R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => R/E/P Saloon => Topic started by: mazoaudio on January 21, 2011, 02:15:16 pm

Title: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: mazoaudio on January 21, 2011, 02:15:16 pm
jrmintz wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 11:38

I don't think it's overtly political to say that all Americans ought to have access to health care resembling that which our congressional representatives, of all parties and ideologies, and in a rare display of unity, have given themselves. It's also not political to say that it's unconscionable that the family of a person who has had a career like Roger Nichols, or any family for that matter, should have to impoverish itself to keep a family member alive. It's a moral issue out of which some people have created a political one.

I donated as well.


+1

Denouncing the reasonable critic of the effects of certain policies as "political" is one of the ways the unjust policies are perpetuated.  (i.e. Arizona shootings)

The  ways folks try to rationalize this class war is a joke.  I have donated to Roger, who is obviously a cool guy and someone who has furthered the science of recording.
It's just says really sad things about our country when people who have been pushed down from the middle class are called upon to help fix situations like this
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: jimmyjazz on January 21, 2011, 02:45:28 pm
I think it's really sad that a disease as common as cancer can decimate the finances of a family which should, by distant observation, be financially sound.  If true, what it means is that only the top few percent can afford anything but the most ordinary "life-saving" efforts, and that is sad.

I am very glad I carry a cancer policy on my family.  Moreover, I'm glad I can afford it.  My father died a couple of years ago from cancer, but the incurred costs were largely carried by insurance and Medicare.  His cancer was uncureable, though -- aggressive brain tumor at age 87 -- so I doubt our experience is all that relevant.  If we had tried to fight it for a few years, I'm sure we would have been in the same boat, and that is mortifying.

Sorry for the continued thread-jack, but I'm with William on this one.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Our Help
Post by: YZ on January 22, 2011, 12:54:44 am
A productive member of society and an expert at his profession, open to share his experiences with his fellows.

While not a multimillionaire, a well-paid individual and I doubt that anyone with a clear mind will say that he did not work for every penny of it and did not do it honestly.

Goes broke and takes his family's savings with him to treat a disease.

Something's wrong.

He's not lazy, he is not destitute of friends and relationships at 'high places'.

Over the years I've been a member here at PSW, I've seen a few calls for help like the OP; this is a crying shame, good people and good hardworking professionals not being able to pay for their treatment.

Have they not saved enough? Did they all burn all their income in futile stuff? How much of a person's income should be set aside for the possibility of a costly illness? And what if that income is not that high and one has to choose between feeding and clothing the kids and saving for the possibility of such an illness?
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Our Help
Post by: Extreme Mixing on January 22, 2011, 01:29:42 am
Yes, I too feel that what is happening to Roger is wrong.  This is exactly the reason that we need a required participation system of national health insurance.  Even a 20 year old can get cancer, or find himself in a terrible car accident and need treatment.  Since all share that risk, all should pay into a health care program.

Someone mentioned Social Security.  Not a day goes by without some politician mentioning that SS will be broke before many of get any of our benefits.  But at the same time we pay public employees 70-90% of their highest pay rate, and GIVE them free medical care for life.  We let them negotiate their own deal!  There is no way that most of us "working stiffs" will let Social Security go down, and continue to pay taxes to support teachers, and DMV retirees who didn't even pay into their plan.  So even if the system keeps working, I'll get like 22K per year while a DMV worker will get 60K per year and free health care for life.  That's not fair in my book.

I truly wish Roger the best.

Steve
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Our Help
Post by: YZ on January 22, 2011, 02:42:29 am
Yes.

Mods, I know I'm veering off-topic here, but...

Why should politicians have access - paid by taxpayers - to a health system unattainable to the common man? Isn't this a Democracy? Aren't we in a Capitalist society? Why elected individuals have more rights - and for life - than the people who voted for them? Why would any politician work for the good of all if he has already gotten such a good deal for himself and his family? Why should a citizen in the boondocks with no health care of any sort be paying for a senator's lavish benefits?

/rant off/

I hope Roger recovers - in all aspects.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: Fenris Wulf on January 22, 2011, 06:08:39 am
wwittman wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 16:40


If thinking that financial luck should not determine whether a colleague gets to have a shot at living is "political mudslinging" then I shall continue to be "out of place"

Where I come from educated  people disagree about many things, but not that people should die because their parents aren't rich or they lost their job, etc.

Funny how almost everywhere else in the civilized western world think that's " the kind of society they want to live in"
Government financing destroys free-market incentives and makes goods and services MORE expensive than they would be in the absence of subsidies. This is a basic law of economics and it cannot be altered by good intentions. U.S. health care has been heavily subsidized for decades, and that is the root cause of spiraling costs.

There is a deep cultural divide between Europeans and Americans. Europeans place a higher value on equality, while Americans place a higher value on liberty. Europeans think of themselves as subjects, while Americans think of themselves as citizens. Europeans look for collectivist, government-based solutions to life's problems, while Americans look for individualist solutions to the same problems.

I seem to recall that my country fought a war with your country over these differences, and won the right to devise our own system of government.

You should learn something about America's culture, before you slander half its population and attribute their beliefs to stupidity and malice.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: FFoster on January 22, 2011, 06:39:58 am
Silvertone wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 07:16

zmix wrote on Wed, 19 January 2011 23:10

Thanks for posting this, David.  I had heard from a friend of his that he was diagnosed with cancer...I didn't realize it was  Pancreatic cancer. That  is extremely tough.  It's also a very sad commentary on the US that serious health problems cause so many people to go bankrupt...

 


So sad to hear.

That's the same cancer that took my Mom down... that and it broke her heart that she and my Dad lost everything they worked their whole lives for just to keep her alive for 6 months in the end...  it's just not right and EVERYBODY KNOWS IT.

THIS COUNTRY SHOULD BE ASHAMED THE WAY THEY LET INSURANCE COMPANIES DICTATE OUR HEATH CARE.  FOR SHAME AMERICA!

I'll say prayers for Roger.

Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: YZ on January 22, 2011, 07:08:15 am
FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:39


Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.


That does not seem to be the case in several countries where there is a government-run health care structure.

Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: KB_S1 on January 22, 2011, 07:24:27 am
FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 11:39


Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.


