Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #460129 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-13 15:10 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-05-26 13:43 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 264 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design
What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 15:10 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> - 2017-05-13 22:54 +0000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 15:59 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 00:34 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:11 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 08:49 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 02:00 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 10:14 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 08:31 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 15:56 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 09:04 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 18:02 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 16:10 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 01:12 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-16 10:57 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-18 10:42 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 14:10 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 10:19 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 15:48 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 13:19 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 18:47 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 15:40 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 00:03 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 19:39 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 08:09 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? John Devereux <john@devereux.me.uk> - 2017-05-18 09:13 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 09:37 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 04:57 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 09:58 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-17 08:21 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 13:28 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 09:13 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 10:14 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 13:31 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 19:17 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 17:47 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 23:45 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-19 19:57 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 23:35 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-20 07:42 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-20 00:48 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-23 09:24 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 12:19 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-23 17:44 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 16:49 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-05-24 08:29 +1000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 19:26 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-05-24 11:32 +1000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 01:16 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-24 18:04 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-24 07:40 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-05-31 11:57 +0000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 09:05 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-06-20 05:12 +0000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-23 21:07 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-23 19:04 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-23 18:46 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-24 12:56 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 12:37 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-24 18:12 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-24 16:11 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-24 19:49 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-26 15:41 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-23 18:44 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 18:18 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 18:54 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 23:00 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 15:32 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-15 15:01 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 00:52 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-05-15 19:17 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-15 19:26 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-16 12:01 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:12 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-16 13:51 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-16 20:26 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 15:50 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 13:27 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 22:00 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2017-05-14 18:39 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 16:20 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:05 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 17:49 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-05-13 18:02 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 21:25 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:28 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-13 19:39 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:05 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-15 20:37 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 18:19 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-15 21:53 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-16 09:18 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-16 12:51 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-20 11:54 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-20 12:05 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-22 08:58 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-22 11:58 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-15 19:29 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 18:06 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 18:38 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 18:44 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? "dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> - 2017-05-13 17:35 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 17:56 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 21:00 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 18:11 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 21:29 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 18:47 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 22:37 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 19:56 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-14 00:08 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-13 21:20 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-14 18:02 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 18:16 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 18:02 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 15:58 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-14 09:19 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 13:29 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 18:40 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-14 18:04 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-05-14 11:12 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 12:23 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-05-14 10:55 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-14 13:32 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 20:44 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:03 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-13 20:17 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 20:57 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 08:55 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-14 08:11 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 14:25 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 23:54 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 09:09 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 18:43 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 00:05 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-13 19:30 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> - 2017-05-13 16:32 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:00 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-13 16:39 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:18 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-13 17:31 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:36 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-13 20:58 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:40 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 12:58 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:35 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:17 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-15 19:04 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-16 09:27 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-16 19:49 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:27 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:13 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-15 18:53 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-16 09:16 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-16 19:43 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 18:52 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-17 18:23 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 09:59 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 18:47 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Riddle <martin_ridd@verizon.net> - 2017-05-13 20:06 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2017-05-17 12:53 