I would like to see a new study of
-
How many parents that were premature babies have premature babies. What kind of life do people who have that have had excessive medical treatment to save their lives (the three year 20 surgeon team type). What would happen to heath costs in the USA if we were not so sue happy? (True non health care example: Oh, I spilled my coffee that I insist must be hot and burned myself it must be the fast food chains fault. Fast food lost thus signs now warn that the coffee is hot.) On another rant, here in Ohio we just spent many dollars to save the life of an inmate who over dosed so we could execute him the next week. I am sure this was done to prevent family from suing. Why do we award money to idiots? (see above) If I am dumb enough to stick my hand under the lawn mower, I deserve to have my fingers cut off. It is not the fault of the mower company for not putting on a warning label. Sorry bad day, djj
djj55 wrote:
What would happen to heath costs in the USA if we were not so sue happy?
Yes, I think that's a big reason your health costs are so obscene.
djj55 wrote:
On another rant, here in Ohio we just spent many dollars to save the life of an inmate who over dosed so we could execute him the next week. I am sure this was done to prevent family from suing.
It's done to hide from the inherent hypocrisy in saying 'we kill people to show that killing people is wrong'
djj55 wrote:
Why do we award money to idiots? (see above)
The media is very selective. Apparently the woman who burned herself on her coffee was served coffee at a temperature above what anyone would consider reasonable.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
How many parents that were premature babies have premature babies. What kind of life do people who have that have had excessive medical treatment to save their lives (the three year 20 surgeon team type). What would happen to heath costs in the USA if we were not so sue happy? (True non health care example: Oh, I spilled my coffee that I insist must be hot and burned myself it must be the fast food chains fault. Fast food lost thus signs now warn that the coffee is hot.) On another rant, here in Ohio we just spent many dollars to save the life of an inmate who over dosed so we could execute him the next week. I am sure this was done to prevent family from suing. Why do we award money to idiots? (see above) If I am dumb enough to stick my hand under the lawn mower, I deserve to have my fingers cut off. It is not the fault of the mower company for not putting on a warning label. Sorry bad day, djj
-
djj55 wrote:
What would happen to heath costs in the USA if we were not so sue happy?
Not much. If ALL medical malpractice was eliminated, it might reduce costs about 1.5%.
Really ? Why are medical costs in the US so obscene then ? If an American went to the doctor here, it would cost about $40. I went to the doctor in the USA and it cost me $200. Basic, common drugs cost me another $300. I'd guess a cost of $50-$80 for that here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Really ? Why are medical costs in the US so obscene then ? If an American went to the doctor here, it would cost about $40. I went to the doctor in the USA and it cost me $200. Basic, common drugs cost me another $300. I'd guess a cost of $50-$80 for that here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Here in UK... To see a doctor - free. He suggests that you need a consultant, and arranges it - free. Consultant takes you into hospital for several tests - free. You spend several days in hospital and have extensive surgery - free. You are sent home but require several visits by community health nurse - free. There is a minor infection that requires a course of antibiotics - £8 (unless you are retired, a child, pregnant or unemployed, in which case it's free). God awful system isn't it.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
Here in UK... To see a doctor - free. He suggests that you need a consultant, and arranges it - free. Consultant takes you into hospital for several tests - free. You spend several days in hospital and have extensive surgery - free. You are sent home but require several visits by community health nurse - free. There is a minor infection that requires a course of antibiotics - £8 (unless you are retired, a child, pregnant or unemployed, in which case it's free). God awful system isn't it.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
Well, I was comparing the cost for me as a foreigner, to the cost of an American using our system here. For me to go to the doctor here can be free, but I can choose to pay a gap if I choose a doctor that charges more than the Medicare fee. I typically pay $15. The rest of our system is the same, except that I also have private health insurance which lets me avoid waiting lists for optional surgery by going to a private hospital ( for example, my vasectomy ). Yes, it's hell on earth. I would feel so much more free if getting a cold cost me $500. And the people who can't afford that, obviously deserve to be sick. And having those minimum wage workers sick plainly does not hamper the operation of the economy in any way.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Really ? Why are medical costs in the US so obscene then ? If an American went to the doctor here, it would cost about $40. I went to the doctor in the USA and it cost me $200. Basic, common drugs cost me another $300. I'd guess a cost of $50-$80 for that here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
No, the legal system as it's abused in American is a form of capitalism, not socialism.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Really ? Why are medical costs in the US so obscene then ? If an American went to the doctor here, it would cost about $40. I went to the doctor in the USA and it cost me $200. Basic, common drugs cost me another $300. I'd guess a cost of $50-$80 for that here.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Because it's an industry in the US, rather than social care. Americans have a form of social care in health insurance, which protects those who can afford it from the real costs involved. But it's no different here, except that everyone is insured via the State. Neither system really works, though. Health care is expensive and will always be so; you either have big State providing it, or private enterprise. I chose a middle route - I have State care if I'm a bit poorly, but should either my wife or I need it I have a private health plan in place so that we'd never have to join a waiting list to get treated. I was once asked if I felt ashamed at having so much money and still visiting an NHS GP. I replied that I pay more in tax each year than the majority of people pay in a life time.