Have any examples you can cite to back this up?
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: Silvertone on January 22, 2011, 08:39:40 am
FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 05:39

Silvertone wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 07:16

zmix wrote on Wed, 19 January 2011 23:10

Thanks for posting this, David.  I had heard from a friend of his that he was diagnosed with cancer...I didn't realize it was  Pancreatic cancer. That  is extremely tough.  It's also a very sad commentary on the US that serious health problems cause so many people to go bankrupt...

 


So sad to hear.

That's the same cancer that took my Mom down... that and it broke her heart that she and my Dad lost everything they worked their whole lives for just to keep her alive for 6 months in the end...  it's just not right and EVERYBODY KNOWS IT.

THIS COUNTRY SHOULD BE ASHAMED THE WAY THEY LET INSURANCE COMPANIES DICTATE OUR HEATH CARE.  FOR SHAME AMERICA!

I'll say prayers for Roger.

Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.



Give me a break, everybody on medicare and medicaid gets to see a doctor before I do.  I pay 1000.00 a month for my wife and my health insurance... through my taxes I also pay for the government official, the policeman, the fireman, the school teacher and many other... so who's helping me out??? Nobody, that's who and if I get a catastrophic disease then what I pay doesn't cover it... give me a break.

Obviously you don't pay for your health insurance or, trust me you would feel differently.  18% increase in coverage last year, 17% this year... wake up everybody,  you may pay a little of your health insurance now but in the not to distant future YOU WILL BE PAYING A LOT MORE!  A LOT MORE!

THE INSURANCE COMPANIES RUN HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY.... WAKE UP EVERYBODY... YOU ARE PAYING THE PROTECTION RACKET... THESE GUYS ARE WORSE THAN THE MOB!  Thanks Hillary!

I want the same health care as my elected official... they seem to get into the doctors right away and get to stay in the hospital as long as it takes. Why not me?

As for Roger, I donated and had others donate yesterday as well... but what kind of country do we live in when a man like this has to rely on handouts to have decant care in his remaining days... I'll say it again... for shame America!

Sorry for getting political Brad but this is "politics at it's best" (worst really)... and we can't talk about the elephant in the room.

Shortly it looks like I'll be canceling my health policy because I can no longer afford it... then our government will be sending me to jail for not having health insurance (that's rich)... again the insurance companies win! Well then at least I'd get to live for free AND get FREE HEALTH CARE... imagine that, criminals get their health care paid for by us as well. Now who are the real criminals here?

It's also been proven that universal health care will lower health care costs in this country... but do you think that is what the insurance companies really want?  

Wakey, wakey, eggs and Bakey... everybody, eyes open...
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: Silvertone on January 22, 2011, 09:06:31 am
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 05:08

wwittman wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 16:40


If thinking that financial luck should not determine whether a colleague gets to have a shot at living is "political mudslinging" then I shall continue to be "out of place"

Where I come from educated  people disagree about many things, but not that people should die because their parents aren't rich or they lost their job, etc.

Funny how almost everywhere else in the civilized western world think that's " the kind of society they want to live in"
Government financing destroys free-market incentives and makes goods and services MORE expensive than they would be in the absence of subsidies. This is a basic law of economics and it cannot be altered by good intentions. U.S. health care has been heavily subsidized for decades, and that is the root cause of spiraling costs.

There is a deep cultural divide between Europeans and Americans. Europeans place a higher value on equality, while Americans place a higher value on liberty. Europeans think of themselves as subjects, while Americans think of themselves as citizens. Europeans look for collectivist, government-based solutions to life's problems, while Americans look for individualist solutions to the same problems.

I seem to recall that my country fought a war with your country over these differences, and won the right to devise our own system of government.

You should learn something about America's culture, before you slander half its population and attribute their beliefs to stupidity and malice.



Health care shouldn't be a free market item... everybody will get sick, everybody will die...  So lets profit from this and while were at it, take everything everybody worked their lives for??? This is evil at it's finest... profit on someones misery...

Now I'm only guessing here but I'd say you haven't been through being financially wiped out by health care cost (I was in my early 30's when it happen to me and have been digging out ever since). You don't fear loosing your health care because you can't afford a "mortgage payment" for your cost every month. I do, it's a real fear... every month.  I pay 1K a month for basic coverage with high deductible and co-pays.  You don't pay the 18% increases every year in health care cost. Well, you do, you just don't know it.  But trust me dude, you will someday... just keep letting insurance companies run health care in this country!

This is a touchy subject for me and I won't be polite about it anymore.  I'll scream at the top of my lungs until EVERYBODY wakes up!
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Fenris Wulf on January 22, 2011, 09:20:18 am
American health care has not been a free market since the 1940's. The current system, in which health care is exorbitantly expensive and everything is done through insurance companies, is a product of government financing and government regulation.

The health care system is ALREADY partially socialized and that is the problem. Once again, the politicians have managed to shift the blame for their own incompetence onto the "free market."

Despite the Left's stranglehold on higher education and the traditional media, many Americans have caught on to the fact that socialized medicine is inherently coercive toward patients and doctors alike, there is no such thing as "free," and the government is NOT omnipotent and does NOT have the ability to provide perfect health care to everyone in perpetuity.

The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election. Perhaps you've been living in a cave and didn't hear about it.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: Eric H. on January 22, 2011, 09:59:41 am
Silvertone wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 13:39

FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 05:39

Silvertone wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 07:16

zmix wrote on Wed, 19 January 2011 23:10

Thanks for posting this, David.  I had heard from a friend of his that he was diagnosed with cancer...I didn't realize it was  Pancreatic cancer. That  is extremely tough.  It's also a very sad commentary on the US that serious health problems cause so many people to go bankrupt...

 


So sad to hear.

That's the same cancer that took my Mom down... that and it broke her heart that she and my Dad lost everything they worked their whole lives for just to keep her alive for 6 months in the end...  it's just not right and EVERYBODY KNOWS IT.

THIS COUNTRY SHOULD BE ASHAMED THE WAY THEY LET INSURANCE COMPANIES DICTATE OUR HEATH CARE.  FOR SHAME AMERICA!

I'll say prayers for Roger.

Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.



Give me a break, everybody on medicare and medicaid gets to see a doctor before I do.  I pay 1000.00 a month for my wife and my health insurance... through my taxes I also pay for the government official, the policeman, the fireman, the school teacher and many other... so who's helping me out??? Nobody, that's who and if I get a catastrophic disease then what I pay doesn't cover it... give me a break.

