PDA

View Full Version : DO NOT change our health care system it is the BEST IN THE WORLD: (charts and graphs)



Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 04:58 PM
http://i48.tinypic.com/24kw86x.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2ap151.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/2ezh0nk.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/160vfcp.jpg

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 04:59 PM
http://i48.tinypic.com/5uep6s.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/dz7z8x.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2v0j05f.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/s652kh.jpg

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 04:59 PM
http://i45.tinypic.com/2z57r0y.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/oigbok.jpg
http://i46.tinypic.com/1ilkk2.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/2yv31pc.jpg

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:00 PM
http://i48.tinypic.com/2wqwkfk.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/24pi8aa.jpg

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:01 PM
http://i48.tinypic.com/24kw86x.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2ap151.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/2ezh0nk.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/160vfcp.jpg

Wow, your C&P skills are amazing!

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:02 PM
http://i48.tinypic.com/2wqwkfk.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/24pi8aa.jpg

http://cdn.holytaco.com/www/sites/default/files/images/2009/IMG_0165.JPG

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:05 PM
Wow, your C&P skills are amazing!

This thread isn't designed to showcase my personal attributes, but rather show statistics on our health care system.

Nice burn though, you sure got me!

PoliCon
03-06-2010, 05:08 PM
Our health care system is soooo bad that government officials from socialized medicine countries come here for their medical treatments. :rolleyes:

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:08 PM
This thread isn't designed to showcase my personal attributes, but rather show statistics on our health care system.

Nice burn though, you sure got me!

http://cdn.holytaco.com/www/sites/default/files/images/2009/ItaysWorld_Homeless_Signs_07.jpg

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 05:11 PM
This thread isn't designed to showcase my personal attributes, but rather show statistics on our health care system.

Nice burn though, you sure got me!


Which are generally irrelevant - or don't mean what you think they mean!!


Deaths due to emphesema is more likely do to factors OTHER than healthcare - perhaps something like smoking or occupation??? Did you ever THINK instead of parrot??


We can go one by one if you like - but they are all baloney.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:12 PM
Our health care system is soooo bad that government officials from socialized medicine countries come here for their medical treatments. :rolleyes:

Our system is good if you have an incredible amount of money. For everyone else it's awful.

Say a large city has 1 really exceptional High School, top programs available, excellent teachers, small class size, the works. The other 9 schools in the district are awful substandard schools (the sort of you think of when you think of "failing inner-city school"). Would you call that city's school district great because "lots of rich kids from other cities come here to attend our good school"?

Come on, think a little.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:13 PM
Which are generally irrelevant - or don't mean what you think they mean!!


Deaths due to emphesema is more likely do to factors OTHER than healthcare - perhaps something like smoking or occupation??? Did you ever THINK instead of parrot??


We can go one by one if you like - but they are all baloney.

Are you suggesting that other countries smoke cigarettes less than we do? lol

ok let's go one by one, I'd love to hear it.

PoliCon
03-06-2010, 05:15 PM
Our system is good if you have an incredible amount of money. For everyone else it's awful.

Say a large city has 1 really exceptional High School, top programs available, excellent teachers, small class size, the works. The other 9 schools in the district are awful substandard schools (the sort of you think of when you think of "failing inner-city school"). Would you call that city's school district great because "lots of rich kids from other cities come here to attend our good school"?

Come on, think a little. And why is that? Where do those who can't afford healthcare get it? I'll give you a hint - the answer is teh gubmint. :rolleyes: And if the other 9 schools are terrible - they're gonna be the gubmint skewls.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:15 PM
Here's a link showing smoking stats by country:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_smo_pre_mal_of_adu-health-smoking-prevalence-males-adults

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:21 PM
And why is that? Where do those who can't afford healthcare get it? I'll give you a hint - the answer is teh gubmint. :rolleyes: And if the other 9 schools are terrible - they're gonna be the gubmint skewls.

People who can't afford healthcare avoid preventative treatment until their illness becomes debilitating then they are forced into emergency rooms where the rest of us, tax payers and even those with their own private insurance, have to pay for them.

The "gumbmint", pays for their healthcare already, using OUR tax money. The smart thing to do would be to reform the system so we get the most bang for our buck, just look at the graphs my man.

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:22 PM
And why is that? Where do those who can't afford healthcare get it? I'll give you a hint - the answer is teh gubmint. :rolleyes: And if the other 9 schools are terrible - they're gonna be the gubmint skewls.

I'll bet that all his charts & graphs show the treatments given to illegals. You know, the ones that call 911 after a sneeze...


Wu, you're the one who needs to think.

PoliCon
03-06-2010, 05:22 PM
People who can't afford healthcare avoid preventative treatment until their illness becomes debilitating then they are forced into emergency rooms where the rest of us, tax payers and even those with their own private insurance, have to pay for them.

The "gumbmint", pays for their healthcare already, using OUR tax money. The smart thing to do would be to reform the system so we get the most bang for our buck, just look at the graphs my man.

Those who cannot afford healthcare are on medicare and medicaid. gubmint healthcare. If their healthcare is substandard - blame the gubmint.

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:23 PM
People who can't afford healthcare avoid preventative treatment until their illness becomes debilitating then they are forced into emergency rooms where the rest of us, tax payers and even those with their own private insurance, have to pay for them.

The "gumbmint", pays for their healthcare already, using OUR tax money. The smart thing to do would be to reform the system so we get the most bang for our buck, just look at the graphs my man.

Your graphs are incomplete and skewed...

PoliCon
03-06-2010, 05:24 PM
he smart thing to do would be to reform the system so we get the most bang for our buck Which would be to institute tort reform - allow portablility, allow competition, allow coverage to be purchased a la cart . . . .you know - all the things that the GOP is pushing for. :rolleyes:

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:25 PM
Those who cannot afford healthcare are on medicare and medicaid.

That's just not true. If this statement was true, there would be no talk at all about expanding coverage because EVERYONE WOULD ALREADY BE COVERED.


gubmint healthcare. If their healthcare is substandard - blame the gubmint.

The charts provided focus on everyone, not just those on medicare.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:28 PM
Which would be to institute tort reform - allow portablility, allow competition, allow coverage to be purchased a la cart . . . .you know - all the things that the GOP is pushing for. :rolleyes:

Well let's look at this one by one.

Tort reform: Obama has accepted this into his final package
Portability: Current bills have provisions to keep you from losing your coverage if you lose your job
Competition: Public Option (which republicans killed)
Individual purchasing: Health Care Exchange for individuals allowing them to bargain for smaller prices.,

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:29 PM
That's just not true. If this statement was true, there would be no talk at all about expanding coverage because EVERYONE WOULD ALREADY BE COVERED.



The charts provided focus on everyone, not just those on medicare.

That's right! They focus on EVERYONE, not citizens. Your information is flawed and purposely so...

