* Inferior care for children. Uninsured children are more likely to receive no or delayed care than insured children, which increases their risk of hospitalization for conditions that could have been treated earlier without hospitalization.

* Short- and longer-term effects of uninsurance. Even relatively short periods of uninsurance (i.e., one to four years) decrease the health status of uninsured adults. Studies over a longer period (i.e., from five to 17 years) find that uninsured adults are at a higher risk of dying than insured adults.


And for society:

Broader Community

The negative effects of lacking health insurance extend beyond the uninsured individual. The IOM found that lack of insurance also affects community health care institutions and providers.

* Financial pressures on health care providers. The uninsured use fewer services and are less able to pay the full cost of care, which creates financial pressures and lowers revenues for health care providers in high-uninsured areas. To avoid the burden of uncompensated care, physicians and hospitals in these areas may reduce services, scale-back staffing, limit hours, relocate or close.

* Limited availability of health care services. Hospitals in urban areas with high uninsured rates have fewer hospital beds per capita; offer fewer services for vulnerable populations (e.g., psychiatric, alcohol and chemical dependence, and AIDS care); and are less likely to offer trauma and burn care. Hospitals in rural areas with high uninsured rates have lower financial margins; have fewer beds in their intensive care units; and offer fewer psychiatric inpatient services.

* Fewer resources for other public health initiatives. In areas with high uninsured rates, public health departments may have to divert resources away from public health activities that benefit the entire community in order to provide care to the uninsured. Communities with high uninsured rates also may be at greater risk of acquiring communicable diseases, which could affect both insured and uninsured individuals living in that community.

http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=fs-108-1-355

 

[amicus]

Hello MinSue...Matriarch....

"...I do believe that our beloved Ami has insulting arrogance down to the finest of arts. Would that I could emulate his skill. Alas, I appear to be far too concerned with the feelings of others. Shame.

But you just carry on, you silly little man, I'm sure you will continue to show me and the rest of the AH-ers, how selfish, self-centred and egotistical the human psyche can become. Let me know when you think you can get no lower on the scale of humanity, then maybe I'll start reading your worthless posts again.

Good day to you...."


"... selfish, self-centred and egotistical..."

The thus described Amicus struts to center stage...

I used to be a rather cuddlesom fella towards the ladies before I embarked upon a career in talk radio and the viscious left wing ladies came out snarling and hissing.

That was back in the early days of Me Too N.O.W. organizations, the anti vietnam crowd, to abortionists and the femi-nazi's...fella had to watch his back...they shot a bullet hole in the radio station studio and regularly threw eggs when I spoke in public. Quite humorous, actually.

And it is seldom only about the issue; it includes a deeper based hatred of both masculinity and independent free thinkers.

Most left wing thinkers seem to think they have such a fine idea about how the world should run. Many can see a mellow socialist paradise if only those damned independent arrogant bastards who insist on choosing their own life style would shut the fuck up.

I have heard the socialist dreams justified time and time again, how the end (total control and slavery) justifies the means (limiting human freedom),

I mainly address my thoughts to men as women usually get captured when they squat to pee.

Thus when I say, 'it is the nature of man to strive for freedom,' I mean just that, men. Women seem to usually want a sprinkling of control in their lives, since they were handed from father to husband usually as property.

Women can't handle the concept of freedom of choice and an independent life. That makes sense, it becomes difficult to function along about the 6th month of pregnancy and those pernishess children, once you feed them, they tend to want to eat all the time.

Perhaps that is why, for most of human history, women were indeed second class citizens with limited rights in society, they earned it.

Now, a socialist slave society does work, for a while but the cost in human life is usually quite high as any who object are simply disposed of in rather nefarious methods.

This insane idea that if you could control and direct the efforts of all men in society, you can build a paradise, is akin to believing in god and sacrificing your life in hopes of a post mortem reward...really silly and insane.

I have an unbridled hatred for those who advocate enslaving those who produce. Ayn Rand had it right, men of the mind should go on strike, leave all you seconder handers to produce your own wealth.

It takes a great deal of time and effort to learn and practice medicine; it takes a very special person to administer to the health of others. And you want to take the life of that doctor and direct him to do your bidding as if he were a raw recruit in the army?

Surely you jest.

Doctors and men of intellect in all the professions, bailed out of Russia and later Germany and England when the bureaucrats nationalized their professions.

Those silly Brits actually passed laws prohibiting doctors and scientists from leaving the country and confiscated their wealth if they did.

You may think you can justify confiscating the life of others for your goals, I am one who will remind you that you cannot.


amicus...

 

[cloudy]

ami, ami, ami....

Just what the hell am I gonna do with you?