Obviously you don't pay for your health insurance or, trust me you would feel differently.  18% increase in coverage last year, 17% this year... wake up everybody,  you may pay a little of your health insurance now but in the not to distant future YOU WILL BE PAYING A LOT MORE!  A LOT MORE!

THE INSURANCE COMPANIES RUN HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY.... WAKE UP EVERYBODY... YOU ARE PAYING THE PROTECTION RACKET... THESE GUYS ARE WORSE THAN THE MOB!  Thanks Hillary!

I want the same health care as my elected official... they seem to get into the doctors right away and get to stay in the hospital as long as it takes. Why not me?

As for Roger, I donated and had others donate yesterday as well... but what kind of country do we live in when a man like this has to rely on handouts to have decant care in his remaining days... I'll say it again... for shame America!

Sorry for getting political Brad but this is "politics at it's best" (worst really)... and we can't talk about the elephant in the room.

Shortly it looks like I'll be canceling my health policy because I can no longer afford it... then our government will be sending me to jail for not having health insurance (that's rich)... again the insurance companies win! Well then at least I'd get to live for free AND get FREE HEALTH CARE... imagine that, criminals get their health care paid for by us as well. Now who are the real criminals here?

It's also been proven that universal health care will lower health care costs in this country... but do you think that is what the insurance companies really want?  

Wakey, wakey, eggs and Bakey... everybody, eyes open...

I'm not american, but where I live, I see to a much lesser degree some 'good ideas' being implemented, year after year, to 'save' the social security system, modeled after america's health care system, which obviously doesn't work, except for millionaires.
In the meanwhile, there is no questions asked to 'save' a bank and putting in 4 or 5 billion euros of public money.

Whenever I hear a politician saying we need to cut benefits to 'save' our social system, I say : BULLSHIT!
I say sell that nuclear submarine and put the money where people need it.
I totally agree with a lot of what's being said here, and to see so many people go bankrupt for health problems in the first world really makes you wonder.

This is not left/right problem. It is an up/down problem.
We need laws that instate health protection of all citizens as a fondamental right, as fondamental as territorial protection and freedom rights.

Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Kingfish on January 22, 2011, 11:24:43 am
There's got to be some kind of 1/2 way solution between what Canada and The USA have. I've lived in both countries for some time, and in Canada, Non Emergency, to Partial emergency care, completely stinks. A trip to the emergency room in alot of cities could be a 5 - 10 hour wait for everyone, who is treated, or seen in a "Critical need of assistance order"

In Nashville, when I broke my hand, I got in, within 15 minutes to see a doctor.

However, on the side of major operations, procedures, terminal illness care etc... My father lived his final days out in Canada. He had Prostate cancer, and then cancer in his neck which eventually took his life.

During that long period of time, he received the same procedures, operations, Chemo and Radiation treatments, in cutting edge facilities, by doctors at the top of their field, it kept him alive an additional 4 years, and during that time, his humble blue collar "Jobbing Musician" life, and financial status, was never compromised, or at risk, and I am thankful for that.

4 years of the most expensive medical care and procedures, cost nothing.

Again, doctors leave Canada, as do health care professionals, as they make up to 10x the wages in the USA, so we're lucky to have the specialists we have, and there are much fewer per city, and longer waiting lists. If the Canadian Government would spend more on Wages for health care professionals... it might be the "Middle ground" we're talking about.

I live in the USA now, and it's always a scary thing, in the back of my mind... If I get sick... really sick, I'll have to pack up shop, and head up to Canada.

For now, seeing as we can't solve the worlds problems today. Lets all help each other out when we can. Send money, support, and thoughts to Roger, and anyone else that needs it when you can.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Jay Kadis on January 22, 2011, 11:49:44 am
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 06:20

The current system, in which health care is exorbitantly expensive and everything is done through insurance companies, is a product of government financing and government regulation.
The current system is so expensive because profits are extracted at every level from insurance to research to drug production and care delivery.  It is not due to government regulation.  Prices are set by profiteers.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: wwittman on January 22, 2011, 12:06:13 pm
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:20



The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election. Perhaps you've been living in a cave and didn't hear about it.



there is not the SLIGHTEST evidence of that

what they rejected was inaction on jobs, or their perception of it.


Socialist police seems to work rather well. Fire depts too.

the "free market" has never existed anywhere and never should.
It's a construct that only works in Ayn Rand's evil head.

and in truth, the business community ITSELF comes running to government for protection of one sort or another inevitably.
capitalism ONLY works with healthy government intervention and oversight.


the 'left', such as it is, looks for where that line might sensibly be drawn.
the right on the other hand insists on repeating the lie that government is unnecessary.


right now in America, if you have a reasonable middle-class income, and are stricken with a massive heart attack, or stroke, or serious cancer, or other major medical catastrophy, and ESPECIALLY one for which there are actual  expensive treatments with good chances of success, the cost of this is astronomically out of your reach.
So the choices?:
Die.
Be bankrupted.
Have insurance... and if you have insurance (which isn't cheap either), the PURPOSE of that company is to maximize its profits by limiting your care as much as possible. as much as the LAW, the GOVERNMENT, allows them to.

none of these are acceptable options in my view.

screw your purist agenda about economics.

Roger, and people just like him who worked all their lives and made a decent income, could DIE for the simple reason that he can't afford care.

that's unacceptable.

you would not deny police protection to someone who didn't make enough money.
or would you?

I say we SHARE the expense of protecting everyone as best we can.
just like we share their police and fire and military protection.
Just like we pay for their clean air and water.
just like when that story broke about the guy whose house they let burn down because he hadn't paid his $75 to the town, everyone who is NOT an asshole was horrified.

you get to decide what kind of world you want to live in.

caring about your neighbours (and EVERYONE is your neighbour) doesn't just mean throwing a donation around once in a while out of your largesse.
It means committing to share ALL of the expenses of ALL of society, all of the time.

Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Rader Ranch on January 22, 2011, 12:17:47 pm
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:20

The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election.


Two years before we were apparently decisively for it. Public opinion is a fickle and easily manipulated thing, just as major flip-flops in political fortune almost always seem to be predicted and expected. Unfortunately, major hardship seems to be a necessary catalyst before any policy sea change.

My experience has been that, of those I know directly involved in the health care industry (who are therefore much more informed than me) the vast majority favor continued health care reform, and I'm fairly certain there's as many conservatives as liberals in that personal survey.