PoliCon
03-06-2010, 05:30 PM
That's just not true. If this statement was true, there would be no talk at all about expanding coverage because EVERYONE WOULD ALREADY BE COVERED.Sadly - there are so many retards out there - I mean besides you and your ilk - who qualify but are to fucking stoopid to apply. :rolleyes: It's already been proven repeatedly that the uninsured number so often touted by the left is made up in large part by 1 - people who can afford it and chose not to get it 2 - people who qualify for existing programs but are too fucking stoopid to apply 3 - illegals. There is no gap. It's a lie.

PoliCon
03-06-2010, 05:36 PM
Well let's look at this one by one.BULLSHIT. :rolleyes:


Tort reform: Obama has accepted this into his final package He accepted to STUDY tort reform not to MAKE it. Fuck are you retarded.



Portability: Current bills have provisions to keep you from losing your coverage if you lose your job By forcing you into government programs which have repeatedly been proven to be substandard. :rolleyes:

Competition: Public Option (which republicans killed)rotfl. Are you completely fucking retarded? You don't compete with the government.

Individual purchasing: Health Care Exchange for individuals allowing them to bargain for smaller prices.,individual purchasing? Is this how you understand a la cart? total fucktard you are . . . . A la cart means that I can purchase to cover specific things. I want coverage for pregnancy - I can purchase coverage for pregnancy. I wang coverage for cancer - I can purchase coverage for cancer. You can purchase coverage for what ever you want rather than having to pay for coverage you would never want or use. Take for example the state of PA requires - THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES - that all policies cover pregnancy so I as a MAN am covered should I become pregnant. FUCKING ASININE.

Apache
03-06-2010, 05:36 PM
Well let's look at this one by one.

Tort reform: Obama has accepted this into his final packageZero has no package

Portability: Current bills have provisions to keep you from losing your coverage if you lose your jobSomething for nothing, has not worked in Man's history...

Competition: Public Option (which republicans killed)1)How about letting Insurance companies go across the nation, not just regionally.
2)The GOP has no power to kill anything with this current Congress. Nice try though...

Individual purchasing: Health Care Exchange for individuals allowing them to bargain for smaller prices.,Name ONE Gov. plan that works the way it was intended...

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 05:51 PM
Are you suggesting that other countries smoke cigarettes less than we do? lol

ok let's go one by one, I'd love to hear it.


Nope, just saying that there are other factors involved and your charts don't address them - at all.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:53 PM
uh huh

FlaGator
03-06-2010, 05:53 PM
Zero has no package

...
Name ONE Gov. plan that works the way it was intended...

The Moon Project? It was intended to put a man on the moon and did so. Other than that, however, nothing jumps out at me. :D

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 05:55 PM
Well let's look at this one by one.

Tort reform: Obama has accepted this into his final package

What a CROCK - he set aside a VERY small amount to INVESTIGATE this.




Competition: Public Option (which republicans killed)


Public option and Competition are mutually exclusive long term. My GOD what an idiot.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:55 PM
Manhatten Project was probably the most impressive feat of human engineering ever. What with the time frame, the amount of people and resources needed.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 05:57 PM
Public option and Competition are mutually exclusive long term. My GOD what an idiot.

Why? What's wrong with the citizens deciding for themselves who can provide the most cost-effective and best quality care for their buck?

Should we allow people to make this choice for themselves, or should we prohibit such a public option from even being created?

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 05:58 PM
Our higher per capita spending is a NATURAL outcome of disposable income - we spend more because we can afford it. Plastic surgery, pain relieving proceedures that are NOT ALLOWED in other countries (or are endlessly delayed - until the person dies)

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 06:01 PM
Why? What's wrong with the citizens deciding for themselves who can provide the most cost-effective and best quality care for their buck?

Should we allow people to make this choice for themselves, or should we prohibit such a public option from even being created?


Nothing, but that is NOT what it is about. Creating a "public option" creates a monopoly - it forces the private companies to fund their competition - and it will drive them out of business. It will eliminate choice.

Analogy - you and I are going into the fruit stand business competing against each other, since I am the government, I FORCE you to GIVE me part of your inventory so that I can undercut your prices. How long would you last??

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 06:04 PM
Our higher per capita spending is a NATURAL outcome of disposable income - we spend more because we can afford it.

We spend more because we can afford it? Doesn't efficiency ever enter the equation?

Also, we shouldn't look at average income or any misleading stat like that because it ignores the distribution of wealth:

http://i50.tinypic.com/mkdkll.png



Plastic surgery, pain relieving proceedures that are NOT ALLOWED in other countries (or are endlessly delayed - until the person dies)

Actually the graphs do address this.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 06:06 PM
Why not just eliminate the barriers to competition that exist right now??? If choice is the issue there are hundreds of companies out there - they are just not allowed to do business in other states.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 06:08 PM
We spend more because we can afford it? Doesn't efficiency ever enter the equation?

Also, we shouldn't look at average income or any misleading stat like that because it ignores the distribution of wealth:

http://i50.tinypic.com/mkdkll.png




Actually the graphs do address this.



That would have been covered under the portion of my statement that explained some of your graphs are irrelevant.

(and your graph does NOT address the issue I brought up)

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 06:10 PM
Nothing, but that is NOT what it is about. Creating a "public option" creates a monopoly - it forces the private companies to fund their competition - and it will drive them out of business. It will eliminate choice.

How does FEDEX and UPS exist then? It's simply not true.

A public health option would be non-profit, you're expecting a non-profit organization to run a multi-billion dollars a year industry out? Come on.


Analogy - you and I are going into the fruit stand business competing against each other, since I am the government, I FORCE you to GIVE me part of your inventory so that I can undercut your prices. How long would you last??

More like I have a billion-dollar a year super fruit stand industry, and you start a fruit stand that focuses on providing affordable fruit rather than producing a profit for your shareholders.

Mine will be the more successful business and yours will provide affordable fruit to people who want it.

ALl of these broken analogies assume that a for-profit business is run the same way as a non-profit organization.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 06:19 PM
How does FEDEX and UPS exist then? It's simply not true.

A public health option would be non-profit, you're expecting a non-profit organization to run a multi-billion dollars a year industry out? Come on.



More like I have a billion-dollar a year super fruit stand industry, and you start a fruit stand that focuses on providing affordable fruit rather than producing a profit for your shareholders.

Mine will be the more successful business and yours will provide affordable fruit to people who want it.

ALl of these broken analogies assume that a for-profit business is run the same way as a non-profit organization.

FED EX and UPS is not a good example they are not allowed to compete with the post office in certain areas - and even so - they are kicking the butts of the post office - which is loosing money AND costing the taxpayers extra money because of this loss - yet they cannot go out of business which would be the case if there was true competition there.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-06-2010, 06:21 PM
More like I have a billion-dollar a year super fruit stand industry, and you start a fruit stand that focuses on providing affordable fruit rather than producing a profit for your shareholders.

Mine will be the more successful business and yours will provide affordable fruit to people who want it.



Your analogies don't reflect the truth!!!


The government will FORCE the insurance companies to support the public option - essentially funding their competition.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 07:26 PM
FED EX and UPS is not a good example they are not allowed to compete with the post office in certain areas - and even so - they are kicking the butts of the post office - which is loosing money AND costing the taxpayers extra money because of this loss - yet they cannot go out of business which would be the case if there was true competition there.