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Clifford Heath <clifford.heath@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 13:33 +1000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 23:53 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-14 00:11 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:24 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-15 20:39 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-15 19:16 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-16 09:29 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 18:58 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-13 21:04 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-14 00:10 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Clifford Heath <clifford.heath@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 14:29 +1000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 00:48 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 00:13 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-14 18:10 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-18 09:44 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-18 12:34 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-18 09:34 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-18 09:03 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-18 12:36 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 14:12 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-18 14:36 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-18 17:43 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-18 18:01 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-18 15:18 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-18 19:39 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 21:26 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-19 09:22 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 13:37 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-19 17:51 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-22 11:30 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 12:32 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-23 10:58 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 17:09 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-23 14:30 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-24 13:30 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 13:01 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-05-26 15:43 +0200
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 21:13 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-05-19 07:50 +1000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-18 20:03 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 20:39 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Rheilly Phoull <rheilly@bigslong.com> - 2017-05-14 12:19 +0800
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-13 22:08 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 22:20 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-05-18 18:10 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 21:31 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 10:28 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 10:53 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-16 12:30 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 19:17 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 11:49 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-19 12:56 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-19 18:05 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-20 08:36 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-20 15:58 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-23 10:21 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-23 13:26 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 17:41 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-05-24 08:37 +1000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 00:45 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-23 18:52 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-15 00:52 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 15:16 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-15 08:08 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:33 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 09:50 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 01:32 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 08:05 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 19:19 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-05-25 08:57 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-25 11:49 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-25 18:04 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-25 13:15 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-26 09:15 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-05-26 09:28 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-26 04:40 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com - 2017-05-31 06:19 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 18:08 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-25 18:30 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-25 13:15 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-26 09:54 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-26 12:23 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-26 13:44 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-26 13:47 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-06-24 00:18 +0000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-06-24 00:24 +0000
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-06-24 09:20 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-06-24 12:38 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-06-24 12:11 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-06-24 13:04 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-06-29 14:20 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-06-29 15:37 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-06-30 11:05 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-06-30 08:13 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-06-30 12:26 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-06-30 03:43 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-26 21:07 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2017-05-26 18:59 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-26 22:17 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-27 09:37 +0100
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-27 09:30 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-27 18:23 -0700
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-05-26 08:47 -0400
Re: What's wrong with "national health care"? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-05-26 13:43 -0700
Page 7 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 14 Next page →
| From | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 12:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ofaajr$mvq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460233 |
On 5/14/2017 7:58 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 14/05/2017 02:02, Don Y wrote:
>> On 5/13/2017 5:35 PM, dcaster@krl.org wrote:
>>> On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 7:20:17 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't buy that, no one is going to say I'll eat myself into a heart
>>>> attack or go jump off a roof so I can get me some more of that free
>>>> health
>>>> care
>>>
>>> They won't say I'll eat my way into a heart attack. But they will eat
>>> more
>>> than they should and continue to smoke because they like to eat and
>>> smoke.
>>
>> And don't want to exercise or engage in other "healthy lifestyle
>> choices", etc.
>
> But the proportion of people who do that is relatively small at least in the
> civilised world. In the USA the mentality seems to be more hypochondriac expect
> a pill to fix everything if you pay enough for it.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States> shows rates of
overWEIGHT *roughly* similar in US & UK (15% higher in US).
IIRC, average health care costs for US is ~9K+. Above claims
"An obese person in America incurs an average of $1,429 more in
medical expenses annually"
I.e., 15% more in costs. And, ~35% obesity rate incurring those
added expenses (assume "overweight" has no cost penalty).
Estimating 6-12% of healthcare dollars going to treat consequences
of obesity. More than smoking costs -- yet we penalize smokers but
give "fatties" a free pass. Obesity largely being a lifestyle *choice*.
> US population is more bimodal than any other I have encountered with a
> relatively small cohort of super fit athletic folk and a huge tail of people
> who vary from overweight to morbidly obese.
Yup. I look at *most* folks and wonder "do they NOT see themselves when
they look in the mirror?" I.e., this isn't a matter of "just a few pounds"
we're talking about. This is "when was the last time you saw your FEET??"
Or, "are there BREASTS hidden among those many folds?"
Interesting graphics: <http://stateofobesity.org/rates/>
Of course, the populations in each differ -- often in ways the exacerbate
the "problem"
Amusing fact: to gain 10 pounds over a span of 10 years (which is a relatively
common occurrence) you only need to consume an extra ~7 calories above and
beyond your energy needs in a given day, everyday.
>>> They do not want some of that free health care, but it would be good if
>>> there was more incentive to lose weight and quit smoking. It would
>>> save the
>>> rest of us some real money.
>>
>> They think there is always a "magic pill" that will solve the problem
>> and "enable" them to continue their behavior.
>
> +1
Until they discover that the pill had an unfortunate side effect
("Gee, who knew this would also increase the odds of bladder cancer?!")
>> Of course, the problem with this is where do you draw the line? How much
>> of a "right" does society have to impose behavioral constraints on its
>> members under the auspices of minimizing health costs? If I can
>> demonstrate
>> that owning a gun increases health care costs, can I make gun ownership
>> illegal? What about consuming "fast food"? Sugary beverages? etc.