-
Because it's an industry in the US, rather than social care. Americans have a form of social care in health insurance, which protects those who can afford it from the real costs involved. But it's no different here, except that everyone is insured via the State. Neither system really works, though. Health care is expensive and will always be so; you either have big State providing it, or private enterprise. I chose a middle route - I have State care if I'm a bit poorly, but should either my wife or I need it I have a private health plan in place so that we'd never have to join a waiting list to get treated. I was once asked if I felt ashamed at having so much money and still visiting an NHS GP. I replied that I pay more in tax each year than the majority of people pay in a life time.
martin_hughes wrote:
chose a middle route
Yes, I have private cover as well. I think it makes sense
martin_hughes wrote:
I was once asked if I felt ashamed at having so much money and still visiting an NHS GP. I replied that I pay more in tax each year than the majority of people pay in a life time.
Here, all GPs are under Medicare, by default. The health insurance covers me for things Medicare does not, as well as expanding my hospital options. But, that is a dumb question. It's people like you and me, people who earn enough to pay a lot of tax, who pay for all the unemployed people being able to get health care at all.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I know it is. However, I've explained to you at length in the past how the complete lack of socialism in society will increase crime, and cause the majority of people to live in poverty. Pure capitalism and pure socialism are both evils. You just don't get that, because you're brainwashed. I ask again - do you have any form of insurance ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I know it is. However, I've explained to you at length in the past how the complete lack of socialism in society will increase crime, and cause the majority of people to live in poverty. Pure capitalism and pure socialism are both evils. You just don't get that, because you're brainwashed. I ask again - do you have any form of insurance ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
So people who get productive people's money and don't have to work, and with the government trying to control every aspect of people's lifes, depriving the people of their God given natural born rights to property and liberty, and eventually bankrupting the country somehow reduces crime. You are the king of doublethink.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
-
So people who get productive people's money and don't have to work, and with the government trying to control every aspect of people's lifes, depriving the people of their God given natural born rights to property and liberty, and eventually bankrupting the country somehow reduces crime. You are the king of doublethink.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
So people who get productive people's money and don't have to work
Welfare is a different thing. Any form of welfare should be tied to being required to seek work. We're talking about insurance here, not a handout for living money.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
and with the government trying to control every aspect of people's lifes,
This is a fantasy. You have health insurance in America. Making it a single, compulsory, government run program will not change the mechanics of how it works
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
depriving the people of their God given natural born rights to property and liberty
I have more liberty than you and I sure as HELL have a lot more property than you. My home and contents insurance on all properties combined is more than a million dollars in cover. So, how has a government run health fund deprived me of liberty, or property ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
, and eventually bankrupting the country somehow reduces crime.
Your country is bankrupt now, because of capitalism. Mine is not, in fact Australia, with it's government run health system, and more welfare than I personally agree with, weathered the GFC better than almost every other industrialised nation.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You are the king of doublethink.