Ok so private companies cannot compete with the government because the government option WILL MAKE A MONOPOLY AND FORCE PRIVATE BUSINESS OUT. and at the same time, PRIVATE BUSINESS IS KICKING THE BUTTS OF THE GOVERNMENT.

Nice one ok.

Also, a non-profit organization is NOT a business, we keep forgetting that around here.

Wei Wu Wei
03-06-2010, 07:27 PM
The government will FORCE the insurance companies to support the public option - essentially funding their competition.

Force how?

The plans that were proposed had a health exchange with many health care options, private and public, that people could choose from.

The public option wasn't to be a government-subsidized business, but a non-profit organization. They are worlds apart.

fettpett
03-06-2010, 10:24 PM
Ok so private companies cannot compete with the government because the government option WILL MAKE A MONOPOLY AND FORCE PRIVATE BUSINESS OUT. and at the same time, PRIVATE BUSINESS IS KICKING THE BUTTS OF THE GOVERNMENT.

Nice one ok.

Also, a non-profit organization is NOT a business, we keep forgetting that around here.

ok, first you're not understanding the difference between the Health Care crap and the Postal Service/FedEx-UPS the Governments rules over them are completely different. in the cases of UPS/FedEx they can set their rates and be as flexible as they want to be.

Health Care will be completely different. the Rules will not allow for flexibility by anyone in the private sector. They'll all have the same Mandates but the Federal Government will be able to undercut everyone. Plus if they keep the same rules as with the previous Bill, once you're out of a private (company supported) Health insurance you'll be FORCED into the government one.

what needs to happen is this.

True Tort reform. a cap on all malpractice suits. the biggest share of the increases in Health Care cost is from this. you put a hard cap with some things having a bit of flexibility by case and severity and you'll reduce costs of Insurance almost over night.

Get rid of all State Mandates/Allow Companies to offer any and all things to be covered. My parents Live in Wisconsin. they have to have Pregnancy coverage as well. My mom is 50 and had a Hysterectomy, she physically CANT have any more Babies. Why should she be forced to have that in her insurance coverage? Other states Mandate various things like Massage (i'm currently in training for Massage and still feel that it shouldn't be a Mandate for coverage) Acupuncture, Aromatherapy, hell there are some states that have talked about Mandating PET Insurance. This whole system is fucked up and screwing ever single person.

Your little pie charts in NO way take into account elective procedures. Brest augmentation, Liposuction, Botox, ETC are all factored into the cost per captia on expenditures. a lot of those procedures cost 2-7 thousand dollars each. Now I would agree that people need better preventative care. but a lot of that is Culture. there are a lot of people that wont go to a doctor for any reason, until they get close to their death bed. then there are the people that or so OCD that they go to the Doctor for every little sneeze and cough. a slight fever at night and rush the kid off the the ER, instead of going to walmart and getting the kid some Tylenol, and taking them to the Doc in the morning.

Then there is the Illegal issue. there are like 5 hospitals in the LA area. all but 1 closes their doors at like 9-10pm because by LAW they cannot turn anyone away for treatment, regardless of whether they can pay or not. to get around it they close cuz it was costing the Hospitals hand over fist to treat these people.

Yes to a large extent having Hospitals, and what not be for-profit might seem wrong and impersonal. but if they don't turn one how are they going to continue to grow and get better and pay for New Doctors and cover their Insurance costs and keep the lights on? that stuff isn't free and if you don't have that, you wont have people coming to your Hospital.

One more example of why we shouldn't have Government Health Coverage. the VA system. for how many years has the VA had shitty services, poor facilities, bad doctors? and yet, how much money has been thrown at them? granted some of the places do need more money, but they are very poorly managed over all, and most Vets will NOT go to them unless they have to.

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 12:22 AM
Why? What's wrong with the citizens deciding for themselves who can provide the most cost-effective and best quality care for their buck?

Should we allow people to make this choice for themselves, or should we prohibit such a public option from even being created?

Government control precludes and prohibits just that - AND the only way that the fed gov can do what you claim is if they tax the fuck out of the rest of us to pay for it! FUCKING RETARD. :rolleyes:

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 12:25 AM
We spend more because we can afford it? Doesn't efficiency ever enter the equation?

Also, we shouldn't look at average income or any misleading stat like that because it ignores the distribution of wealth:

http://i50.tinypic.com/mkdkll.png




Actually the graphs do address this.

http://freon.shackspace.com/misc/strawman.png

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 12:26 AM
How does FEDEX and UPS exist then? It's simply not true.

A public health option would be non-profit, you're expecting a non-profit organization to run a multi-billion dollars a year industry out? Come on.



More like I have a billion-dollar a year super fruit stand industry, and you start a fruit stand that focuses on providing affordable fruit rather than producing a profit for your shareholders.

Mine will be the more successful business and yours will provide affordable fruit to people who want it.

ALl of these broken analogies assume that a for-profit business is run the same way as a non-profit organization.

fucktard - Fedex and UPS do not compete in day to day mail delivery. :rolleyes:

Rockntractor
03-07-2010, 12:26 AM
Government control precludes and prohibits just that - AND the only way that the fed gov can do what you claim is if they tax the fuck out of the rest of us to pay for it! FUCKING RETARD. :rolleyes:
Don't give him any ideas, let's just hope he is a retard that doesn't f*** and reproduce. We don't need him adding to the gene pool if it can be avoided!

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 12:29 AM
Don't give him any ideas, let's just hope he is a retard that doesn't f*** and reproduce. We don't need him adding to the gene pool if it can be avoided!

point taken. He's still a fucktard though.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 05:41 AM
Force how?

The plans that were proposed had a health exchange with many health care options, private and public, that people could choose from.

The public option wasn't to be a government-subsidized business, but a non-profit organization. They are worlds apart.

Ever hear of the tax code??


Just where do you think the public option is going to get their start up money.


If you don't think it will cost anything, why is there $2.3 trillion in the bill????

Sonnabend
03-07-2010, 07:47 AM
As a citizen of a nation with socialised health care...lemme lay it out for you.

We have 21 - 23 million people so far, nurses leaving in droves, doctors overworked, closed hospital beds, ambulances playing musical hospitals, closed wards, closed beds, no ICU beds available for neonates, patients flown from one state to another because there are no beds, patients discharged too early who die or develop lifethreatening complications owing to po0or aftercare or monitoring,

Socialised care like the UK, where yesterday a man died of dehydration...in a hospital ward.

State controlled hospitals where a man with a busted leg can sit for ten hours waiting for care (cant go to a private hospital as they dont HAVE an ER), children with meningitis or other diseases seen hurriedly and sent home who then die, doctors who are paid shit money and quit or go overseas, nurses who are overworked, underpaid, understaffed, underequipped, work double shifts ROUTINELY (wanna have your gear checked by a nurse who is 3/4 asleep?) who then walk out...want me to continue?