>
> There are healthy forms of street fast food. It doesn't have to be laden with
> fat, sugar and salt like most American fast food is.
> Yaki soba for instance.
Here, folks tend to want "gratification" in addition to a quick/cheap "calorie
fix". When I was a teen, I enjoyed McD's burgers. As I got older, I
gravitated away from "fast food". I recall visiting a McD's in my 30's
for a "quick bite" as I didn't have time to get home, etc.
Went through the drive-thru, ordered a few burgers and fries. And, started
eating them before I'd cleared the parking lot. Made a U-turn and brought
the burgers back: "These are LOADED with SALT!" -- as if they had screwed
up, somehow, in making them. "I'm sorry sir, that's the way we always
make them..."
It was eye opening.
>> OTOH, if I just adjust the "premium" you pay to indulge in those behaviors
>> to reflect the increased costs (statistically speaking) that you will
>> force society to incur for your "freedom", how does that get enforced?
>
> Add the cost as a tax on the product much like is done with tobacco and alcohol
> in the UK (and may be done with cannabis at some point).
I'm not sure that does anything to change the problem. It may help PAY
for the problem -- but, you'll always be in a lagging relationship.
People seem incapable of evaluating future costs against the present.
Some of it is the need for "instant gratification" but I think there is
still a fundamental cognitive disconnect between "now" and "later".
>> Random testing? (Aha! You had a Big Mac sometime in the last 14 days!
>> The BigMacMarkers are still prevalent in your bloodstream! Oooo... I
>> can smell Coke on your breath...)
>
> Modern diagnostics are so good that you can easily detect opiate drug residues
> in people who have eaten poppy seed bread.
Sure, but can they tell if I got enough sleep last week? Ate all
my vegetables this past weekend? etc.
Testing typically relies on detecting persistent *habits* not general
tendencies. I.e., I can be alert and well rested, today -- depite
spending 38 hours working, "yesterday".
>> Surtaxes on unhealthy products/services? (That will be $1.00 for the
>> super-sized Coke, and 23c for the sugary beverage tax...)
>
> Potentially yes. Also banning adverts for unhealthy foods during childrens TV
> and/or prior to the adult TV watershed.
There have been attempts at that, here -- removing "soda" machines from
schools (where they were located to help generate revenue!), changing the
dietary guidelines for school lunches (we are now headed back to considering
"ketchup is a vegetable"). While I think they may be helpful, I think they
represent baby steps in changing significant aspects of serious behavior
issues.
I.e., I routinely "take the stairs" -- regardless of how many flights
may be involved -- instead of the elevator. Sure, this is a step in
the right direction. But, if it was the *only* exercise that I got,
it would be painfully inadequate (very few buildings with more than
a dozen floors, here, and seldom a need to visit any of them!)
>> What are the limits to the nanny state?
>
> Adding fluoride to water is another one which causes trouble with the
> libertarians but prevents a lot of small children with terrible sugary diets
> from suffering a lot of toothache. Can't stop them eating their way to type 2
> diabetes though which seems to be the end point for most obese Americans. It
> makes healthcare a lot more expensive to be obese.
"Purity of Essence". :>
So, to NOT impede on folks' "freedom", do you let them gorge themselves?
