monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@oralloy,

Again, with the oralloy uniformed opinion.

People who know a wee bit about this, people who don't rely on sound bites from wacky right wing sites for their information, disagree with your badly misinformed notion.

Quote:

A National Health Program for the United States: A Physicians' Proposal

Abstract:

Our health care system is failing. Tens of millions of people are uninsured, costs are skyrocketing, and the bureaucracy is expanding. Patchwork reforms succeed only in exchanging old problems for new ones. It is time for basic change in American medicine. We propose a national health program that would (1) fully cover everyone under a single, comprehensive public insurance program; (2) pay hospitals and nursing homes a total (global) annual amount to cover all operating expenses; (3) fund capital costs through separate appropriations; (4) pay for physiciansÕ services and ambulatory services in any of three ways: through fee-for-service payments with a simplified fee schedule and mandatory acceptance of the national health program payment as the total payment for a service or procedure (assignment), through global budgets for hospitals and clinics employing salaried physicians, or on a per capital basis (capitation); (5) be funded, at least initially, from the same sources as at present, but with payments disbursed from a single pool; and (6) contain costs through savings on billing and bureaucracy, improved health planning, and the ability of the national health program, as the single payer for services to establish overall spending limits. Through this proposal, we hope to provide a pragmatic framework for public debate of fundamental health-policy reform. (N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 102-8.)

http://www.pnhp.org/publications/a_national_health_program_for_the_united_states.php?page=all

1 Reply

According to this imbecile Trumps campaign promise he has a month and a half to completely destroy ISIS. And this is one campaign promise he may actually keep, he’s been such an idiot they all just may die laughing.

0 Replies

@snood,

Very few options in life are either entirely good or bad - I think most people are aware of that.

Medical payouts in countries with single payer systems are a generally constant political issue for their legislators indicating the likely government rationing of care or at least the quality of care. Providing a wage scale that attracts sufficient skilled medical petitioners and specialists is also a common problem , resulting in the rationing of care particularly for serious but treatable diseases. This is evident in the relatively long waits for =specialist appointments that prevail in the UK and Canada. (It is more than coincidental that the most effective way to reduce medical costs with minimal effect on statistical life expectancy is to deny or ration care to the old and very sick.)

Current examples of government managed care, including the VA and most Medicaid programs aren't very encouraging in that regard. Private sector operations of all kinds are generally more efficient, effective and customer oriented than government operations. Certainly the quality of our Public schools isn't a very encouraging indicator for the quality we are likely to see from publically managed health care.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

I'm not a fan of those who routinely attack Waters but her statement's a bit over the top, way over the top, in my opinion. I'll bet it derives, however, from her devotion to this guy:

Quote:

But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

There's a strain of this that runs through Christianity and it's not uncommon in the black church.

1 Reply

@hightor,

First of all it appears the tweet is fraudulent.

Secondly ascribing anything the corrupt demagogue says to her Christian faith absurd.

1 Reply

@snood,

Yes overall.

If the people who live in a country with a single payer healthcare system are generally happy with what they have, that's a "yea."

That doesn't mean, of course, that everyone will have the same response to any of these "things"

In general Brits and Canadians seem to be A-OK with their healthcare systems. Fine and dandy. I'm sure there are some aspects they don't like but nothing is perfect.

People generally get what they want and I'm not about to tell Canadians and Brits that they are foolish for getting what they want, but it doesn't mean that we have to follow their lead.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

And a consequence of the progressive ideological extremism will be the chokehold of government directed bureaucratic oversight and control of every aspect of our lives.

This could be a quote from a John Birch tract.

"control of every aspect of our lives". Like whether your daughter or granddaughter unable to marry another woman? Or have access to abortion or to have her birth control needs covered in her medical plan? Or you grandson being tossed into the clink for choosing a joint over a bottle of scotch? Or your community, in majoritarian consensus, being unable to pass local firearms ordinances they deem necessary? Etc.

Once again, you simply ignore that real world fact that the most free and prosperous nations in the world operate with governmental structures which you insist must axiomatically be described as without liberty and destined to failure. That is nutty. It's John Birch nutty (which is high on the nutty scale).

And as I've pointed out before, your ideological dream (not much different from Norquist's) has no exemplar nation which can offer evidence of workability, either in prosperity, actual liberty, enviable health and welfare of citizens, and relative citizen contentment.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Little to none.
I don't perform on cue.

The cue was for clarity and integrity.

