Re: Going to GP

used2be <used2be@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Rowland McDonnell" <real-address-in-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
used2be <used2be@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Loz" <lozzer2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
used2be wrote:

You obviously have
insurance/money but if you didn't in the US you would be screwed.

if that was the case, there wouldn't be so dang many mexicans crossing
the border to go to our hospitals. for free.

Do they go to the same hospital and see the same doctors that you would
if
you were ill?

yes, dahling, they do. the very same ones. here in the US, we can't
"deny"
healthcare to someone just because they can't afford it.

Which is why wounded US armed forces personnel are all so incredibly
happy with the free treatment the government is providing. Not.

and therein lies the problem. the gov't is providing it.

How do you work that out, then?

? our military
hospitals SUCK.

Our government run military hospitals used to be among the very best
health care providers in the world - until the system was deliberately
run down at the end of the Cold War on the grounds that military
hospitals were no longer needed.

So clearly the problem is not down to the fact that it's government run.
The problem is something else. The UK government can run hospitals that
work well and has done. If US government run hospitals are poor, the
fault has more to do with the fact that it's `US' than `government'.

and every last one of them is gov't run.

Back in the days when our NHS was purely run by the central authorities,
standards of care and cleanliness in hospitals were generally superb.
Now they have moved over to private firms providing services, quality
has dropped while costs have risen out of control.

So it clearly cannot be the case that it's poor quality because it's run
by the government. Experiences shows that's not how it works.

it's sad. very
very sad. our soldiers should be treated like royalty, not dirt. i'm
thoroughly disgusted by the gov't run healthcare our soldiers must endure.

Where is your evidence that things would be any better if it were
privately run? There are plenty of government-run enterprises in Europe
that work well. What is it about the USA that's different? Is your
government *really* even less competent than the clowns we have to put
up with?

If the USA can't even provide proper medical care for its own soldiers,
do you think anyone's going to believe that it provides proper medical
care for (say) poor black people living in (say) Lousiana or Texas or
any of the other slaver states?

medical care provided to (say) black folks living in (say) Louisiana or
whatever state they choose to live in,

Is poor, if they can get it at all, isn't it?

and while we're on the subject, let's
consider that medical care provided to (say) even many illegal mexicans
isn't provided by the gov't.

I ask again: how many Mexicans enter the USA to get free health care?

btw, there's no sanity in objecting to the USA providing health care to
illegal Mexican workers in the USA: the USA should just let them work
legally, let them pay tax, and you'll be fully squared with them, won't
you?

You say `many illegal Mexicans' - but how many? How many are coming to
the USA for free health care? What are the figures?

Come on! You keep complaining about that, but I know that we get
similar complaints from people in the UK about illegal immigrants coming
here for the NHS and it's been shown that the numbers of people doing
that are utterly trivial. And the people who make the complaints are
all of the neo-Nazi type - racist, nationalist, bigoted scum who need
drowning. Are you that type of scum yourself?

You've been making similar claims. Are you racist, nationalist, bigoted
scum? You sound like it - the fact that you ignored my question about
how many Mexicans go to the USA for free health care makes me think that
you're just repeating the standard complaints about damned outsiders
that one hears at any gathering of neo-Nazi scum in the UK.

And the complaints they come out with are total fucking bull*** -
malicious lies, all of it. And you sound just like them. You sound
like you're spouting the standard malicious racist lies that neo-Nazi
scum in the UK spout. You're coming across as if you're a budding
National Front member, and I'm pretty unhappy about that.

Yes, I'm using strong language, but this is something I feel /very/
strongly about. I've got no time for Nazi scum, and you sound like Nazi
scum to me.

it's provided in privately run facilities and
public hospitals.

Public hospitals? Well, that counts as government run, surely?

And it's all done with government money, which is spent very
inefficiently any time it's passed on to private firms. Government
subsidy of private enterprise is the worst of all possible ways of doing
things: you get low quality and high price. Just look at trains in the
UK.

You either want government money and a government run organization -
done properly, that gives you good quality but high cost; OR ...

.... you want private money and a commercial operation. That gives `just
about okay quality' and low cost.

If you have government money and a private firm, you get high costs and
low quality.

It's been shown time and time again the UK - we've had the changes, and
that is what happens.

You can have your religious faith in whatever you like, but don't try to
convince me that I'm wrong on this.

as i said before, hospitals can't turn their back on
someone just because they can't afford to pay for treatment.

I bet that they do. And I did ask you to tell me how many Mexicans come
to the USA for the free health care - you ignored me completely, didn't
you?

Now, you made the claim that Mexicans enter the USA illegally for the
free health care. How many do that each year? Come on - you made the
claim, let's have the figures!

The US health care system doesn't work very well. Nor does the UK's
health care system - but the faults are very different.

yeah. less gov't involvement would make all the difference in the world.

Is this some kind of religious thing? Are you signed up to some sort of
religious sect that's opposed to governments trying to do things? Or
what?

i already know how you feel about that subject,

It's not how I *FEEL* - it's what I've seen about the way the world
actually works.

so don't waste your time
giving me a long winded version of why you think gov't run medical care is
so fabulous and privately run health care sucks.

I have not stated that gov't run health care is fab and private is crap.
That's not what I've said at all.

Why not try reading what I have to say instead of just ranting and
raving and generally trying to shout me down? I understand that you
don't like me attacking a fundamental article of your personal faith.

The US health care system is far too expensive: the US way doesn't work
very well. That's a fact. Quality is good, but cost is astronomical.
Why is that? Is it because it's not run by the government? Well, I've
not said so, have I?

Why not look at the real thing?

UK health care has dropped in quality and increased in costs since the
government started privatising it. Private firms, government money; bad
service, high cost. It used to be `okay service, high cost' - when fully
nationalised.

The UK electricity supply industry is providing less reliable power
since the government privatised it. Private firms, fully commercial
operation; prices are okay but service quality has dropped.

UK railways are in an awful mess since they were privatised - they get a
subsidy. Private firms, government subsidy; prices are lousy and
service quality is appalling.

I could go on. There are examples that go the other way - British
Leyland (motor vehicles) was famous in the 1970s for its lousy products
while it was still nationalised (some exceptions such as the Mini,
mind). Privatisation saw quality improve across the board while prices
stayed competitive. Car makers shouldn't be nationalised industries -
they should be fully commercial operations.

You need to get away from the idea that `commercial is good and
government is bad'. I realise that it's part of the personal religion
of quite a lot of USAians including you so you'll probably just get
angry for me challenging your faith, but unfortunately that article of
faith is about as sensible as believing that the world was created in
six days.

It's not how the world works. It's a lot more subtle than that. You
need to look at each case in detail. The broad-brush writing off of one
way of doing things while putting all your money on another way of doing
it isn't very sensible to my mind. Privately run `care homes' for the
elderly are a good example: they're under a lot of scrutiny in the UK at
the moment because so many of them have been shown to be abusing their
patients. Private enterprise torturing the elderly and confused in the
name of profit - here in the UK, right now.

For sure I've had the NHS (a non-private bit) torture *me*, but loonies
have always been treated like *** and we get no sympathy.

Rowland.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
.