Then, STILL provide the care that they will invariably need? Redirect
resources and research to address their "selfishness" -- at the expense
of others (e.g., I suspect there is very little that our ALS friend
"did" to merit her Dx and ultimate demise. Yet, monies went into
treating fat/lazy/self-indulgent people undoubtedly at some expense
to her and her quality of life)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 10:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2edf05b9-98b3-441a-8bd9-036c74fafa66@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460151 |
On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 8:35:44 PM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote: > On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 7:20:17 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > > > > > I don't buy that, no one is going to say I'll eat myself into a heart attack > > or go jump off a roof so I can get me some more of that free health care > > > > They won't say I'll eat my way into a heart attack. But they will eat more than they should and continue to smoke because they like to eat and smoke. They do not want some of that free health care, but it would be good if there was more incentive to lose weight and quit smoking. It would save the rest of us some real money. > > Dan Right, I dream of some system where personal responsibility counts for something. I'm not sure what that looks like. George H. (USA)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 13:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ofaels$fod$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460257 |
On 5/14/2017 10:55 AM, George Herold wrote: > On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 8:35:44 PM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote: >> On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 7:20:17 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen >> wrote: >> >> >>> >>> I don't buy that, no one is going to say I'll eat myself into a heart >>> attack or go jump off a roof so I can get me some more of that free >>> health care >>> >> >> They won't say I'll eat my way into a heart attack. But they will eat >> more than they should and continue to smoke because they like to eat and >> smoke. They do not want some of that free health care, but it would be >> good if there was more incentive to lose weight and quit smoking. It >> would save the rest of us some real money. > > Right, I dream of some system where personal responsibility counts for > something. I'm not sure what that looks like. *Think* about it. Thiese are consequences that YOU will experience from YOUR personal choices. And, they are typically "significant", life-style altering and even life threatening. If *that* doesn't motivate people to alter their behaviors (become personally responsible -- for, at least, their own bodies and their obligations to their families, etc.), then what else possibly could? Holding a gun to their head and ordering them to eat their Brussels Sprouts?? :< "Have unprotected sex (use IV drugs) AND YOU CAN DIE..." ??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 20:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <q1afhctegn7s97breafqg6tem5p398h8bh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #460136 |
On Sat, 13 May 2017 16:20:13 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote: >Den søndag den 14. maj 2017 kl. 00.57.39 UTC+2 skrev Cursitor Doom: >> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >> >> > So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >> > (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >> >> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in their >> own misfortune. > >I don't buy that, no one is going to say I'll eat myself into a heart attack >or go jump off a roof so I can get me some more of that free health care > >> Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. > >while it might be annoying to pay for "freeloaders" I'm quite sure that it'll >be below the noise floor in the big scheme of things > How can you come to that conclusion? We already have a nation of freeloaders.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 21:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <of8a6e$176$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460136 |
On 5/13/2017 7:20 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > Den søndag den 14. maj 2017 kl. 00.57.39 UTC+2 skrev Cursitor Doom: >> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >> >>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >> >> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in their >> own misfortune. > > I don't buy that, no one is going to say I'll eat myself into a heart attack > or go jump off a roof so I can get me some more of that free health care It's about the same as the idiots who put special taxes on "junk food" thinking it will discourage anyone from eating the stuff. >> Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. > > while it might be annoying to pay for "freeloaders" I'm quite sure that it'll > be below the noise floor in the big scheme of things Of course. This is the same argument people use about the welfare cheaters. I actually had a friend who swore there were welfare recipients who were paying for new Cadillacs with their multiple welfare checks. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 20:17 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MmNRA.111971$jP5.24352@fx03.iad> |
| In reply to | #460131 |
On 05/13/2017 06:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: > On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: > >> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? > > I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it > treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in their > own misfortune. Losers have the "loser mentality." They'd make unhealthy lifestyle choices under private insurance or public, don't matter. And I think you overestimate the ability of social pressure like what kind of insurance you do or don't have to change things. They'll just go on doing their thing, hospitals finally won't be able to turn down a person in medical crisis because of ethics, and the costs will end up socialized, regardless. Worst-case scenario example: suppose $X of my tax dollars is spent on "entitlement programs" for ten people. 9 of them have the "loser mentality" and make the wrong choices with that money. But one of them was there simply due to circumstance, not mentality. They manage to leverage themselves out. Or if they had the "loser mentality" they manage to change it. Some conservatives would call that "theft." I'd call it a huge victory. I think the carrot of reward makes a much better motivator than the stick of hardship. But to motivate people to keep playing the game the rewards need to be incremental and consistent - you need to toss out some carrots on level 1 in addition to the glittering loot you get on level 10. Problem is that at a macro level it's impossible to know who really deserves it and who doesn't. So 9 people end up using it on lobster dinners. For _them_ that's an entitlement, yeah - and a cost of doing business for government. But for the one who doesn't it's a reward for not quitting the game. And because they have the right mentality, they will treat it that way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 20:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <of89s2$veg$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460131 |
