Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Seems like what you're arguing. You want us NOT to have a good system, or else Mexicans will cross the border to try to use it. Right?Text book strawman. :sorry1:
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Seems like what you're arguing. You want us NOT to have a good system, or else Mexicans will cross the border to try to use it. Right?Text book strawman. :sorry1:
And I suppose you have data to support this baseless assertion?autodidact, your missing the point, we pay more because we have the best doctors. We do, you pay for what you get.
Here's a question for you: who is more satisfied with their health care, Canadians or Americans? If the answer turns out to be Canadians, would that affect your views?P.S. Canada's healthcare sucks badly, and we are suppose to be like them?
You have data to support this? Do American doctors make more than French doctors? Do they provide better care? Then why do French people live longer than Americans?Under a NHP that saves tons of money according to Autodidact, someone comes out holding the short stick. She says I'm not following the math. More people will be seen and it will cost less.
Doctors will make less. That is the bottom line.
Have you noticed your tendency to make unsupported assertions and then consider them to be proven? If you want us to accept this, provide data to support it. For example, are doctors fleeing France to work in the U.S.? Have you ever been seen by a French doctor? Dutch? German? I haven't. I've been seen by a few from India--that's about it. Where do you speculate American doctors will flee to, Mexico?The best doctors from around the world will have no incentive to come to America. Not only will there be longer lines because of more people being seen, there will be less doctors and the best will have left the country to work elsewhere for the highest bidder.
But I don't have to shuffle figures to make it look good. It is good; which is what the figures show. What figures do you think would be relevant? Yes, you're right, it will take time to realize the full benefit of universal coverage, so the sooner we make the change, the better.Anyone who supports a NHP only focuses on getting everyone covered. Shuffling figures to make it look good is dishonest. You cannot get more for less. That is simple math. All these savings will come over time. People don't get well overnight. Preventive medicine will not see any benefits for at least a generation.
Why do we need jobs if the government is going to give us everything? If I am sick, I don't work anyway.
The bottom line is this, people feel entitled to health care whether they can afford it or not.
uh, explain? This was my first post on the subject, and no, I wasn't proved wrong, its true, we've got the best in the world.
Based upon his arguments, I strongly suspect that this is the real reason he is so opposed to it.so the sooner we make the change, the better.
No, it's not. Have you read the thread? There's lots of good cites and data in this thread that absolutely prove that you are flat out wrong. The U.S. most emphatically does NOT have the best health care system in the world, France does. What data are you citing in support of your false assertion? Or have you personally sampled the health systems of every country in the world?
Wow, try reading my post again, I'll repeat it in bold to compensate your poor vision...
WE HAVE THE BEST DOCTORS, do you see the word 'healthcare' in that sentence at all?
NO,
Wow, try reading my post again, I'll repeat it in bold to compensate your poor vision...
WE HAVE THE BEST DOCTORS, do you see the word 'healthcare' in that sentence at all?
NO,
I think it would have to be that our health care system is so screwed up that we manage to take the best doctors in the world and still provide inferior care.So your theory is that you have the best doctors, but they just choose to provide inferior health care? Great theory.
I think it would have to be that our health care system is so screwed up that we manage to take the best doctors in the world and still provide inferior care.
If you stated a single face anywhere in this thread, I must have missed it. What fact was that? Because so far all I've seen is your unfounded and false opinions. For example, you keep saying that the U.S. has the best doctors. On what do you base this? Have you read some international surveys? Have you been treated by doctors in various countries? Or did you possibly just make it up?your right, our system is messed up, but that doesn't mean we don't have the best doctors. its just common sense,
I never had a theory, I just stated a simple fact, nothing more,
Here's a question for you: who is more satisfied with their health care, Canadians or Americans? If the answer turns out to be Canadians, would that affect your views?
Autodidact, I don't believe I have called anyone a liar on RF ever as I recall. Liar is a word I seldom ever use. I have never meant any disrespect towards you and I regret saying anything that would have given you that impression.
You all seem to believe this is a no brainer and I am somehow too dense to see the same conclusions you do.
For the life of me, I cannot see how more people are going to use the same available amount of services without waiting longer and costing us less to boot. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is, that is all I am saying.
Either doctors are going to work harder for less money or a NHP is going to cost us more than you think it is. That is all I am saying.
O.K. understood.Autodidact, I don't believe I have called anyone a liar on RF ever as I recall. Liar is a word I seldom ever use. I have never meant any disrespect towards you and I regret saying anything that would have given you that impression.
Not at all. To tell the truth, Rick, until you said on another thread that universal health care would raise our taxes, I really didn't know the facts myself. I had no real position on the issue. In researching it, I was surprised to find out that countries with universal health care spend dramatically less than we do. At first I couldn't understand how that can be. So I don't think you're dense at all. It is counterintuitive that covering everybody costs less than covering 85% of the people. It actually costs us money NOT to cover people, and costs us more money only to partially cover most of us. Why is this?You all seem to believe this is a no brainer and I am somehow too dense to see the same conclusions you do.
So, what, the WHO is lying? The U.N. is lying? The governments are all lying, and nobody noticed? It's not too good to be true, it's just good, and true.For the life of me, I cannot see how more people are going to use the same available amount of services without waiting longer and costing us less to boot. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is, that is all I am saying.
Do the math. What if you just take the 1/3 (or whatever it is) cut that the insurance industry makes and give it to the doctors? Shazzam, more money, just like magic. I ask you again, why would it cost Americans more than Canadians? Are we sicker? Why would it cost us more than Spaniards? Are we dumber? My daddy used to say that smart people learn from other people's experience. Why can't we learn from the Australian's experience?Either doctors are going to work harder for less money or a NHP is going to cost us more than you think it is. That is all I am saying.
That is all I am saying.
Drive up the national debt.Open question to all:
Name one single area where the federal government provides something cost effectively and better than private industry.