Go ahead, Wei Wei Wankfest..come on, argue with me...I'll bash you over the head with so many facts your head'll have a fucking DENT in it for a year...as it is the US health care system is far superior to ours.

Obama is an idiot and his plan is a disaster in the making, and you're a pathetic fool for not seeing that.

I live here..I KNOW.

Come and get it...asshole.

Sonnabend
03-07-2010, 07:50 AM
Australia's health system could have only 60 per cent of the nurses it requires by 2006 unless action is taken urgently, a new report says.The Australian Council of Deans of Nursing report has sparked warnings from health experts that the shortage could weaken the quality of patient care.

It predicts that an ageing population will exacerbate the current nurse shortage, leaving an Australia-wide shortfall of more than 4000 nursing graduates by 2006. The report's author, consultant Barbara Preston, warns that if qualified nurses keep leaving the profession at the current rate, an increase in graduate nurse supply of 25 per cent by 2005 and 50 per cent by 2006 will be required to meet demand.

The gravity of the situation varies substantially between states. It is most dire in NSW and the ACT, which will have only 47 per cent of the nurses they need within three years, the report says. Victoria is comparatively well placed, but can still expect to have only a little more than three-quarters of its required nurses.
http://campaigns.f2.com.au/image.ng/cat=news&Params.richmedia=yes&subcat=national&site=age&adspace=300x250
The council's president, Pauline Nugent, said the growing shortage would affect the quality of care provided to patients, and increase pressure on nurses in the system."As they become more stressed because there's less of them, they'll think: 'Why am I doing this?' " she said. The head of nursing at the Australian Catholic University, Maria Miller, said the treatment of nurses also needed to be improved so that fewer left the profession early in their careers.

She warned that unless the problems were resolved, health care risked becoming "substantially below standard," and that could lead to earlier discharges from hospitals battling to cope with waiting lists. Victorian secretary of the Australian Nursing Federation, Lisa Fitzpatrick, said the situation in Victoria had improved significantly in recent years due to lower nurse-patient ratios and improved conditions. She said this had also helped to reduce the attrition rate of young nursing graduates.

The Preston report also points to the rapid ageing of the nursing workforce, which means the average age for nurses is the early 40s. In 1996, the biggest age group was the 35 to 39 bracket, rising to 40-44 by 2001. By 2006 the average age is expected to be 45-49. A spokesman for state Health Minister Bronwyn Pike said a Government campaign had encouraged more than 3400 nurses to re-register for work between 2000 and 2002. The average age of those nurses was 54, which meant the Government would soon face large attrition rates and a greater shortage.

Sonnabend
03-07-2010, 07:54 AM
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/Pubs/BN/2007-08/Hospital01.jpg

fettpett
03-07-2010, 09:17 AM
Australia's health system could have only 60 per cent of the nurses it requires by 2006 unless action is taken urgently, a new report says.The Australian Council of Deans of Nursing report has sparked warnings from health experts that the shortage could weaken the quality of patient care.

It predicts that an ageing population will exacerbate the current nurse shortage, leaving an Australia-wide shortfall of more than 4000 nursing graduates by 2006. The report's author, consultant Barbara Preston, warns that if qualified nurses keep leaving the profession at the current rate, an increase in graduate nurse supply of 25 per cent by 2005 and 50 per cent by 2006 will be required to meet demand.

The gravity of the situation varies substantially between states. It is most dire in NSW and the ACT, which will have only 47 per cent of the nurses they need within three years, the report says. Victoria is comparatively well placed, but can still expect to have only a little more than three-quarters of its required nurses.
http://campaigns.f2.com.au/image.ng/cat=news&Params.richmedia=yes&subcat=national&site=age&adspace=300x250
The council's president, Pauline Nugent, said the growing shortage would affect the quality of care provided to patients, and increase pressure on nurses in the system."As they become more stressed because there's less of them, they'll think: 'Why am I doing this?' " she said. The head of nursing at the Australian Catholic University, Maria Miller, said the treatment of nurses also needed to be improved so that fewer left the profession early in their careers.

She warned that unless the problems were resolved, health care risked becoming "substantially below standard," and that could lead to earlier discharges from hospitals battling to cope with waiting lists. Victorian secretary of the Australian Nursing Federation, Lisa Fitzpatrick, said the situation in Victoria had improved significantly in recent years due to lower nurse-patient ratios and improved conditions. She said this had also helped to reduce the attrition rate of young nursing graduates.

The Preston report also points to the rapid ageing of the nursing workforce, which means the average age for nurses is the early 40s. In 1996, the biggest age group was the 35 to 39 bracket, rising to 40-44 by 2001. By 2006 the average age is expected to be 45-49. A spokesman for state Health Minister Bronwyn Pike said a Government campaign had encouraged more than 3400 nurses to re-register for work between 2000 and 2002. The average age of those nurses was 54, which meant the Government would soon face large attrition rates and a greater shortage.

Thats INSANE... there is such an over supply of Nurses in Michigan that they put a Hiring freeze on them in my part of the state just before Thanksgiving. There are so many dumb people that go into the profession thinking it's easy, but flunk out once they are in the program...there are 1-3 year waiting lists in some places to get into nursing school. My previous Job went to Canada so we were eligible for TRA/TAA (basically get to go to school for 3 years for "free", up to 15,000 a year) of the people that went into it, at LEST 80% went for nursing, including my sister in law. besides her, most of them aren't smart enough to complete nursing school.

AmPat
03-07-2010, 10:18 AM
Our system is good if you have an incredible amount of money. For everyone else it's awful.

Say a large city has 1 really exceptional High School, top programs available, excellent teachers, small class size, the works. The other 9 schools in the district are awful substandard schools (the sort of you think of when you think of "failing inner-city school"). Would you call that city's school district great because "lots of rich kids from other cities come here to attend our good school"?

Come on, think a little.

Let's, shall we?
Why do officials from other countries come to the US to get medical procedures instead of getting it done in their utopias?
What medical help are our non-filthy rich population not getting?
How much do the poor helpless, down trodden in our society pay for their FREE health care?
Stop posting eye charts and do some analysis here. Are you against our health care because it is expensive?
Are you against our health insurance?
What is your main gripe, insurance or care ?
Do you suggest that our health care is so bad that a bloated, broke, bankrupt, corrupt gov't run by idiot politicians will improve it?

Just enlighten us here. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

AmPat
03-07-2010, 10:22 AM
Why? What's wrong with the citizens deciding for themselves who can provide the most cost-effective and best quality care for their buck?

Should we allow people to make this choice for themselves, or should we prohibit such a public option from even being created?

It should be prohibited and you know precisely why. It is impossible for the others to stay in business when they are against bloated gov't that doesn't have to run efficiently. There will be no competition within a couple of years and all will be under the control of Big Brother. You well know this or you have no business being outside of the assylum.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 01:48 PM
Ever hear of the tax code??


Just where do you think the public option is going to get their start up money.


If you don't think it will cost anything, why is there $2.3 trillion in the bill????