1 Reply

@blatham,

George can answer for himself but I think ascribing to him the notion that governmental structures are a denial of liberty and freedom is just nutty (and high on the blatham nutty scale)

You're wrong, as well, in your final comment. The US has followed george's "dream" with great success for much of its history.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Well we've long ago established I and all my fellow conservatives have no integrity so this was to be expected.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Little to none.

I don't perform on cue.

Yet you demanded it of me, Finn, actually more than once and after I complied, with a separate thread to accomodate you, you never showed.

Why, how can you be such a hypocrite, a flaming one? Don't you think that there is anyone who remembers?

You know that they aren't likely to point a finger at you because you could point it right back. But you know how dishonest you are being and it doesn't bother you in the least.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

A wee bit of honesty from you, Finn, even though it's tongue in cheek.

0 Replies

@camlok,

Nope

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Yeah right, oralloy.

1 Reply

@camlok,

Is that supposed to be an insult?

Oralloy's posts are infinitely more interesting than yours.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

No, just an illustration of how your "proof" resembles oralloy's opinions, which are just repeats of oralloy's opinions.

Quote:

Oralloy's posts are infinitely more interesting than yours.

You missed the video of the missile/plane going thru WTC2, a complete impossibility and one that would have provided someone competent and with a semblance of honesty with hours of discussion material.

And the one with molten steel pouring out of WTC2, again another complete impossibility for the US government conspiracy theory.

Why do you figure it is that there are so may who will deny video evidence to the point of refusing to look at it? That just doesn't seem to jive with the high standards we always hear that America and Americans hold to.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

What is the difference, in intent, between Norquist's goal and any left-wing ideologue? They all want to see a government that represents what they believe is the best path for America to follow, even if what they believe in is loony.

First, take a look at the formulation or assumption that sits under your rhetorical question. Any ideology must equal any other ideology and that there's probably no means to establish which might be better or worse for citizens because it just comes down to partisan desires/beliefs. But we actually have real-world examples all around - other sovereign nations. We have many means to establish which ideologies are successful and which are not.

The difference is Norquist's rejection of majoritarian democracy where citizens, by consensus, establish what their government ought to look like and how it ought to operate. Let's note first that Norquist is not a representative of the people as he's never been elected to any political position ever. Yet he has managed to grasp enormous power over the American political system by manipulating that system to bring America in line with his extremist ideology. His "pledge" and his Tuesday meetings have been key means to this end where he can bully elected representatives into siding with him or he will bring significant forces to bear and see that individual severely threatened and commonly defeated in a primary or election. And he's gotten himself very wealthy playing this game, which would seem a tad odd (or corrupt). What the majority of citizens might want is of no interest to him whatsoever (outside of how that might necessitate how covertly he operates or what deceptions he will engage in).

1 Reply

@camlok,

Be careful, if you keep introducing your crazy 9/11 theories into unrelated threads you will be banished again and then it will take the rest of us at least two of your posts to recognize your new screen name.

You used to anger and annoy me because I gave you more credit than you deserve. Now you just amuse me. It's actually fun to respond to you.

Rant on JTT, rant on! Smile

0 Replies

@snood,

Quote:

Aren't there some things that are either yea or nay? For instance, either single payer healthcare systems have been good for the countries that have them, or they haven't?

Healthcare is a particularly enlightening subject here. We have tons of valuable research data on healthcare costs and outcomes in countless nations. It's empirical data. Yet that empirical data is almost never cited or addressed by right wing partisans in the US. And as I (and other Canadians) noted many times before, it is entirely commonplace to bump into such Americans who are absolutely impervious to Canadians' accounts of living with our single payer system. They may never have even visited Canada but they presume to understand our system's pluses and negatives far better than those of us who have spent most of our lives experiencing that system. It seems totally bizarre. And it is, in terms of how ridiculous such people are. But there's no mystery as to why they think what they think. Those ideas have been fed to them from Fox and other such outlets.

0 Replies

@blatham,

Well it's clear that neither you or I believe that all ideologies are equal.

What I am arguing is that there is no measurable difference between ideologues of the left or the right. They are either equally on point with their ideology or they are equally frauds. You on the other hand, have a very binary view of things.

I could really give a rat's ass as to what Norquist believes because I don't credit him with 1% of the influence you do. He's your bogeyman, not mine.

You are obsessed with the notion that a sinister cabal of "conservative" villains are trying to destroy the world. It's comical.

1 Reply

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know