About all I can say definitively is that we're one of the families that fervently hopes our insurance would help in case of catastrophe, 'cause lord knows it blows chunks on the routine maintenance.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: mgod on January 22, 2011, 12:23:35 pm
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 03:08

There is a deep cultural divide between Europeans and Americans. Europeans place a higher value on equality, while Americans place a higher value on liberty. Europeans think of themselves as subjects, while Americans think of themselves as citizens. Europeans look for collectivist, government-based solutions to life's problems, while Americans look for individualist solutions to the same problems.

I seem to recall that my country fought a war with your country over these differences, and won the right to devise our own system of government.

You should learn something about America's culture, before you slander half its population and attribute their beliefs to stupidity and malice.

And you should learn one or two tiny things about Europe before you make completely off-base and wildly inaccurate pronouncements about who Europeans are.

I will say, in your defense, that miseducating our young into delusions of who we are and who others are isn't a uniquely American trait. Europeans do it too. So we'll blame your public school system for how little you know. But just for starters you might want to to do a little reading of de Tocqueville and France in the late 18th century. Then proceed from there to the rest of the continent. Also, some awareness of Parliamentary democracy will help you.

Was this condescending? Certainly not! Interpreting it that way would confirm that slander you're worried about.

Also - I'M an American and I favor collectivist solutions. Maybe you ought to learn one or two things about us too.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: mgod on January 22, 2011, 12:26:31 pm
Rader Ranch wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:17

Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:20

The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election.

Two years before we were apparently decisively for it. Public opinion is a fickle and easily manipulated thing, just as major flip-flops in political fortune almost always seem to be predicted and expected. Unfortunately, major hardship seems to be a necessary catalyst before any policy sea change.

How fickleness is created - read about Wendell Potter.

Here's the first link that came up:

 http://www.metropulse.com/news/2011/jan/12/wendell-potters-d efection-health-care-pr/

There's plenty more. Advertising is big business because IT WORKS.

http://www.google.com/search?q=potter+medical+industry&i e=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:offi cial&client=firefox-a
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Kurt Foster on January 22, 2011, 02:26:27 pm
I think it's an obscenity that profit is made from any kind of human suffering. Our first priority should be to relive pain and illness money be damned. A catastrophic illness should not wipe out all that a person has worked for their whole life.

Part of the problem with health care in the US is people study to become Doctors, Nurses, Health Care "Professionals" only because they wish to be wealthy and not because they are caring and compassionate people. I have visited many Doctors / Dentists or other "professionals" who were cold incompetent fishes more interested in their cars or getting their appointments finished in order to make a golf date or some other social function.

The sad fact is the wealthy have more now than they have had for years while the working and middle classes are receiving a smaller and smaller piece of the pie  as each year passes and yet it seems they are still not satisfied.  How much is going to be enough?

In another time and place, Mr. Nichols would have had the benefits and job protection afforded by a trade union. He would have been protected by medical insurance paid for by the unions and the industry. Sure he would have had to pay dues and perhaps even put a little time participating in union activities but I submit he would have been better off by far than he is now in present conditions. Remember when people in audio were ALL in a Union that had health care and retirement benefits? That was also a time and situation where jobs were protected and coincidentally the filters and standards of who had access to studios and the means of production were higher. I see it lamented over and over on these pages how much better music and audio were back in those days when you have real talent in the control room and the live room. But in those days 60% of all the jobs in the US were unionized. There is a direct correlation between the loss of the unions and the stagnation of wages in the US. When Ronald Regan busted the air traffic controllers he set a precedent that created a climate for union busting across the nation. Since the 70's coincidentally, wages for the middle and working classes have been flat.  

Somewhere along the line, we let the scabs and freelancers bust the unions not only in the music and audio trades but also in the building trades, food service and other segments of labor and now look what we have? Now even the teamsters are facing the challenge of Mexican drivers and trucks coming into the country via NAFTA and "free trade zone" rules.

What we need is  a few more Jimmy Hoffa types. At least the MAFIA understood the working man needs to eat too. They understand that when the working class does well, everyone does well. Some of the best paying music gigs I ever had were working in clubs that were run by the mob. I think it's time we all get "mobbed up" again.  

Yes in the good old USA, we all have freedom. Freedom to starve, freedom to become homeless and freedom to die. Thanks Ronald Regan.  
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 22, 2011, 02:59:27 pm
Profit is not made from human suffering. Doctors TREAT suffering.

Do they make too much money? I dunno. I don't make any money. Am I bitching about no healthcare? No. I have no contract that came with my navel to cover it.

I live in the wrong time. I belong in a time where people live their lives, because that's all there was to do. Metopia.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: jwhynot on January 22, 2011, 04:22:10 pm
I've had emergency care in both Canada and the US.

Canada was better.

And cost about 1/15th as much.

And yes, because I'm not a resident, I paid retail for it.

If you got speedy treatment at a US ER, you were fortunate.  I was fortunate too in my last ER visit - I was there only about an hour and 15 minutes.  It did set me back over 3 grand.  But I got fixed up.

But I've had several experiences where it took substantially longer.  For example - in 1996 I had a little mishap in which my knee was cut open, exposing 3 bones.  I needed the laceration fixed as well as a good look at the joint to be sure it wasn't contaminated.

It was 9 hours before I spoke directly to a physician.  I had a little paper bucket for the blood while I waited.  But it was a holiday weekend - there were shootings.  So I waited.

Experiences vary.  ER's are tricky - you never know what emergencies will get in the way.  It's not a good way to compare systems.

Single payer has one very important advantage - wait for it -

it's cheaper.

A hell of a lot cheaper.

And - there is no government intervention in the decision process as to course of treatment.

Read that - unequivocal - none.  Zero.

People who live with that system have a sense of safety and confidence in the outcomes that is virtually unknown in the USA.

I know this will be contradicted by various folks - and is frequently contradicted (falsely) by people in the press.

That doesn't alter the reality.

Those who are afraid of single-payer don't know how it works.  There really is no sensible objection to it, unless you figure having no care at all is preferable.

Soon, the majority will have two options in the US.  Be poor or have no care at all.

Good luck with your decision.  I'm opting for having care - because I maintain in my mind the illusion that we live in a civilized country and maybe, someday, the sensible will overcome the flameout artists with a vested interest.