Yes part of the proposed funding for the public option was through taxes, primarily taxes on the wealthy. How does this force people into the public option?

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 01:50 PM
As a citizen of a nation with socialised health care...lemme lay it out for you.

We have 21 - 23 million people so far, nurses leaving in droves, doctors overworked, closed hospital beds, ambulances playing musical hospitals, closed wards, closed beds, no ICU beds available for neonates, patients flown from one state to another because there are no beds, patients discharged too early who die or develop lifethreatening complications owing to po0or aftercare or monitoring,

Socialised care like the UK, where yesterday a man died of dehydration...in a hospital ward.

State controlled hospitals where a man with a busted leg can sit for ten hours waiting for care (cant go to a private hospital as they dont HAVE an ER), children with meningitis or other diseases seen hurriedly and sent home who then die, doctors who are paid shit money and quit or go overseas, nurses who are overworked, underpaid, understaffed, underequipped, work double shifts ROUTINELY (wanna have your gear checked by a nurse who is 3/4 asleep?) who then walk out...want me to continue?

Go ahead, Wei Wei Wankfest..come on, argue with me...I'll bash you over the head with so many facts your head'll have a fucking DENT in it for a year...as it is the US health care system is far superior to ours.

Obama is an idiot and his plan is a disaster in the making, and you're a pathetic fool for not seeing that.

I live here..I KNOW.

Come and get it...asshole.

Watch out for this tough guy. He's going to physically harm me with his masculine posts.

What country do you live in? Care to share some stats on that nation so we can compare?

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 01:51 PM
It should be prohibited and you know precisely why. It is impossible for the others to stay in business when they are against bloated gov't that doesn't have to run efficiently. There will be no competition within a couple of years and all will be under the control of Big Brother. You well know this or you have no business being outside of the assylum.

Yep Big Brother is going to have us in The System, and once we're in The Machine, then The Man, can come bust in my door.

Have you guys ever heard of this book called 1984? Trust me, you should read it. Educate yourself.

Infowars.com

BadCat
03-07-2010, 03:18 PM
Yes part of the proposed funding for the public option was through taxes, primarily taxes on the wealthy. How does this force people into the public option?

Why should the "wealthy" pay for YOUR health care?

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 03:22 PM
Why should the "wealthy" pay for YOUR health care?

They like stealing other peoples' money.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 03:24 PM
Yes part of the proposed funding for the public option was through taxes, primarily taxes on the wealthy. How does this force people into the public option?

I'll ask again: Are you really that stupid???


---- and I have already explained how this bill will force people onto the public option.

It forces the insurance companies to pay for their competition - and drive them out of business - until the public "option" is the ONLY option.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 03:34 PM
Yep Big Brother is going to have us in The System, and once we're in The Machine, then The Man, can come bust in my door.

Have you guys ever heard of this book called 1984? Trust me, you should read it. Educate yourself.

Infowars.com


We have - and the Democrats are trying to put themselves into the position of Big Brother.


Funny you should bring this up!!! You DO know what Orwell was warning us against - don't you???


Hint - it was not the Soviet Union.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 03:36 PM
Why should the "wealthy" pay for YOUR health care?

Every form of system has those which disproportionately benefit from it and those with disproportionately suffer from it (because we don't have a perfect system as some idealists believe). So, those who benefit most from the system should put more back into the system that got them where they are.

Taxes help pay for libraries and schools and roads and fire departments. There's no reason (other than protecting the wallets of Big Insurance) not to have them help pay for health care too.

Health care doesn't need to be treated like a commodity like cars or shoes.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 03:38 PM
I'll ask again: Are you really that stupid???


---- and I have already explained how this bill will force people onto the public option.

It forces the insurance companies to pay for their competition - and drive them out of business - until the public "option" is the ONLY option.

But if there's really masses of Americans who WANT PRIVATE INSURANCE AND DON'T WANT BIG GOVERNMENT IN THEIR LIVES, then won't they continue to be a reliable costumer base for the insurance companies?

How can these companies go under if "the majority" of americans are standing strong by their product out of philosophic reasons?

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 03:44 PM
But if there's really masses of Americans who WANT PRIVATE INSURANCE AND DON'T WANT BIG GOVERNMENT IN THEIR LIVES, then won't they continue to be a reliable costumer base for the insurance companies?

How can these companies go under if "the majority" of americans are standing strong by their product out of philosophic reasons?

Companies will offload their private plans on to the government plan whenever they get the chance. Most people have their employers provide them with their insurance.
They won't have a choice.


Are you in any way acquainted with reality???

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 03:51 PM
Companies will offload their private plans on to the government plan whenever they get the chance. Most people have their employers provide them with their insurance.
They won't have a choice.


Are you in any way acquainted with reality???

Except that the new health care bill provides Americans with a Health Care Exchange so they can purchase individual health plans at rates similar to group policies even if their employer drops them.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 03:57 PM
Except that the new health care bill provides Americans with a Health Care Exchange so they can purchase individual health plans at rates similar to group policies even if their employer drops them.


You REALLY ARE that stupid, aren't you. Everyone said you were, but I TRIED to give you a chance.

Let me get this straight.

People are going to PAY separately for their OWN insurance when the government will pick up the tab if their employer shifts them over to the government plan?

Sheese, I've seen smarter three year olds.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 04:03 PM
You REALLY ARE that stupid, aren't you. Everyone said you were, but I TRIED to give you a chance.

Let me get this straight.

People are going to PAY separately for their OWN insurance when the government will pick up the tab if their employer shifts them over to the government plan?

Sheese, I've seen smarter three year olds.

If you worked for a company and they wanted to shift you over to the BIG GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED PUBLIC SOCIALIST "OPTION", but you had the choice to purchase your own insurance at a decent rate, which would you choose?

fettpett
03-07-2010, 04:04 PM
Except that the new health care bill provides Americans with a Health Care Exchange so they can purchase individual health plans at rates similar to group policies even if their employer drops them.

You're an idiot. what do you think will happen to Private insurance when the Government can constantly undercut EVERY SINGLE policy? did you even read my post on page 5? obviously not otherwise you won't be making these idiotic posts

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 04:06 PM
You're an idiot. what do you think will happen to Private insurance when the Government can constantly undercut EVERY SINGLE policy? did you even read my post on page 5? obviously not otherwise you won't be making these idiotic posts

They can't undercut every single policy. Many premium quality policies will still be far better if you're able to afford them, as they are now.

Even if they could, would you purchase the INEFFICIENT BIG BROTHER CRADLE-TO-GRAVE NATIONALISM PUBLIC OPTION just because it was a little cheaper? Or would you PROTECT YOUR GOD-GIVEN FREEDOMS BY PURCHASING PRIVATE INSURANCE FROM COMPANIES?

fettpett
03-07-2010, 04:19 PM
you don't get it. by under cutting the Cheap coverage they'll put the companies out of business. it's like a pyrimid.