On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: > On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: > >> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? > > I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it > treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in their > own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you > inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never > contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. You base this on what experience? -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 08:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <_3URA.71707$Gx4.46714@fx34.am4> |
| In reply to | #460157 |
On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: > On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >> >>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >> >> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in their >> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. > > You base this on what experience? Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and cherry-picked extreme examples.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 08:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <KPXRA.99726$jo6.30700@fx33.iad> |
| In reply to | #460209 |
On 05/14/2017 03:55 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: > On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: >> On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >>> >>>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >>> >>> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >>> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in >>> their >>> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >>> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >>> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. >> >> You base this on what experience? > > Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and > cherry-picked extreme examples. > The best incentive for making healthy lifestyle choices is having a healthy life! If someone can't be bothered to do it for its own sake, what makes someone think they'd do it for "bureaucratic reasons"?!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 14:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <MUYRA.102566$kY3.72542@fx47.am4> |
| In reply to | #460219 |
On 14/05/17 13:11, bitrex wrote: > On 05/14/2017 03:55 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >> On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: >>> On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >>>> >>>>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>>>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >>>> >>>> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >>>> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in >>>> their >>>> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >>>> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >>>> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. >>> >>> You base this on what experience? >> >> Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and >> cherry-picked extreme examples. >> > > The best incentive for making healthy lifestyle choices is having a healthy > life! If someone can't be bothered to do it for its own sake, what makes someone > think they'd do it for "bureaucratic reasons"?! Indeed. But I sometimes /choose/ to be "unsafe", and I've similarly encouraged my daughter to do the same. Examples before she was 14yo include skiing, flying gliders, backpacking around India. Now I will claim that those are /beneficially/ dangerous for ourselves, society and the country. But others would prefer that we wrapped ourselves in cotton wool. The quid pro quo is that I don't complain if they chose to become addicted to foul smelling insecticides.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-14 23:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ofb8im$elu$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460209 |
On 5/14/2017 3:55 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: > On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: >> On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >>> >>>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >>> >>> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >>> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in >>> their >>> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >>> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >>> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. >> >> You base this on what experience? > > Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and > cherry-picked extreme examples. Or making up stuff based on your personal biases. -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-15 09:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <zmdSA.94668$Aj7.35910@fx33.am4> |
| In reply to | #460319 |
On 15/05/17 04:54, rickman wrote: > On 5/14/2017 3:55 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >> On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: >>> On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >>>> >>>>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>>>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >>>> >>>> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >>>> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in >>>> their >>>> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >>>> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never >>>> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. >>> >>> You base this on what experience? >> >> Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and >> cherry-picked extreme examples. > > Or making up stuff based on your personal biases. Studies have shown that 37% of statistics are made up on the spot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-17 18:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ofijgj$ikl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460330 |
