Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Rod Pemberton" Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: OT: ObamaCare vs. Google Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:49:10 -0500 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 100 Message-ID: References: <1f417310-eee5-4c00-a34f-2efd28661a86@googlegroups.com> <99CdnV3zyb0X_grPnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@supernews.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:27065 On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 04:34:20 -0500, Andrew Haley wrote: > Rod Pemberton wrote: >> On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 10:38:50 -0500, Andrew Haley >> wrote: >>> Mark Wills wrote: >> >> The HuffingtonPost article complains about costs per person being too >> large in the US per person as compared to their lifetime. According >> to the article, those costs are the reason the US is an outlier. > > Not entirely. There's also the outcomes: that graph has two axes. > Yes entirely. If you adjust cost to align with other English speaking countries, it's in the same clump near Finland. From the US to Japan, that only represents a four year difference in lifespan. That can be attributed to many reasons other than healthcare: wealth, mental, pollution, hours worked, food quality, exercise, obesity, drinking genetics, gun violence, culture. Are you conflating health with healthcare? > Clearly, the USA needs a solution to its appalling healthcare system, Clearly? How so? What makes it "appalling"? It was an excellent system that had just a few flaws that needed fixed which Democrats prevented Republicans from fixing for six decades. Democrats scrapped the system and replaced with a Ponzi scheme worse than Social Security. It's riddled with numerous faults, far more than before. Some of these will likely never be fixed, just like before. > which costs a fortune but delivers poor outcomes. I think most of the "poor" outcomes, at least from that graph, is due to selective healthcare. The age range for the U.S. is entirely inline with other English speaking countries. > Obamacare is not the last step, but at least it's a step in the > right direction. What direction? Is "foul-up" a direction? What was the wrong direction? > course it's difficult to implement and will have problems. The prior system wasn't completely broken like now. It was partially broken and minimally so. That could've been fixed. > However, this modest proposal been blocked at every turn by > well-funded vested interests who have managed to convince many > people that European-style systems are a step on the road to a > communist dictatorship. I don't think they need to convince anyone of that. You saw the link to Germans exporting elderly to reduce healthcare costs, and you might've seen the article about the guy in Canada who couldn't get his rotting tooth pulled for a year who pulled it himself, and the women in Canada coming to the U.S. to get abortions and birth children because they couldn't get care in Canada. That's just a handful of the articles over the past decade on the poor quality of socialized medicine. > Rather than ranting about Obamacare, it'd be nice to hear someone on > the right come up with a constructive suggestion about what to do. Repeal ObamaCare. Fix the small list of things that were broken before: eliminate inability of hospital to refuse care to uninsured, fraudulent and excessive charges to Medicare and Medicaid, and unwillingness of government to require digital records and legible prescriptions to prevent mistakes. > One that doesn't leave poor people to die in the gutter. Those below the poverty threshold could get healthcare via Medicaid previously and currently. So, there is no literal reason poor people to "die in the gutters" other than they rejected government healthcare or they were a victim of gun violence. If those who oppose gun control are shooting each other, what do you expect to happen? Do you really expect society to save you - at their expense? If you have a deathwish, you should expect death. Nearly every black man who dies due to gun violence in an urban environment is killed by a racist, nearly all of whom are black... The victim was racist too, but against whites. There are over 500 murderers and victims each year in a nearby city, year over year, for five, maybe seven, decades now. Nearly all of those people were or are black. You won't see or hear about those victims' civil rights, i.e., loss of life, from the likes of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. No white man was involved. It's not racist. Apparently, it's not important to the black community either. All of those same people were up in arms over Trayvon, but there was not a single mention of all those others who die each year. That was just one U.S. city with a large black populace. They even inspired the President to say something, but he said nothing about all those other dead blacks either. Rod Pemberton