JW
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: bigaudioblowhard on January 22, 2011, 04:45:50 pm
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 07:20

...

The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election.
....


The recent election was NOT a referendum on health care. I'm not sure what it was, though.

Certain people are trying to "spin" it as though it was.

I cannot understand why we won't have Single Payer in the US. Believe me, (and JW) as a Canadian living here...

Its cheaper... and everybody relaxes a tiny bit. No matter how fucked financially you may get, your health care is NOT on the table.

I've heard stories of people who were sick, then died, and costs for care only plundered their estate, leaving nothing to be inherited by their children. After it all went to Companies, who are raising rates in California by as much as 50%.

So your dad died, you paid $50,000 for hospital bills, now pay alot more for yourself. (this actually happened to an acquaintance)

This is somehow a better deal? I don't get it, what am I missing here.

America... wake up... take care of your people, stop throwing money at foreign wars. It may not cost you a dime more in taxes, and your children won't have to sell your house you spent your entire life paying off.

bab
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: zakco on January 22, 2011, 05:32:54 pm
Silvertone wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 05:39


I want the same health care as my elected official... they seem to get into the doctors right away and get to stay in the hospital as long as it takes. Why not me?


Every American should be asking this very question.

Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: mgod on January 22, 2011, 05:41:23 pm
jwhynot wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 13:22


Soon, the majority will have two options in the US.  Be poor or have no care at all.

JW

Actually there is a 3rd option, and its what I suggest to people who are panicking. Use the services, don't pay your bill, like everyone else. I carry expensive insurance and as a result can't see a doctor when I need to.

BUT - when I had cancer, Blues Shield paid the $50k hospital bill. The surgeon - who wouldn't take insurance because it doesn't pay enough - I paid directly, until I couldn't anymore. He got something for saving my life, about 50%. Plenty enough for 2 hours work.

When I had a heart attack some months later Blue Shield paid the ER, and the doctors, who didn't do such a god job, I never paid. Because I couldn't. The paramedics I did pay.

Now, in commie France everyone would've been taken care of and the docs would have been making a reasonable living, about the same as the rest of the country.

And its worth noting that in a single-payer system, the underlying cause of both my little episodes, which was detected in 1987, would have been taken care of right then, inexpensively, because to do otherwise would risk costing the system too much money in the long run. But in our wise system, the risk of my dying before costing the system money is high enough that's its worth the risk to not spend $500 on minor surgery if there's a chance I won't cost the system anything by dying first. But I outsmarted it, I lived - expensively.

Your political convictions may vary of course. But the numbers don't lie.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Rader Ranch on January 22, 2011, 05:51:37 pm
Tidewater wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 14:59

Profit is not made from human suffering.


By whom, Mother Teresa? I mean...what???

Quote:


I live in the wrong time. I belong in a time where people live their lives, because that's all there was to do.


Disenfranchised hunter-gatherer? I'm living my life. Any contact at all with the outside world should aptly show the range of ideals that constitute folks definition of 'living free', and I can just about guarantee that there are precious few people who would truly be happier a few centuries back, it's merely convenient to romanticize.

Me, I was born far too early I think, but what can you do, besides keep paying taxes and searching for affordable, effective health care  Rolling Eyes
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Jay Kadis on January 22, 2011, 06:20:11 pm
The whole US medical system has been undermined by the profits inherent in the existing structure.  Doctors emerge from medical school owing hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans, so they have to make money.  At every stage of device and drug manufacturing and delivery, profits are exacted by middlemen, each of whom must indemnify themselves so the system is then plagued with unreasonable liability-related costs that thwart new treatments and research.  Corporate research is directed at the most expensive devices and drugs so that maximal profits can be realized, while preventive care and patient education are neglected.  Drug manufacturers advertise directly to end users who don't have a clue about medicine.  Private insurance companies take a big cut for managing the whole system. The associated but extraneous costs are astronomical. These problems are minimized by single-payer systems.  Everyone then has a vested interesting keeping the costs low because they're ultimately paying the cost in tax: better health care leads to lower taxes for all.  Win-win.

Medical care will never be perfect.  We can't all have a heart transplant and we never will be able to.  Doctors make mistakes.  Medicine has grown extremely complex and incidents happen at the limits of our technology.  But if the system is optimized, it will cost less and deliver better care overall.  That is the case everywhere medical care is managed by a single payer system, which is nearly everywhere except the US.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: Kassonica on January 22, 2011, 06:34:17 pm
FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 22:39


Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.



Completely and utterly false.

I wish Roger nichols the best and I hope he recovers and still has a home.

Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: jonathan jetter on January 22, 2011, 06:38:24 pm
wwittman wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 12:06


Socialist police seems to work rather well. Fire depts too.



hi william-

i agree with you that fire protection should not be provided by the private sector, but i disagree that our police system is working well.

a few reference points off the top of my head-

the Chicago police assassinated Fred Hampton in 1969.

established legal precedent states that the police have no obligation to protect the citizenry, and numerous cases where police failed to respond to 911 calls have not resulted in any findings of liability.  their *only* legal obligation is to work to apprehend criminals.

Frank Lucas's testimony ended up indicting practically the entire NYC vice squad.

Amadou Diallo and Abner Louima and Rodney King.

all the recent taserings, including a grandfather who was strapped to his hospital bed, and a driver who had gone into diabetic shock and was mistakenly thought by cops to be drunk.

etc etc etc.

i don't know what the solution is, but we've worked ourselves into a situation where we employ a police force of halfwits and racists and frat boys who never grew up, give them guns, roll the dice, and hope it all somehow works out.

as far as health care...i don't know what the solution is, either.  i'm actually mildly impressed that my congress did something, even if it turns out not to be perfect.  i tend to think that health care is also one of the few things i would not want to be provided by the private sector, and things are currently so broken that i think it can't hurt to give this new way a chance.  i'd even be willing to get behind a fully public option, and i'm someone who in most aspects of life will always argue for a free market solution.