On 5/15/2017 4:09 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: > On 15/05/17 04:54, rickman wrote: >> On 5/14/2017 3:55 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >>> On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: >>>> On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>>>>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >>>>> >>>>> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >>>>> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in >>>>> their >>>>> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >>>>> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have >>>>> never >>>>> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. >>>> >>>> You base this on what experience? >>> >>> Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and >>> cherry-picked extreme examples. >> >> Or making up stuff based on your personal biases. > > Studies have shown that 37% of statistics are made up on the spot. I heard it was 78.3%, and I'm sticking to my story! -- Rick C
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-18 00:05 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <RG4TA.55430$ZZ1.2031@fx14.am4> |
| In reply to | #460713 |
On 17/05/17 23:43, rickman wrote: > On 5/15/2017 4:09 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >> On 15/05/17 04:54, rickman wrote: >>> On 5/14/2017 3:55 AM, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 14/05/17 01:57, rickman wrote: >>>>> On 5/13/2017 6:54 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" >>>>>>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? >>>>>> >>>>>> I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it >>>>>> treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in >>>>>> their >>>>>> own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you >>>>>> inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have >>>>>> never >>>>>> contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. >>>>> >>>>> You base this on what experience? >>>> >>>> Never underestimate "alternative-experiences" and >>>> cherry-picked extreme examples. >>> >>> Or making up stuff based on your personal biases. >> >> Studies have shown that 37% of statistics are made up on the spot. > > I heard it was 78.3%, and I'm sticking to my story! "Strong and stable statistics", eh? Aaaargh - I'm channeling the Prime Minister's election slogan. Help me, please.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bill.sloman@ieee.org |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 19:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3d065640-bacd-47cc-aceb-f71a48ac41f6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460131 |
On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 8:57:39 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote: > On Sat, 13 May 2017 15:10:31 -0700, Don Y wrote: > > > So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" > > (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? > > I would say that it encourages unhealthy lifestyle choices, because it > treats all patients equally, regardless of how culpable they are in their > own misfortune. Not only that, but once you have such a system, you > inevitably begin to attract others, often from overseas, who have never > contributed to its upkeep, yet still expect to be 'fixed-up' by it. The UK national health service did have a habit of refusing treatment to people who had made unhealthy life-style choices until they had repented of those choices, and stopped smoking or lost some weight. It does treat people who show up from overseas, but the argument is that they can be carrying infectious diseases (like tuberculosis, as some of them did) and it's a whole lot safer and cheaper to lock them up in an isolation ward until they stop being infectious than it is to have them loose in the community, infecting other people). This is the overwhelming argument for universal health care, but it's too complicated for the readers of the Mail. It costs you money in treating non-infectious diseases, but that's a worthwhile investment. The US managed to start a small epidemic of drug-resistant tuberculosis amongst the uninsured early on around 1970, in New York. They did learn the lesson about TB, but seem incapable of generalising from it. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1205429#t=article -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 16:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <HPKdnRkZDq4ICorEnZ2dnUU7-WudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #460129 |
On 2017/05/13 3:10 PM, Don Y wrote: > So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" > (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? I.e., what would you > wish was different/better? How are your "death panels" implemented? > How is care "rationed"? What have you NOT been given (by way of care) > that you feel you ought to have? > > I.e., if you were starting from scratch to reinvent YOUR system, what > would you change? I'd see about adding dental care here in BC, Canada. Otherwise as far as I am concerned it works well enough. There is always room for improvement, but my family, friends, and I have all been treated promptly and well in both ordinary and serious situations. John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 17:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <of86gl$nke$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460139 |
On 5/13/2017 4:32 PM, John Robertson wrote:
> On 2017/05/13 3:10 PM, Don Y wrote:
>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care"
>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? I.e., what would you
>> wish was different/better? How are your "death panels" implemented?
>> How is care "rationed"? What have you NOT been given (by way of care)
>> that you feel you ought to have?
>>
>> I.e., if you were starting from scratch to reinvent YOUR system, what
>> would you change?
>
> I'd see about adding dental care here in BC, Canada.
Let's not get started on dental care! I don't know any dentists
here that work more than a four day week -- and, that's by CHOICE
(i.e., they are doing quite well on 4 days pay!)
> Otherwise as far as I am concerned it works well enough. There is always room
> for improvement, but my family, friends, and I have all been treated promptly
> and well in both ordinary and serious situations.
I'm looking for concrete specifics. I.e., WHEN will you be "denied care"?
When with that denial be "unfair" in your eyes?
If you're 115 and you break a hip, will you go to the head of the queue?
Be made to "wait your turn"? Or, sent home with an apology ("we can't do
anything for you") and best wishes?
If your darling "perfect 10" daughter trips and suffers an ugly gash in
her face, will they just "stitch it up"? Or, will she get cosmetic surgery
to restore her "natural beauty"?
[I broke an elbow in my youth and have a rather prominent scar to
show for it. If I was the sort of person concerned with appearances,
I might complain about the FOR PAY treatment that I received, at that
time]
Where will they draw the line? Are tax revenues automatically increased
to pay for increased need? And, similarly, decreased in times of less
need?
What would happen in a epidemic/pandemic? How would folks be selected for
treatment? Age? Wealth? Location (relative to care centers)? First come,
first served?