Cheap insurance 75% of the business
Midlevel 12-15%
Hgh level 5%
Preimium 2-3%

you cut out that cheap Insurance and you bankrupt the company, they CAN NOT SURVIVE WITHOUT THAT COVERAGE. the Government can UNDERCUT THEM every single time. and Taxes on top of that will kill them even faster

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 04:21 PM
you don't get it. by under cutting the Cheap coverage they'll put the companies out of business. it's like a pyrimid.

Cheap insurance 75% of the business
Midlevel 12-15%
Hgh level 5%
Preimium 2-3%

you cut out that cheap Insurance and you bankrupt the company, they CAN NOT SURVIVE WITHOUT THAT COVERAGE. the Government can UNDERCUT THEM every single time. and Taxes on top of that will kill them even faster

But if most Real Americans want private insurance and don't want Big Government taking over their Lives, then why would they ever leave their private insurance? Even if their employer drops them, they will still soon be able to purchase it on their own at a decent rate.

I mean if this Government Takeover is so awful, and since THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN, what business are they afraid of losing?

fettpett
03-07-2010, 04:30 PM
you still don't get it. I might look good on Paper, and be a great concept in theory, but it DOESN"T WORK! Not only is it myth that people aren't allowed health care (by Law Hospitals are REQUIRED to admit a person, regarless of if they can pay or not for Emergancy Care.) but the Number of people uncovered is VASTLY overrated. Most people that don't have it, don't have it cuz they don't want or need it. If they don't want it then they pay out of pocket for it.
Who knows why some of these companies are backing this shit. probably cuz they are hoping for some kickbacks from this corrupt government.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 04:32 PM
you still don't get it. I might look good on Paper, and be a great concept in theory, but it DOESN"T WORK! Not only is it myth that people aren't allowed health care (by Law Hospitals are REQUIRED to admit a person, regarless of if they can pay or not for Emergancy Care.) but the Number of people uncovered is VASTLY overrated. Most people that don't have it, don't have it cuz they don't want or need it. If they don't want it then they pay out of pocket for it.
Who knows why some of these companies are backing this shit. probably cuz they are hoping for some kickbacks from this corrupt government.

This didn't address my question in the last post but I'll respond anyway.

Yes people are required to get care (for EMERGENCY CARE), but at that point usually the problem has progressed so much that the expenses are far more, and who do you think pays for people who are forced into Emergency Rooms?

fettpett
03-07-2010, 04:42 PM
i did answer your question. IDK why some companies are backing it other than they are expecting short term kickbacks. but the Bill is bad on sooo many levels.

and yes i know we pay for a lot of the Emergancy care. but a lot of the time a payment plan is put in place and then goes to collections. We pay a lot for Emergency care because of the libabity involved and the cost of the Doctors/Hospitals Malpractice insurance. they screw up and they get sued because they didn't have enough money to hire more doctors and nurses because their insurance preiums are so high and they are still paying off the last 15 Malpractice suits. Thus the need for Tort reform.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 05:07 PM
If you worked for a company and they wanted to shift you over to the BIG GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED PUBLIC SOCIALIST "OPTION", but you had the choice to purchase your own insurance at a decent rate, which would you choose?

Most people would choose the "free" option. I personally already self-insure.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 05:17 PM
Most people would choose the "free" option. I personally already self-insure.

Most people? Well firstly the public option was never designed to be "free" (only subsidizing low-income households who couldn't afford it), it was only designed to be cheaper.

Still, I thought the majority of Real Americans already Rejected the GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER. If this is true, why would they choose the public option over their private options?

this "public option will force private out of business" relies on the idea that everyone is going to jump ship and get with the public option, but according to The Overwhelming Reaction to Obamacare, Americans should be rejecting it?

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 05:18 PM
1. Most Real Americans want private insurance.
2. Most Real American DO NOT WANT a government plan.
3. If given the choice between several private plans and a public option, Most Real Americans will jump to the public option and cause the private companies out of business.


These 3 propositions are inconsistent.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 05:43 PM
1. Most Real Americans want private insurance.
2. Most Real American DO NOT WANT a government plan.
3. If given the choice between several private plans and a public option, Most Real Americans will jump to the public option and cause the private companies out of business.


These 3 propositions are inconsistent.


No they are not. If given a choice between paying for coverage and not paying (or paying a subsidized rate) most people would choose the less expensive option.

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 05:50 PM
So a government option would be less expensive and more efficient? (remember the subsidized rate was only considered for low-income households that couldn't afford it)

stsinner
03-07-2010, 06:00 PM
You are free to purchase the skills and time of whatever and however many doctors you can afford in this country, and they'll gladly sell their skill to you.. And that's exactly how it should be.

No one has a right to the education and skill amassed by any doctor, and the government has absolutely no business telling doctors how much they can charge for their labor or which procedures they are allowed to perform to treat their customers.

stsinner
03-07-2010, 06:09 PM
1. Most Real Americans want private insurance.
2. Most Real American DO NOT WANT a government plan.
3. If given the choice between several private plans and a public option, Most Real Americans will jump to the public option and cause the private companies out of business.


These 3 propositions are inconsistent.

Hey, dumbass.. The reason why real (smart) Americans don't want the government anywhere near health care is because there isn't one thing the government has ever done that was done 1. well, and, 2. efficient.. The closest we could come to either is prosecuting wars-the government does do that well, but it sure as hell does not do it efficiently...

If the government gets involved with health care, when you go to the hospital you'll get the efficiency of the Post Office with the urgency of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles and the compassion of the IRS...

Let's try this one, genius.. Ever heard of the law of supply and demand? Sure you have, so tell me-how can you just add 25-30 million people to the roles of insurance companies and have this result in health care costs going down? Supply and demand are generally inversely proportioned to one another, so there is no way the costs can go down..

Also, this isn't even about health care.. It's about politics and the Democrats securing a voting majority for the foreseeable future by giving health benefits to tens of millions of crimigrants and then giving them the vote by forcing down our throats legalization for this roaches against our will, just as this asshole and his cronies are shoving health care down our throats when we've made it abundantly clear with the tea parties and with the historic election of Scott Brown to Kennedy's seat that we don't want his fucking health welfare bill known as health care and the massive debt it will saddle our children and grandchildren with..

Constitutionally Speaking
03-07-2010, 06:38 PM
So a government option would be less expensive and more efficient? (remember the subsidized rate was only considered for low-income households that couldn't afford it)


It would be for the consumer - because the other insurance companies subsidize IT. Remember our fruit stand???

hazlnut
03-07-2010, 07:03 PM
Name ONE Gov. plan that works the way it was intended...

As long as that's the only qualifier....

Peace Corps
HEAT
VA (underfunded, need for improvement)
Army
Navy
Air Force
Coast Guard
Americorps
Federal Student Loans - people with loans graduate every year. The majority of the loans are repaid.
USPS - (I guess this one's debatable)
The interstate highway system
FAA
FCC
FDA
National Parks
EPA - now under new management
TARP - unfortunately...

I tried to list the ones the undeniably work on a daily basis. e.g. There are 28000 domestic flights a day without incident.

Any program/service private or public can be improved. -- Ask yourself, would our life be better without this thing?