jon

Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Les Ismore on January 22, 2011, 06:57:27 pm
As stated in the other thread on this subject, Canadian healthcare is a basic right to Canadians. To most civilized countries in the world. Basic, basic stuff here.
The fact that the US is soooo behind the rest of the civilized world isn't just lousy, it's CRIMINAL.
It's not free, we pay according to income. My household has a relatively high income, so we pay about $60 per month for the 2 of us. In the past when I was a starving musician I didn't have to pay as much and at times didn't have to pay anything. And yes it comes out of tax revenue as does schools, government, police, fire protection, road maintenance, etc etc etc.
I have a friend (canadian) who moved to New York and worked as a producer engineer musician there for 20 years and was fairly successful doing many records you would be familiar with. Couldn't afford insurance. One night leaving the studio the cab he is riding home in is wiped out by a couple idiots in a stolen car. He was paralyzed from the waist down for the rest of his life. And requires much therapy and help. Luckily for him he has many friends who have been putting on benefits and started a trust fund for him, as otherwise I doubt he would have survived.
Is that how it is in the US? If you aren't famous and have legions of fans and rich friends to donate to your healthcare bills you just die?
That's more like a third world country........
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: DarinK on January 22, 2011, 06:57:56 pm
Just a couple comments on the "freedom" issue.  I think things like better Social Security and health care for all would lead to a more free life.  How many decisions are based on wanting a decent retirement, or having decent health care?  Being a wage-slave is not freedom.

I just read a blog from Forbes (not exactly Socialists) which discussed the top countries for happiness/prosperity.   From the article: "Happiness means having opportunity–to get an education, to be an entrepreneur. What’s more satisfying than having a big idea and turning it into a thriving business, knowing all the way that the harder you work, the more reward you can expect?"
And, "They are all borderline socialist states, with generous welfare benefits and lots of redistribution of wealth. Yet they don’t let that socialism cross the line into autocracy. Civil liberties are abundant (consider decriminalized drugs and prostitution in the Netherlands). There are few restrictions on the flow of capital or of labor. Legatum’s scholars point out that Denmark, for example, has little job protection, but generous unemployment benefits. So business owners can keep the right number of workers, while workers can have a safety net while they muck around looking for that fulfilling job."

Here's the article:  http://blogs.forbes.com/christopherhelman/2011/01/21/new-ran king-the-worlds-happiest-countries/
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 22, 2011, 08:02:51 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 18:38


we've worked ourselves into a situation where we employ a police force of halfwits and racists and frat boys who never grew up,

jon





Not everywhere, but HERE TOO! The politicians are no different. No training in anything, and WHOOP! There they is!

Nice suit!

Read this! (CC)

Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: PRobb on January 22, 2011, 11:27:40 pm
YZ wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 07:08

FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:39


Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.


That does not seem to be the case in several countries where there is a government-run health care structure.



Just to clarify, by "several countries" you mean just about every other developed, first world democracy on the planet.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Fenris Wulf on January 23, 2011, 12:55:24 am
wwittman wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 17:06

Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:20



The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election. Perhaps you've been living in a cave and didn't hear about it.


Roger, and people just like him who worked all their lives and made a decent income, could DIE for the simple reason that he can't afford care.



As I have already said, government intervention and not "profiteering" is what made health care unafforable for the average person.

When the government tries to make a good or service "free," it artificially increases demand and destroys the basis of price competition, until the good or service becomes more expensive than it would be in the absence of subsidies. This is a basic law of economics and it cannot be circumvented by any amount of planning, no matter how intelligent or charismatic the planners are.

I see the same ignorance in regard to higher education. Last year, University of California students held demonstrations across the state to protest tuition fee increases. They never stopped to ask themselves WHY higher education is exorbitantly expensive; instead, they demanded that the cost be shifted to taxpayers. They thought they were demonstrating AGAINST the university bureaucracy, but in reality they were serving the bureaucracy's interests by agitating for more money instead of reform.

But we don't need to understand economic principles or cause and effect, as long as we have good intentions. Right?

I have little faith in the reports of Europeans and Canadians who say their health care system works. When people believe that a system is "fair" and "equitable," they are more willing to accept its shortcomings. They are willing to accept a very low standard of care, as long as everyone receives the same care and it's considered a "right." The same attitude can be observed in Americans in regard to public education.

Even in a system that is theoretially egalitarian, there can be wide variations in quality from one region to another, and the people who are lucky enough to live in one of the better regions will have a more positive impression of the system.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Les Ismore on January 23, 2011, 01:13:24 am
My wife is Danish. In Denmark everyone gets PAID to go to university. That's right they get a wage to attend university and all the courses are free. But of course they complain that they don't get paid enough.....



Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Fenris Wulf on January 23, 2011, 01:24:23 am
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Les Ismore on January 23, 2011, 01:26:40 am
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 21:55



I have little faith in the reports of Europeans and Canadians who say their health care system works. When people believe that a system is "fair" and "equitable," they are more willing to accept its shortcomings. They are willing to accept a very low standard of care, as long as everyone receives the same care and it's considered a "right." The same attitude can be observed in Americans in regard to public education. Even in a system that is theoretially egalitarian, there can be wide variations in quality from one region to another, and the people who are lucky enough to live in one of the better regions will have a more positive impression of the system.


I find it hard that anyone can honestly say that a system that bankrupts families and lets people die because they can't afford it is a high quality care. While nothing is perfect in this universe (Stephen Hawkings) I would take Canadian healthcare any day over the joke that masquerades as healthcare in the US. You can be sure that whenever Canucks travel in the states we carry extended health so we don't get caught in the trap you poor suckers are in.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Jay Kadis on January 23, 2011, 01:49:04 am
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 21:55

wwittman wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 17:06

Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:20



The American people decisively rejected socialized medicine in the recent election. Perhaps you've been living in a cave and didn't hear about it.


Roger, and people just like him who worked all their lives and made a decent income, could DIE for the simple reason that he can't afford care.



As I have already said, government intervention and not "profiteering" is what made health care unafforable for the average person.
What government intervention are you talking about?

One health insurer alone sent $525 million in profit to their parent company in 2009.  Since 2004, that comes to $4.2 billion.  That would have bought a lot of health care we didn't get.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/23/business/la-fi-anthe m-cash23-2010feb23
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Fenris Wulf on January 23, 2011, 02:10:51 am
Health insurance is not a free market. It is a government-controlled cartel. The government mandates coverage for various illnesses and forbids price competition. Technically, the present system is fascism : private ownership combined with government control.

The government is playing an elaborate, decades-long con game. It interposes a vast bureaucracy in between doctors and their patients, funnels health care dollars into the pockets of unproductive bureaucrats, and blames the result on "capitalism" in order to justify further government intervention.