Whenever you get cornered in an argument, you fall back on that tired old standy of yours that women are less than men.

I'm come to the conclusion, therefore, that we scare the shit out of you. Why?

Just what is so scary about us?

Is it the fact that we're just as smart as you, if not more so?

Is it that, barring physical activity, we can do anything you can do, if not do it better?

Just what in the world scares you so badly?

 

[Liar]

I have heard the socialist dreams justified time and time again, how the end (total control and slavery) justifies the means (limiting human freedom),

Um..."limiting human freedom" and "total control and slavery" would both be means.

The end being something along the lines of "a society where everyone is equally granted the opportunity to life and good health". (Or maybe a term more to your ideaology's tastes: "Economic homogenization") Get your basic definitions straight before you open your mouth.

 

[elsol]

http://www.conservativecat.com/mt/archives/2004/11/111504_capitali_1.html

The Flash is interesting.

I do agree that government will have to push down demand somehow.... or tax me a fuck of a lot... which is bad-bad.

Yes... I'm fucking selfish. I don't want to pay more taxes than I already do.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[amicus]

Cloudy, Cloudy, Cloudy...what the hell am I gonna do with you....


Smiles...you most likely do not wish to hear my answer, about why men fear women, but, since you asked....


Women have no morals and no ethics. None.

Women are subjective, emotional, and can be seduced by a bouquet of flowers.

From Cleopatra to Helen of Troy and far beyond, women are treacherous, sneaky, underhanded and evil in pursuit of their desires.

Bible lore is rife with examples of promiscuous women corrupting the gentle society of men.

Women, beginning as young girls, are dangerous, daring, frivolous, mischievous and gain great pleasure from getting a fellow in trouble.

Being weaker physically, women are left to fall back upon their wily ways to survive. I never really blamed them for that until they started wearing mens clothes, smoking cigars and claimed equality.

I could write pages and pages for you, maybe even a book on the subject of the differences, throughout history, between man and woman.

Even from the little I said above, you can see the truth all around you. You know as well as I do, that I have, although briefly, accurately described the actions of 'some' women, throughout history and right now in current times. You know it and you use it and at the same time, like so many, deny it.

Thas Okay...(I still want you anyway)

amicus skips down the lane avoiding hen fruit...

 

[elsol]

*cough*cough*

Ayn Rand was a woman.

You know... one of those 'squatters' and type who can't handle freedom.

Nietsche... now THERE was a man's man.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[amicus]

So is Ann Coulter and I want her too.


amicus...

 

[elsol]

Bible lore is rife with examples of promiscuous women corrupting the gentle society of men.

amicus skips down the lane avoiding hen fruit...

*cough*cough*

You're an atheist.

You can't pull the bible out in your argument... it invalidates everything you said.

Try again.


Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[elsol]

I have an unbridled hatred for those who advocate enslaving those who produce.

But not those who produce children, who carry them for nine months, and feed them.

Those you have no problem enslaving.

Awesome! I still got dibs on Jessica Simpson.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[amicus]

Um..."limiting human freedom" and "total control and slavery" would both be means.

The end being something along the lines of "a society where everyone is equally granted the opportunity to life and good health". (Or maybe a term more to your ideaology's tastes: "Economic homogenization") Get your basic definitions straight before you open your mouth.

You know exactly my meaning. You dance a fine dance around the issue.

Just tell me this: Assume I am a young doctor in my late 20's or early 30's. All my life has been in pursuit of knowledge and a medical license to practice.

I did not use government funds for my education, I specialized in the field of my choice.

My desire now is to practice my profession in a manner I choose.

Now, my friend, you tell me how you justify conscripting me into your 'universal medicine(socialized medicine) scheme when I want only a private practice where-in I choose my patients, my income and my abode.

Or do I not have the right to such choices?

amicus...

 

[elsol]

You know exactly my meaning. You dance a fine dance around the issue.

Just tell me this: Assume I am a young doctor in my late 20's or early 30's. All my life has been in pursuit of knowledge and a medical license to practice.

I did not use government funds for my education, I specialized in the field of my choice.

My desire now is to practice my profession in a manner I choose.

Now, my friend, you tell me how you justify conscripting me into your 'universal medicine(socialized medicine) scheme when I want only a private practice where-in I choose my patients, my income and my abode.

Or do I not have the right to such choices?

amicus...

Come on, ami...

You know... every now and then some people got it suck up until a new system is in full bloom.

I'm sure some southerners were REALLY bummed about losing slaves. I mean they'd grown up with darkie getting them everything they needed and when they were feeling peckish they had a human whipping post.

They got over their loss.

Okay, some of them did.

Sincerely,
ElSol