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 07:06 PM
the government has absolutely no business telling doctors ... which procedures they are allowed to perform to treat their customers.

Really? Because there's an awful lot of regulation in the health industry, some procedures or medicines deemed unsafe, licenses required, . Government shouldn't step in? It should just be totally unregulated and doctors should just do whatever they like?

Wei Wu Wei
03-07-2010, 07:07 PM
As long as that's the only qualifier....

Peace Corps
HEAT
VA (underfunded, need for improvement)
Army
Navy
Air Force
Coast Guard
Americorps
Federal Student Loans - people with loans graduate every year. The majority of the loans are repaid.
USPS - (I guess this one's debatable)
The interstate highway system
FAA
FCC
FDA
National Parks
EPA - now under new management
TARP - unfortunately...

I tried to list the ones the undeniably work on a daily basis. e.g. There are 28000 domestic flights a day without incident.

Any program/service private or public can be improved. -- Ask yourself, would our life be better without this thing?

NO BIG GOBVERNMENT. GOVERNMENT IS BAD.

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 07:45 PM
As long as that's the only qualifier....

Peace Corps
HEAT
VA (underfunded, need for improvement)
Army
Navy
Air Force
Coast Guard
Americorps
Federal Student Loans - people with loans graduate every year. The majority of the loans are repaid.
USPS - (I guess this one's debatable)
The interstate highway system
FAA
FCC
FDA
National Parks
EPA - now under new management
TARP - unfortunately...

I tried to list the ones the undeniably work on a daily basis. e.g. There are 28000 domestic flights a day without incident.

Any program/service private or public can be improved. -- Ask yourself, would our life be better without this thing?

You think all of those are good huh? :rolleyes:

Rockntractor
03-07-2010, 07:58 PM
Really? Because there's an awful lot of regulation in the health industry, some procedures or medicines deemed unsafe, licenses required, . Government shouldn't step in? It should just be totally unregulated and doctors should just do whatever they like?

I think they should use you to test new drugs and procedures.

BadCat
03-07-2010, 07:59 PM
Every form of system has those which disproportionately benefit from it and those with disproportionately suffer from it (because we don't have a perfect system as some idealists believe). So, those who benefit most from the system should put more back into the system that got them where they are.

Taxes help pay for libraries and schools and roads and fire departments. There's no reason (other than protecting the wallets of Big Insurance) not to have them help pay for health care too.

Health care doesn't need to be treated like a commodity like cars or shoes.

You sound like a Communist.

Rockntractor
03-07-2010, 08:02 PM
You sound like a Communist.
He will ask you to explain it to him, he probably doesn't know what a commie is.

BadCat
03-07-2010, 08:07 PM
He will ask you to explain it to him, he probably doesn't know what a commie is.

Well, he's down in GD saying he reads Beck and Coulter. In here, he sounds like someone I'd like to gut shoot.

AmPat
03-07-2010, 08:55 PM
Yep Big Brother is going to have us in The System, and once we're in The Machine, then The Man, can come bust in my door.

Have you guys ever heard of this book called 1984? Trust me, you should read it. Educate yourself.

Infowars.com

Says the Pot to the Kettle.:rolleyes:
By the way. You are a liar. You say your'e not for this bill yet you defend it with every fiber of your regressive liberal mind.

lacarnut
03-07-2010, 08:56 PM
Any program/service private or public can be improved. -- Ask yourself, would our life be better without this thing?

Without Fannie & Freddie and ARM's, you bet your sweet ass we would be better off. These liberal mindless programs have sucked the life blood out of our economy. Bush started the crap with everyone should own a home. That is pure Bullshit.

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 10:27 PM
Without Fannie & Freddie and ARM's, you bet your sweet ass we would be better off. These liberal mindless programs have sucked the life blood out of our economy. Bush started the crap with everyone should own a home. That is pure Bullshit.

actually - Carter started it.

Rockntractor
03-07-2010, 10:48 PM
actually - Carter started it.

Which means we have had five presidents since then who should have stopped it.

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 10:51 PM
Which means we have had five presidents since then who should have stopped it.

Actually - congress should have stopped it - and when attempts were made the left balked at them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM

Rockntractor
03-07-2010, 10:54 PM
The president can push things and get them done if he has the backbone or desire. Bush knuckled under constantly to the socialists.

PoliCon
03-07-2010, 10:57 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCrRL5pJqCg&feature=channel

Wei Wu Wei
03-08-2010, 12:05 AM
Says the Pot to the Kettle.:rolleyes:
By the way. You are a liar. You say your'e not for this bill yet you defend it with every fiber of your regressive liberal mind.

I am totally against the bill that appears to be the final version (the senate bill, even if it's slightly modified)

Wei Wu Wei
03-08-2010, 12:06 AM
Well, he's down in GD saying he reads Beck and Coulter. In here, he sounds like someone I'd like to gut shoot.

Yes I have read plenty of Coulter and enjoy Beck and own his latest book

Wei Wu Wei
03-08-2010, 12:09 AM
Let's try this one, genius.. Ever heard of the law of supply and demand? Sure you have, so tell me-how can you just add 25-30 million people to the roles of insurance companies and have this result in health care costs going down? Supply and demand are generally inversely proportioned to one another, so there is no way the costs can go down..

Why is insurance cheaper when large groups (such as employer-based policies) buy into them compared to trying to purchase an individual plan on your own?

There's your answer.



Also, this isn't even about health care.. It's about politics and the Democrats securing a voting majority for the foreseeable future by giving health benefits to tens of millions of crimigrants and then giving them the vote by forcing down our throats legalization for this roaches against our will, just as this asshole and his cronies are shoving health care down our throats when we've made it abundantly clear with the tea parties and with the historic election of Scott Brown to Kennedy's seat that we don't want his fucking health welfare bill known as health care and the massive debt it will saddle our children and grandchildren with..

Yes yes mr dobbs. it's the immigrants always the immigrants.

Rockntractor
03-08-2010, 12:11 AM
Yes I have read plenty of Coulter and enjoy Beck and own his latest book
Are you understanding and accepting what you read?:confused:

Wei Wu Wei
03-08-2010, 12:14 AM
I read an awful lot but let's not get this thread off topic I've been warned for that already I'd be more than happy to talk about books in my General Discussion thread about it.

here's a link: http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=26030

Rockntractor
03-08-2010, 12:17 AM
I read an awful lot but let's not get this thread off topic I've been warned for that already I'd be more than happy to talk about books in my General Discussion thread about it.

here's a link: http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=26030
You have a hard time giving straight answers to questions. End of discussion.

Wei Wu Wei
03-08-2010, 12:18 AM
Question was off topic for this thread, I provided a link where you can ask whatever you like.

Or just end the discussion whatever helps you sleep at night.

Rockntractor
03-08-2010, 01:07 AM
Question was off topic for this thread, I provided a link where you can ask whatever you like.

Or just end the discussion whatever helps you sleep at night.
Haven't you realized by now that you have annoyed just about everyone on the board?