I.e., I'm sure *somewhere* in your enabling legislation, all these things
are spelled out in black and white. Or, do most folks "not care" until/unless
the shit hits the proverbial fan?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 16:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a21324df-9d08-41bd-aef5-33a32fc6a8d2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460129 |
On Saturday, 13 May 2017 23:10:15 UTC+1, Don Y wrote: > So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" > (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? I.e., what would you > wish was different/better? How are your "death panels" implemented? > How is care "rationed"? What have you NOT been given (by way of care) > that you feel you ought to have? > > I.e., if you were starting from scratch to reinvent YOUR system, what > would you change? UK. The main problem with our NHS is the same one every any large system suffers from: incompetence. It spans the range from from understandable errors to crass stupidity, abuse, predictable injury & death. Can one design a system so it won't deteriorate into this sort of thing? I'm doubtful. It could certainly be patched up to fix a lot of them, if anyone showed interest in doing so. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 17:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <of87hn$q8c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #460141 |
On 5/13/2017 4:39 PM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 May 2017 23:10:15 UTC+1, Don Y wrote:
>
>> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care"
>> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? I.e., what would you wish
>> was different/better? How are your "death panels" implemented? How is
>> care "rationed"? What have you NOT been given (by way of care) that you
>> feel you ought to have?
>>
>> I.e., if you were starting from scratch to reinvent YOUR system, what
>> would you change?
>
> UK. The main problem with our NHS is the same one every any large system
> suffers from: incompetence. It spans the range from from understandable
> errors to crass stupidity, abuse, predictable injury & death.
And you think that is a characteristic of "national health care" that
isn't also present in "pay for service" systems?
You've not heard the stories of wrong appendages being amputated, here.
Or, doctors using their own sperm to impregnate their fertility patients.
Or, gross billing errors. Or being unfairly denied care because an
underwriter screwed up in drafting the policy. Or, records being
lost. Or...
My neighbor's wife (eventually) died from a medical error -- after living
as a vegetable for many years.
I watched the recovery room nurse try to double-administer a medication
to SWMBO after her surgery was over (while she was still groggy/incompetent)
and had to fight with the nurse to prove my observations:
"Is that G-23 Pxilon Hydrocholrate?"
"Yes."
"How would I know that name, off-hand? Do you think I'm an MD?"
"<mumble>"
> Can one design a system so it won't deteriorate into this sort of thing? I'm
> doubtful. It could certainly be patched up to fix a lot of them, if anyone
> showed interest in doing so.
And, what interest is there in patching a "pay for service" system to
fix those same problems?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tabbypurr@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 17:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fcf8bc84-da5b-42fe-b540-159887f8e92a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460147 |
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 01:18:11 UTC+1, Don Y wrote: > On 5/13/2017 4:39 PM, tabbypurr wrote: > > On Saturday, 13 May 2017 23:10:15 UTC+1, Don Y wrote: > > > >> So, for the folks who live/work in places with "national health care" > >> (whatever THAT means), what's *wrong* with it? I.e., what would you wish > >> was different/better? How are your "death panels" implemented? How is > >> care "rationed"? What have you NOT been given (by way of care) that you > >> feel you ought to have? > >> > >> I.e., if you were starting from scratch to reinvent YOUR system, what > >> would you change? > > > > UK. The main problem with our NHS is the same one every any large system > > suffers from: incompetence. It spans the range from from understandable > > errors to crass stupidity, abuse, predictable injury & death. > > And you think that is a characteristic of "national health care" that > isn't also present in "pay for service" systems? do I? Where do you get that from? There is one important difference: when you pay, you can go elsewhere. Businesses care about getting your $. > You've not heard the stories of wrong appendages being amputated, here. > Or, doctors using their own sperm to impregnate their fertility patients. > Or, gross billing errors. Or being unfairly denied care because an > underwriter screwed up in drafting the policy. Or, records being > lost. Or... Where do you get the bizarre idea that I think those things don't happen in pay-medicine? > > Can one design a system so it won't deteriorate into this sort of thing? I'm > > doubtful. It could certainly be patched up to fix a lot of them, if anyone > > showed interest in doing so. > > And, what interest is there in patching a "pay for service" system to > fix those same problems? Staying in business. No system is ever going to be perfect, but the amount of rot in the uk nhs is excessive. NT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design
csiph-web