Page 2 of 2

Re:

Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:54 pm
by Isaac
woodchip wrote: This is working well?:

"Up to 1,200 people lost their lives needlessly because Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust put government targets and cost-cutting ahead of patient care."

"The independent inquiry headed by Robert Francis QC found the safety of sick and dying patients was 'routinely neglected'. Others were subjected to ' inhumane treatment', 'bullying', 'abuse' and 'rudeness'."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ients.html
What ever their numbers are, for abuse and death, ours are higher.

Re:

Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 1:22 pm
by CUDA
Isaac wrote:
woodchip wrote: This is working well?:

"Up to 1,200 people lost their lives needlessly because Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust put government targets and cost-cutting ahead of patient care."

"The independent inquiry headed by Robert Francis QC found the safety of sick and dying patients was 'routinely neglected'. Others were subjected to ' inhumane treatment', 'bullying', 'abuse' and 'rudeness'."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ients.html
What ever their numbers are, for abuse and death, ours are higher.
facts??? or conjecture???

Re:

Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 1:58 pm
by Isaac
CUDA wrote:
Isaac wrote:
woodchip wrote: This is working well?:

"Up to 1,200 people lost their lives needlessly because Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust put government targets and cost-cutting ahead of patient care."

"The independent inquiry headed by Robert Francis QC found the safety of sick and dying patients was 'routinely neglected'. Others were subjected to ' inhumane treatment', 'bullying', 'abuse' and 'rudeness'."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ients.html
What ever their numbers are, for abuse and death, ours are higher.
facts??? or conjecture???
I see, we're not terribly off. 8.27 deaths/1,000 people.
The UK is 10.05 deaths/1,000 people. I guess they eat worse food than we do.

Re:

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 1:15 am
by Sirius
Insurrectionist wrote:If Canada’s health care is so good why did Danny Williams Canada’s Newfoundland Premier come to US for Heart Surgery

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700
Because that's where the expert in question was. If you need to visit a specialist, and they happen to be sufficiently scarce, you'll go wherever the nearest one is, and in the local neighbourhood that's statistically more likely to be the US.

Also, it's important to distinguish between the quality of the equipment and medical personnel and health care as a whole. For the latter you also need to take into account the availability of that equipment and expertise. I don't think anyone would dispute the facilities America has available - but that doesn't do you any good if you can't use them due to insurance/money issues. Just because American health-care works for the rich and powerful doesn't mean it works for everyone.

The place the real argument seems to be is how you improve the affordability and accessibility of health-care in the US. I suspect a lot of the problem comes down to inefficiency, considering how much it costs and what you get in return. If America is spending the highest proportion of its GDP on health, it should be the healthiest country in the OECD.

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:02 am
by Duper
once again, I'll point to any VA Hospital as a shining example for what's to come.

Go ask any older Vet what it's like to go there.

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 5:36 am
by Insurrectionist
\"It was never an option offered to him to have this procedure done in this province,\" said Ms. Dunderdale, refusing to answer whether the procedure could be done elsewhere in Canada.

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story. ... z0hIkUTT86
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.
Seems like they were willing to let him die. I bet a regular person would have died because they could not afford to come to America to have the operation.

As for accessibility any one can an will walk into a hospital emergency room and get treatment for what ever. It's the law and they have to treat you no matter what and that is a problem when people don't pay. Affordability is what needs to be tackled for sure.

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:59 pm
by SilverFJ
If I go to the doctor I pay for it. If I'm hurt on the job my boss pays for it.

I barely use their roads, I don't take their handouts, I never need the police's help, I'm not an idiot so I don't need the fire department... I've never owned a credit card (no debt). I certainly get taxed more than I receive, and I'm not going to pay them any more, let alone, MORE.

Taxed
Enough
Already

Re:

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 6:18 pm
by Isaac
So that's a no for the 30% payroll tax increase?

Re:

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:29 am
by AlphaDoG
Isaac wrote:So that's a no for the 30% payroll tax increase?

AHAHAHAHA!

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:13 am
by Spidey
Wow the vote is 8 to 10...who said there aren’t any commies around here. :P

Re:

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:21 am
by Isaac
Spidey wrote:Wow the vote is 8 to 10...who said there aren’t any commies around here. :P
Well they're voting for a 6% tax; my initial proposal that's unrealistic. ...Again, I'm very sorry for wasting people's time with the poll, but I did learn more about healthcare because of this mistake.