No, you are drowning in hyperbole and have not even a slight grasp on the facts of the situation. You think that saying 'socialist' and 'government control' often enough will prove that moving health insurance from the current mess in the US to a government run system that covers everyone is somehow analagous to all the things you claim. Australia proves it is not, or at least, that it does not have to be. It's this sort of X must lead to B thinking that is your most basic and recurrent mistake. But, I'm glad we are discussing it, thank you.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
So people who get productive people's money and don't have to work
Welfare is a different thing. Any form of welfare should be tied to being required to seek work. We're talking about insurance here, not a handout for living money.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
and with the government trying to control every aspect of people's lifes,
This is a fantasy. You have health insurance in America. Making it a single, compulsory, government run program will not change the mechanics of how it works
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
depriving the people of their God given natural born rights to property and liberty
I have more liberty than you and I sure as HELL have a lot more property than you. My home and contents insurance on all properties combined is more than a million dollars in cover. So, how has a government run health fund deprived me of liberty, or property ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
, and eventually bankrupting the country somehow reduces crime.
Your country is bankrupt now, because of capitalism. Mine is not, in fact Australia, with it's government run health system, and more welfare than I personally agree with, weathered the GFC better than almost every other industrialised nation.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You are the king of doublethink.
No, you are drowning in hyperbole and have not even a slight grasp on the facts of the situation. You think that saying 'socialist' and 'government control' often enough will prove that moving health insurance from the current mess in the US to a government run system that covers everyone is somehow analagous to all the things you claim. Australia proves it is not, or at least, that it does not have to be. It's this sort of X must lead to B thinking that is your most basic and recurrent mistake. But, I'm glad we are discussing it, thank you.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Once again, let's review the definition of socialism. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism[^] 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done Now capitalism. : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/capitalism[^] We are bankrupt because of government interference, setting up a international corporatocracy using the federal reserve system to their advantage. Its socialism/communism.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
-
Once again, let's review the definition of socialism. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism[^] 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done Now capitalism. : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/capitalism[^] We are bankrupt because of government interference, setting up a international corporatocracy using the federal reserve system to their advantage. Its socialism/communism.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
We did this before. How does my government or yours own the means of production and distribution of goods ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
Why do I pay those big insurance bills if I have no private property ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
I don't get this bit. Surely capitalism is distinguished by unequal distribution of goods, and people being paid according to work done ? Either way, I remember last time you used word games to try to make the current situation fit this definition, but it plainly does not. I own houses, I own cars. Many Americans do the same. Private property exists in every concievable way.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
We did this before. How does my government or yours own the means of production and distribution of goods ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
Why do I pay those big insurance bills if I have no private property ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
I don't get this bit. Surely capitalism is distinguished by unequal distribution of goods, and people being paid according to work done ? Either way, I remember last time you used word games to try to make the current situation fit this definition, but it plainly does not. I own houses, I own cars. Many Americans do the same. Private property exists in every concievable way.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
You don't own your property if you have to pay rent to the state (property taxes). Unequal distribution of goods is welfare and subsidies. Government owns means of production because corporations get special privileges by the government and handouts from the central bank effectively eliminating competition and further bankrupting the country.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
-
You don't own your property if you have to pay rent to the state (property taxes). Unequal distribution of goods is welfare and subsidies. Government owns means of production because corporations get special privileges by the government and handouts from the central bank effectively eliminating competition and further bankrupting the country.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You don't own your property if you have to pay rent to the state (property taxes).
See ? Word games. I don't pay property tax on my principal residence, but I pay rates, which pay for my water, trash pickup etc. The amount is negligible and no barrier to ownership. Most people have mortgages ( I don't ). A typical mortgage is $2000 a month. Rates are about $80 a month, so it's the cost of the house that matters, rates make no difference. Private property does not just mean my house. I own more than $20,000 worth of guitar equipment, for example, and at least $10,000 worth of computers. The replacement value on my CD collection is $60,000. How do you explain those things away ? I plainly have private property. If I was robbed, the police would investigate and attempt to return my property to me.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Unequal distribution of goods is welfare and subsidies.