In a free market, the rate of profit for insurance companies would be roughly equal to the rate of profit for other industries (around 3%). Without government financing inflating prices, routine medical expenses would be paid out-of-pocket and medical insurance would be reserved for unexpected or catastrophic expenses.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 23, 2011, 02:20:23 am
I would be for a healthcare reform that was catastrophic only, and not loopholed like the other regulations that make a real estate collapse, or a politician friendly with anyone, in a Biblical sense.

The problem with mandates (for me.. you too) is the moving goal posts. If we set a cap @ $10,000.00, a common cold will cost $11,000.00, and so on.

I still predict we all end up with lopsided boob jobs ($17,000.00), and a poorly vetted medical staff who barely speak English amputating our legs, when we were in for lopsided boob reduction. ($18,000.00)
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: jonathan jetter on January 23, 2011, 02:50:48 am
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 02:10

Health insurance is not a free market. It is a government-controlled cartel. The government mandates coverage for various illnesses and forbids price competition. Technically, the present system is fascism : private ownership combined with government control.

The government is playing an elaborate, decades-long con game. It interposes a vast bureaucracy in between doctors and their patients, funnels health care dollars into the pockets of unproductive bureaucrats, and blames the result on "capitalism" in order to justify further government intervention.



i think there's a lot of truth in this.

certainly i think that as a whole, our economic system has many characteristics of fascism.

or, rather, to be more precise- many small and medium-sized businesses in rather peripheral industries are "able" to function as a free market.  (though whether this is beneficial is largely up for debate once the "free" companies are stuck existing in the same economy as the "fascist" ones)

larger industries are generally linked inextricably with government- finance, medicine, defense contracting, utility providers, oil, etc etc.  either the government subsidizes/controls the industries, or the industries pay off the government, or both.

what you're saying in your second paragraph also dovetails almost exactly with the anecdotal statements i've heard from doctors who have been practicing for 30 years.  apparently, back in the day, it often worked like this:  patients would come in.  doctors would treat them.  if it wasn't covered by insurance, and the patient was wealthy, he'd pay.  if the patient was poor, he wouldn't pay, or he would pay what he could afford.  doctors made more than they make now, and more people received better care.  

the main difference between now and then is this:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HealthCare/health-insurers-post -record-profits/story?id=9818699
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 23, 2011, 03:27:13 am
Ok, with what you just said before the last thing, and the last thing.. hold a sec, help me say this..

The insurance thing is a scam. I mean, calling a plan where everything is covered, at least.

You really can't insure against anything you know is coming, much less already exists. Insurance is bullshit when the above fact exists.

When I was a child, we walked in, I got prodded, I threw up, we paid and left. It was always $25, and sometimes $50, and never took more than 20 minutes, but we were there a bunch, because I had odd allergies.

I will give an inch if they won't take a mile. I will go for catastrophic, if they make every visit cost the sickly enough to keep them from jamming the door with hangnails, and colds, but not so much that it can't be afforded..

I am not talking about price fixing to eff the doctor. I would also call for an overhaul of the tax system, and regulations about some of the less mainstream things they make doctors do to comply with codes written by Dr. Frankenstein.

Much of the problem with medical cost is administration. The computerized national register is not what I mean.

The tax thing is a major one. If you dump income tax, and fire the IRS, I am all about having a conversation with you, and a bunch of good doctors.

Federal taxes should be a flat 10% at the point of sale for everything but food. It's good enough for God.

Ya know..
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: YZ on January 23, 2011, 03:46:41 am
Tidewater wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 06:27


Federal taxes should be a flat 10% at the point of sale for everything but food. It's good enough for God.
Ya know..


Well, if you take into consideration that when God helps someone it does not cost Him any money, and realize that the 10% you mention go to _the Church's Administration_ and not to God Himself, you may come to the conclusion that those 10% are way too much.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: DarinK on January 23, 2011, 03:49:47 am
Fenris Wulf wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 23:10



In a free market, the rate of profit for insurance companies would be roughly equal to the rate of profit for other industries (around 3%).


3% is about the rate of overhead for Medicare & VA medical care - the only true government health care systems.



Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Extreme Mixing on January 23, 2011, 07:16:47 am
Good points William.

Health care in America should really be a right.  In many ways, it is.  You don't see poor migrant worker's children being born on the street outside the hospital, do you?  And if they are born with a defective heart they get medical attention.  Right?

With rights come responsibility.  That's why I think everyone should pay in, even if you're young and healthy, because you never know what life will bring your way.  I don't know Roger's situation.  Maybe he had a pre-existing condition that made it impossible for him to get coverage.  Or maybe he just didn't think he would ever need medical services.  Either way, $10 donations from a few friends online surely won't be enough to fight this type of cancer.  He won't get much public aid until he has used all of his money and left his family destitute.  That's no way to live and it's certainly not a good way to die.

If you don't think the medical system in this country needs an overhaul then you just haven't been sick enough yet.  I've spent some time in the hospital, and I've seen the bills.  They are astounding!  But at least I got better.

Steve

Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Bob Olhsson on January 23, 2011, 10:17:27 pm
Health care in America is a classic "insurance job." The more it costs, the more the insurance companies earn. What the federal government already pays could easily cover everybody.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: DarinK on January 24, 2011, 12:33:21 am
Extreme Mixing wrote on Sun, 23 January 2011 04:16

Good points William.

Health care in America should really be a right.  In many ways, it is.  You don't see poor migrant worker's children being born on the street outside the hospital, do you?  And if they are born with a defective heart they get medical attention.  Right?

With rights come responsibility.  That's why I think everyone should pay in, even if you're young and healthy, because you never know what life will bring your way.  I don't know Roger's situation.  Maybe he had a pre-existing condition that made it impossible for him to get coverage.  Or maybe he just didn't think he would ever need medical services.  Either way, $10 donations from a few friends online surely won't be enough to fight this type of cancer.  He won't get much public aid until he has used all of his money and left his family destitute.  That's no way to live and it's certainly not a good way to die.

If you don't think the medical system in this country needs an overhaul then you just haven't been sick enough yet.  I've spent some time in the hospital, and I've seen the bills.  They are astounding!  But at least I got better.

Steve





We have to be careful to not confuse having medical insurance with having medical care.  Insurance doesn't guarantee care, and it doesn't guarantee that our bills will be paid.  A quick google search brings up this statistic:
Sixty-two percent of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were linked to medical expenses. Of those who filed for bankruptcy in 2007, nearly 80 percent had health insurance.

