Re: Pedio Maxis to Kentro tis Athinas

On Feb 12, 10:05 am, px <1...@xxxxx> wrote:

"A selection" of one-sided newspaper articles is just propaganda.

Vin, these are mainstream media articles. All you have is that
socialist WHO report so far.
Still, you avoided the question: What type of credentials do you need
in order to reference newspaper articles?

So what? That doesn't mean it's bad. If you look at it from GDP % it's
only 3% higher than Germany
What are you saying here? Do you know the German system?

There is a table in that same socialist paper you pointed me to. Are
you planning to read it any time soon so I don't waste my time
pointing you to the exact location of the information?

But this is exactly what is at issue: and the evidence, so far as
it is known, suggest exactly the opposite. Existing state-run
healthcare systems (despite all their faults) are in general more
effective.

According to the WHO analysis that has socialist motivations. They
measure effectiveness in a different way, namely the number of
citizens with access and "fairness in cost".

Why? Is comparing health-care costs per capita socialist?

No, but measuring effectiveness based on "financial fairness" is 100%
socialist.

Also what you conveniently omit is that the US is FIRST in
responsiveness.

First: I *included* it in my post on WHO. Your behaviour on the
other hand has been a disgrace:

Do you think you can handle being easy on the drama? Thanks!
Including it is one thing. Completely ignoring it in your diatribe is
another.

you immediately deleted the contents

I delete a bunch of stuff so I can keep track of things. It was not
intentional

Second: This is not as good as it sounds: serving very well a section of the
population by excluding millions from health care is not something you brag about.

Give the man a cigar! Just admit you are a socialist and I'll shut
up.
Actually in the US there is a sizable portion of the population that
it disenfranchised in more ways than healthcare. Do I think it's good?
No I don't, but I don't want private services become public to find
out if that segment of the population can be "redeemed".
Just so we're clear...No, I don't agree that quality of healthcare is
measured by how much of the population has access to it. That's what
WHO says and you just accept it as a given.

Look at this paper by Dr Harris:
http://www.mit.edu/people/jeffrey/House_Testimony_Nov_1993.html
Now will you quit whining?
Find a more recent reference after the increases in the tobacco
duties
are introduced and then you will have belatedly made you claim
some good. Also, this guy excluded from his estimates the savings from
the pension and old-age health costs from those who die early from
smoking.

Oh Puhleeease! You hound me for a reference, I find you an article
something form an MIT scholar specific and to the point and you still
whine. Tobacco duties were always there.
No matter what type of evidence I present to you, you'll be a naysayer
recalling some unknown article by some unspecified author.

What you are saying here is that you found a fault in the WHO
report. But in it the overall comparison is between cost and results. It is all in there.

That's deceiving..... I'm not fooled that easily. The "results" is just
an interpretation of raw data filtered by socialist blinders! The
study is tainted by the Bolshevik virus.

Look, are you aware that by writing such smart-ass remarks you do no look
too good?

Stick to the topic and stop trying to divert the discussion with
personal attacks, simply because you have no arguments.

:-)

Good! Now I hope we don't have to talk about this again.

So what? You get what you pay for.

But you were telling us here that you do not want the state-run
waste. Apparently it is less wasteful than you claimed.

Nope! High cost doesn't mean waste. I get good value for the high cost
as the quality of the healthcare is top-notch. I'm now working on a
project to install automated intravenous administration. Will allow
nurses and physicians to monitor all IV dispensers from a central
location and the dosages are computer controlled.. Last year we rolled
out electronic physician ordering that eliminated errors from
handwriting on prescriptions... also expensive. We bought a top notch
Cardiology system that takes videos of your heart.... Super expensive.
They all improve patient safety and workflow.... But it's expensive,
and that's why our costs are so high.
A government run outfit would take years to complete just the study
and more years to fund it. By that time it would be obsolete.
Waste on the other hand is when Medicare is being charged $100 for a
pack of bandages and the people administering it don't question it
because they are government employees.

If you weren't so preoccupied with your WHO pals you could possibly
see the perils of a government run system.

You made strident comments about waste and "your dollars". That
means that you are well informed. BTW this report made it into
newspapers at the time.

Oh Really? It must be true then

Both defence and health care are collective efforts. You cannot do
either by yourself. However your personal efforts can procure
you the necessary for eating and paying your bar tab.

Collective maybe, but not necessarily universal. Defense has to be
universal as it protects the state as it is defined in it's very
existence. Healthcare does not define the state. It can be handled in
many different ways.
Our healthcare system is top, barring universal access and 'fairness
in cost'. Both of these deficiencies are fine by me as long as our
quality is kept high.

Apparently it succeeded in quite a few places includin the
US(medicare).

Medicare is a disaster and a giant waste. A good portion of people's
paychecks goes to pay for it too.

They must be doing something right.

Not a damn thing. Privatizing it is the next logical step.

Not two systems are identical. There is uniformity only within one
country. Funny enough the most "socialist" country comes out best!

You gotta be kidding!! Why wouldn't it come out first if socialist
criteria are used?

Also, apart from the strikes, french public transport is also very good.

Good for the French..... I would never want to live there. Are you
embarrassed to admit you're a socialist?

and corrupt WHO that downplays the harm of the Chernobyl catastrophe
??

Yup it's true. You can't trust them

You got anything else besides the socialist WHO study?
Man, you have a bit of a fixation. The WHO compared figures only.

Exactly! Figures rarely tell the whole store, especially in a
complicated matter like this?

Do you have a better idea?

Yes! Do a true statistical analysis based on ALL public healthcare
systems. Take in to account quality based on six sigma principles. Do
a real world assessment by some firsthand investigations to back-up
any statistical analysis.

The last section is written by the University of Maine and not WHO.
It is the Universrity of Maine that calls Medicare *HIGHLY*
*SUCCESSFUL*
*PUBLIC* *PROGRAM*. This is a US institution and they should know.

You can't be serious. Most academia here (and seemingly elsewhere) is
very left leaning..... nearly communist. There are some notable
exceptions especially in the Ivy League schools, but the rest are
right out Marxist. No real people think Medicare is successful, much
less *highly* successful.
The whole premise of your position is based on leftist principles,
plain and simple.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Clinton unveils socialist medical plan
    ... businessperson provides zero healthcare insurance funding for 10 employees ... and less of the portion of the employees healthcare insurance cost. ... insurance industry we have gobs of payers too. ...
    (alt.politics)
  • why is medical care so expensive?
    ... too many people don't pay and push cost onto others. ... give those who can't afford tv sets FREE tv sets and dump the cost on ... yet, in healthcare, those who can't ... this sets medicine apart from all other businesses. ...
    (sci.med)
  • Re: OT/ What is the true cost of cheap gas?
    ... I snipped from this post, about the cost of a gallon of gasoline at the pumps, it is obvious that the major difference between the US and some other countries is the level of taxation imposed by our elected officials. ... Medicare fraud, by service recipients, medical professionals, and the government itself has been rampant. ... While NHS supporters might applaud the universality of benefits, with the availability of state, county, local, and charity hospitals, healthcare can be found at low or no cost when necessary. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: HSAs a Shot in the Arm
    ... someone else is going to pay a higher ... government and instiutions cannot fully fund the care they promised ... the cost increase. ... has just about the most expensive healthcare in the world. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Pedio Maxis to Kentro tis Athinas
    ... If the patient's country of origin had great healthcare why bother ... Why the waste of making very rich a few in the medical ... Nobody wants big government. ... 80% with medicare, medicaid and welfare. ...
    (soc.culture.greek)