Well, yes, that is unequal, but you realise people on welfare get very small amounts of money ? And the idea is to provide a safety net, not for people to live on it. I agree that it needs to be policed better, but I don't agree that it's bad. If you give someone who is able bodied and out of work no way to live, do you think they won't turn to crime ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Government owns means of production because corporations get special privileges by the government and handouts from the central bank effectively eliminating competition and further bankrupting the country.
Again, what utter drivel. Government plainly does NOT own those things, regardless of how you try to twist reality.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You don't own your property if you have to pay rent to the state (property taxes).
See ? Word games. I don't pay property tax on my principal residence, but I pay rates, which pay for my water, trash pickup etc. The amount is negligible and no barrier to ownership. Most people have mortgages ( I don't ). A typical mortgage is $2000 a month. Rates are about $80 a month, so it's the cost of the house that matters, rates make no difference. Private property does not just mean my house. I own more than $20,000 worth of guitar equipment, for example, and at least $10,000 worth of computers. The replacement value on my CD collection is $60,000. How do you explain those things away ? I plainly have private property. If I was robbed, the police would investigate and attempt to return my property to me.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Unequal distribution of goods is welfare and subsidies.
Well, yes, that is unequal, but you realise people on welfare get very small amounts of money ? And the idea is to provide a safety net, not for people to live on it. I agree that it needs to be policed better, but I don't agree that it's bad. If you give someone who is able bodied and out of work no way to live, do you think they won't turn to crime ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Government owns means of production because corporations get special privileges by the government and handouts from the central bank effectively eliminating competition and further bankrupting the country.
Again, what utter drivel. Government plainly does NOT own those things, regardless of how you try to twist reality.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Word games.
Glad you warned me, I might have read the rest of your post.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Word games.
Glad you warned me, I might have read the rest of your post.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
Yes, it always comes to this. Your fantasy world does not bear close examination, so you run for your life.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Once again, let's review the definition of socialism. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism[^] 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done Now capitalism. : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/capitalism[^] We are bankrupt because of government interference, setting up a international corporatocracy using the federal reserve system to their advantage. Its socialism/communism.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
So, which means of production and distribution does your government own and administer?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
We are bankrupt because of government interference, setting up a international corporatocracy using the federal reserve system to their advantage. Its socialism/communism.
Corporatocracy is government by a group of wealthy corporations. They govern by capturing the legislative and executive branches of government through the self-serving nature of most of humanity, generally for wealth and power. Corporatocracy has none of the objectives of socialism, communism or fascism. Each corporation seeks only to increase its return on investment (ROI), there is no other objective. Corporatocracy is by its very nature international, as individual corporations locate their manufacturing to countries that provide the greatest ROI. Naturally, they also sell into those markets that provide the greatest ROI. Your bankruptcy is due to a lack of government regulation. Government is there to protect the interests of the USA over those of any individual (which a corporation is, by law) or organization. Because the interests of a sufficient number of members of the legislature and the executive were those of the corporations, your interests were not even considered.
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a technical writing, I intend to be a software engineer.
-
You don't own your property if you have to pay rent to the state (property taxes). Unequal distribution of goods is welfare and subsidies. Government owns means of production because corporations get special privileges by the government and handouts from the central bank effectively eliminating competition and further bankrupting the country.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album[^] The True Soapbox is the Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You don't own your property if you have to pay rent to the state (property taxes).
So a feudal monarchy is a socialist state?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Government owns means of production because corporations get special privileges by the government and handouts from the central bank effectively eliminating competition
Or Corporations own the Government and get special privileges and handouts from the Central Bank. Rest assured, your Government does not own the means of production. As to the elimination of competition, that is the objective of Capitalism. Greatest return on ROI is a monopoly, failing that, a cartel. If Corporations can use the Government to eliminate competition, they will.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
further bankrupting the country
Which bankruptcy was brought about by the blind pursuit of ROI without careful analysis of the consequences, and exacerbated by the Corporations forcing the Government to bail them out, transferring debt from the private to the public sector.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Unequal distribution of goods is welfare and subsidies.
Well, if you are quoting from this: 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done no, it isn't.
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a technical writing, I intend to be a software engineer.