I don't know Roger's situation either, but I know that having insurance does NOT in any way mean that a person's finances won't be wiped out by medical bills.  

As for the fact that emergency rooms can't turn away emergency cases, that does not equal health care.  Emergency rooms only have to treat emergency cases, and they are only obligated to stabilize the patient.  That's it.  No preventative care.  No ongoing or long term care. No treating of small problems before they become big problems.  It's an incredibly expensive & inefficient system, both in terms of monetary cost and human suffering.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: JDNelson on January 24, 2011, 03:22:18 pm
YZ wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 04:08

FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:39


Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.


That does not seem to be the case in several countries where there is a government-run health care structure.



Would the average working person in China, Cuba, etc. receive unlimited state-of-the-art cancer treatments? Would Hu Jintao or Fidel?  Just wondering.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: YZ on January 24, 2011, 06:24:42 pm
JDNelson wrote on Mon, 24 January 2011 18:22

YZ wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 04:08

FFoster wrote on Sat, 22 January 2011 09:39


Yes, lets have the government run health care so it can be inaccessible to everybody.


That does not seem to be the case in several countries where there is a government-run health care structure.



Would the average working person in China, Cuba, etc. receive unlimited state-of-the-art cancer treatments? Would Hu Jintao or Fidel?  Just wondering.


I have absolutely no idea, those two countries are communist, de facto dictatorships where the press is heavily censored so any details about the reality of day-to-day life of the commoner there are hard to know. One can only guess, and it is better to leave guesswork outside of this discussion and focus on "known knowns" and use as references only democratic countries.

The only certainty is that, much like in the USA, their political class probably receive the very best medical care that can be had within their territory.
Title: Re: Roger Nichols Fighting For His Life, Needs Your Help
Post by: PRobb on January 24, 2011, 08:07:32 pm
JDNelson wrote on Mon, 24 January 2011 15:22


Would the average working person in China, Cuba, etc. receive unlimited state-of-the-art cancer treatments? Would Hu Jintao or Fidel?  Just wondering.

So China and Cuba are your standards of excellence.
I would like to aim a bit higher.

Although, you might be right. The US and Cuba are tied at #36 for life expectancy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expec tancy

And Cuba's infant mortality is lower than ours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mor tality_rate
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 24, 2011, 08:18:44 pm
We are only #36 because we are #47 in math.

-cue team america theme-
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Jay Kadis on January 25, 2011, 11:42:20 am
Tidewater wrote on Mon, 24 January 2011 17:18

We are only #36 because we are #47 in math.
Math was invented by Arabs and other foreigners.  It can't be trusted.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Jon Hodgson on January 25, 2011, 11:58:05 am
Jay Kadis wrote on Tue, 25 January 2011 16:42

Tidewater wrote on Mon, 24 January 2011 17:18

We are only #36 because we are #47 in math.
Math was invented by Arabs and other foreigners.  It can't be trusted.



No we foreigners have "maths"

I think it's the missing "s" that's messing up your calculations.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: mgod on January 25, 2011, 01:36:03 pm
Jay Kadis wrote on Tue, 25 January 2011 08:42

Tidewater wrote on Mon, 24 January 2011 17:18

We are only #36 because we are #47 in math.
Math was invented by Arabs and other foreigners.  It can't be trusted.


USA!!! #47!!! WOO-HOO!!!
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 25, 2011, 04:30:26 pm
AMER_ICA! EFF YEAH! Freedom isn't free. Buck oh five, dood.

Math wasn't invented by Arabs. They brought nothing to the table.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Jon Hodgson on January 25, 2011, 04:57:27 pm
Tidewater wrote on Tue, 25 January 2011 21:30

Math wasn't invented by Arabs. They brought nothing to the table.


Well they didn't so much bring nothing to the table (that was arguably the Indians) but they did pass it down the table to the Europeans, who were a bit slow to catch on.


Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: YZ on January 26, 2011, 07:47:29 am
Going back on-topic...

I've been a member here for about five years.

Over that period, I've read a few 'calls for help' to the benefit of fellow audio engineers who fell on hard times due to illness.

IIRC, all from the USA.

None from Europe or elsewhere.

Something to think about.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: mgod on January 26, 2011, 11:53:29 am
YZ wrote on Wed, 26 January 2011 04:47

Going back on-topic...

I've been a member here for about five years.

Over that period, I've read a few 'calls for help' to the benefit of fellow audio engineers who fell on hard times due to illness.

IIRC, all from the USA.

None from Europe or elsewhere.

Something to think about.

No.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Malcolm Boyce on January 26, 2011, 01:12:18 pm
YZ wrote on Wed, 26 January 2011 08:47

Going back on-topic...

I've been a member here for about five years.

Over that period, I've read a few 'calls for help' to the benefit of fellow audio engineers who fell on hard times due to illness.

IIRC, all from the USA.

None from Europe or elsewhere.

Something to think about.

Outstanding point.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 26, 2011, 07:24:57 pm
In Europe, the first thing they do when you get sick is turn off your internet.

www.snopes.com/sick_in_europe.html
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: DarinK on January 26, 2011, 07:52:37 pm
Tidewater wrote on Wed, 26 January 2011 16:24

In Europe, the first thing they do when you get sick is turn off your internet.

www.snopes.com/sick_in_europe.html



I've never seen & can't find anything about that, including at http://www.snopes.com/
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: YZ on January 26, 2011, 08:28:43 pm
What a fantastic example of tea-behavior.

Saying _anything_ when confronted with uncomfortable facts.

Does Miles realize that he's been fed the same?
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: Tidewater on January 26, 2011, 10:59:24 pm
The post was a joke. The statement was silly, and the link was a ruse.

Tea behaviour? You just revealed a world unknown. I am not a tea party member.

If you can take that seriously, it makes me wonder about other things said here.

Look how far apart you think we are. Seriously. I have also underestimated just how far apart WE REALLY are.

Disheartening. It's not all our own faults, maybe, but we can definately fix this part.

A joke... among artistic musician types.. turns tragic..

Let's all check our heads.

See you in the next one, and don't be late.
Title: Re: Health care - the need for reformation (was Roger Nichols)
Post by: mgod on January 27, 2011, 12:41:57 pm
Tidewater wrote on Wed, 26 January 2011 19:59

The post was a joke.

Some things are best left to professionals.