Sonnabend
03-08-2010, 01:18 AM
Watch out for this tough guy. He's going to physically harm me with his masculine posts.No, just hammer you with FACTS.


What country do you live in? Care to share some stats on that nation so we can compare?

Love to

Australia..

Current PUBLICALLY FUNDED health system in crisis. Massive nursing shortage, poor pay, shit conditions, nurse and doctors leaving in droves. Beds closed everywhere, ambulances stacked up in a queue whilst their patients sit or lie on gurneys. (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/ambulance-drivers-paid-as-babysitters/story-e6freuy9-1225831953604)


Sydney news alerts

Ambulance drivers paid as babysitters

THE state's hospitals have become so full nearly 100,000 ill and injured people rushed to emergency departments by ambulance last year were forced to wait up to an hour to be seen. At Newcastle's Mater Hospital late last year, our picture shows overworked paramedics waiting with them, babysitting the patients on collapsible trolleys in hospital corridors until they can be seen by staff.

Paramedics cannot leave the patients unless relieved by colleagues - and ER ward staff are unable to admit patients until there is a bed for them. The bottleneck in the corridors of our emergency departments is played out all over NSW - including at Prince of Wales, Wyong, RPA and Westmead - forcing government bureaucrats to employ roaming teams of relief ambulance workers to enable their colleagues to get back on the road and attend emergencies or other jobs.

The teams have logged more than 5000 hours in the past year, switching between hospitals to see to patients and allow their colleagues to return to the road.

Figures obtained by the Opposition under freedom of information show that of the 97,782 people forced to wait between 30 minutes and an hour in the first 11 months of last year, 66,562 were emergency cases including car accidents, asthma attacks and heart attacks, are the most serious and are fast-tracked into treatment.

The remainder wait - more than 1000 patients were stuck waiting to be seen by emergency staff for more than three hours. Australasian College for Emergency Medicine state chairman Richard Paoloni said patients waiting for treatment in corridors were not being monitored adequately. He said patients were forced to wait because there were no free beds.

"The longer people are waiting to get the care they need, particularly when they present under urgent circumstances, there is the potential that delay is going to lead to a worse outcome, lead to a greater length of stay in hospital or a greater amount of suffering," Dr Paoloni said.

"It has a big impact on the patients and the staff. The staff want to be treating the patient. That's not really possible in a corridor." Dr Paoloni was critical of the decision to bring in medical response teams to mind patients until a bed was free. "Clearly it's not the best care for the patient, it is a response in a situation where the best care is not available," he said. "I don't think we should be doing it."

NSW Health's own figures this week revealed most hospitals were failing to meet their benchmarks. One in four emergency patients waited more than eight hours for a hospital bed, with Liverpool having the worst result at 61 per cent, followed by Westmead. Opposition Health spokeswoman Jillian Skinner said the medical response teams were effectively babysitters.

"Thousands of ambulance man-hours are being wasted babysitting patients because the State Labor Government has cut hospital beds and closed wards," she said. "Only an incompetent State Labor Government would deploy valuable resources plugging holes rather than fixing the systemic problem."

A health department spokeswoman said ambulance workloads were increasing and that paramedic and nurse teams were being deployed to release ambulances.A spokesman for the ambulance service said: "It is not ideal to have paramedics caring for the patient while waiting for a hospital bed."

Just last week, South Australian Premier Mike Rann flagged a nationwide plan to slash the benchmark emergency department admission time to four hours. But NSW hospitals would be unlikely to improve on the current eight-hour limit without a massive increase in bed numbers.

Federally, Opposition leader Tony Abbott has targeted our troubled hospitals as a major vote winner and will take advantage of yesterday's news from Health Minister Nicola Roxon about health insurance premiums. Health funds submit their premium requests to the minister each year. She then decides whether to approve them based on the need to ensure funds "remain viable".

"We are looking very closely to make sure that only what is needed is approved," Ms Roxon told Sky News. "But I do, unfortunately, have to say to the public there's never really good news in these."

Our population is over 21 million and growing...think of what the public option will be like for a nation of 300 MILLION.

Bigpimpin0690
03-09-2010, 05:45 AM
I have Gov run Healthcare and it's sucks bad. The only way I can get one of my children seen is to take them to the ER. I think that is a waist of money and resources. Not all Dr. visits require a trip to the ER but with this Gov run BS that's the only way you'll get seen any time this month. There is a shit ton of red tape too, way to much bureaucracy. Oh and I must mention the poor diagnosis. They will almost always dismiss the first and second visit as something simple. Then issue a persciption for some drug they have way to much of and need to get rid of it before it expires. If you want to hear the real horror stories of Gov run Healthcare and Gov provided Insurance feel free to contact your closest Military person, they will likely give you an ear full. If I were able to choose for myself I would take my money and find my own damn insurance and healthcare myself. Unfortunatly my familly and I are forced to deal with this substandard Gov run Bull Shit. For all of you that don't think this Obamacare is about money or control you are out of your mind. The Gov will make a fortune off of this program, and will always take the cheapest way out when it comes to providing you with care. How do I know? Because I've seen it for 18 years everytime me or one of my four family members goes to the Doctors or Hospital. Trust me if you haven't had or dealt with Gov Care you are one of the lucky ones. They can't even get Medicare or Social Security under control, what make any normal person believe they could manage Healthcare for the whole damn nation?

Wei Wu Wei
03-09-2010, 04:45 PM
Government can't do anything right.

What? it's just an organized system of individuals (elected ones at that) like every other organization?

uhh. no. it's "GOVERNMENT", ergo it is bad. unlike private organizations...which are GOOD. see, this thing means this and that thing means that.

my world is v well defined.

lacarnut
03-09-2010, 05:50 PM
Government can't do anything right.

What? it's just an organized system of individuals (elected ones at that) like every other organization?

uhh. no. it's "GOVERNMENT", ergo it is bad. unlike private organizations...which are GOOD. see, this thing means this and that thing means that.

my world is v well defined.

Now you are learning. Government could fuck up a wet dream.

fettpett
03-09-2010, 05:59 PM
Now you are learning. Government could fuck up a wet dream.

for some reason i hear a thick stream of sarcasm dripping from his last post.....:rolleyes::rolleyes::eek:

lacarnut
03-09-2010, 07:14 PM
for some reason i hear a thick stream of sarcasm dripping from his last post.....:rolleyes::rolleyes::eek:

You call it sarcasm; I call it stupidity.:)

fettpett
03-09-2010, 10:25 PM
ah, yeah there is a lot of that too...LMAO

Rockntractor
03-09-2010, 10:52 PM
for some reason i hear a thick stream of sarcasm dripping from his last post.....:rolleyes::rolleyes::eek:
I think there is often a thick stream dripping from him!
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/fat-guy-in-a-diaper.jpg?t=1268193138

Rockntractor
03-09-2010, 11:23 PM
Here is an avatar for you wei wei, it is sized and ready to go!
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/diapy.jpg?t=1268194878

fettpett
03-10-2010, 06:45 PM
OMG, ROFLMFAO thats Awesome!