RSSSocialized Medicine Crowd Back For Fight
J.J. Jackson* | May 31, 2006
Canadians Healthier Than Americans, Survey Says
05.30.06, 12:00 AM ETTUESDAY, May 30 (HealthDay News) — Canadians are healthier than Americans, have better access to health care and have fewer unmet health needs, a new study of both countries reveals.
The findings come in spite of the fact that the United States spends almost twice as much per capita on health care as Canada, the researchers noted.
“This shows that you can spend much less than we [Americans] do, and deliver much more and better care then we do,” said study co-author Dr. David U. Himmelstein, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School in Cambridge, Mass.
Yep, you heard right! They claim that because Canadians are healthier (actually in dispute when you read what this study did not cover) that “the researchers conclude that universal health care coverage should be implemented in the United States”.
And you thought Hillary Care was dead? HA!
However the study also discovered what I and others have been telling you for years, that to get medical care in Canada you have to wait longer. “Canadians were more likely to cite waiting times as their main obstacle to good care,” the study finds.
And as usual the devil, as the say, is in details - or lack there of.
Greg Scandlen, the founder of the non-profit Consumers for Health Care Choices based in Hagerstown, Md., disputed the findings.“In terms of overall satisfaction with the health care system, Americans score better,” noted Scandlen. “So, the headline coming out of this ought to be that ‘Americans are more satisfied with their healthcare system than Canadians are.‘”
Scandlen also criticized the way the study was conducted, noting that there was too much focus on routine health issues, to the relative exclusion of crisis situations that can demand more costly and dramatic interventions.
“Canada clearly emphasizes primary care pretty strongly, and I give them credit for that,” he said. But he added, “This survey doesn’t look at the more serious stuff, like surgery and cardiac care — serious, expensive things that apply to a minority of the population.“
First of all, “universal healthcare” is unconstitutional. I know that hasn’t stopped us from having other unconstitutional programs like Social Security, but I just thought that I would point out how people that promote these types of programs don’t really care what the law of the land says. Are those the kind of people you really want in charge?
I’d rather pay for my own health insurance than have some government bureaucrat telling me what is best for me. But as is always the case with Socialism and Communism it’s all or nothing … everyone has to be in otherwise the government cannot control you.
No thanks. I’d rather die on my feet than live on my knees waiting for a bureaucrat to decide what treatment I need.
 |
(Ebook)
Manufacturer:Thomson Gale
Released:16 September, 2005 |
 |
The Truth About Hillary : What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She’ll Go to Become President
(Book)
Authors:Edward Klein
Manufacturer:Sentinel HC Released:21 June, 2005 |
Contributor's website: http://www.libertyreborn.com
*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.
Comments
7 Responses to “Socialized Medicine Crowd Back For Fight”
Leave a Reply
By posting a comment you agree to abide by the rules of this site.
Loading ...
-
Recommended Reading:
-
i really dont understand the mentallity of a person like jj jackson. universal health care is really the only cost efective and efficient of administering health care mr jackson would rather pay an over priced insurance policy plus co pays and deductable for some hmo pen pusher to deny him health care rather than have some government bureacrat that will provide him with guranteed basic health care and never deny him because he has a pre existing condition. as for waitng times 40 millon people have to wait indefinatly for health care in the us until;l they can find the cash.As for being unconstitutional any constitution that denies its citezens basic health care should be torn up and rewritten. Why do so many american put this bankrupt anti socialist doctrine before their own welfare. Freedom and democracy is not just about voting in a two party state where both parties field candidates that are stooges to private intersts that support only the rich. it is about a democracy in the distribution of goods and services amongst all citezens and untill this exists then there is no such thing as democracy and no constitution is worth the paper it is written on.have anice life
What utter pro-socialist/communist gibberish. You do realize there are lots of “universal” health insurance systems in the world and all of them are failing miserably right? The former Soviet Union had one. Cuba has one now that is so bad Uncle Fidel had to bring in a doctor from Spain to save his life. Even the system in Great Britain is failing so bad that citizens need to carry private insurance to cover what the government will not. Then of course there is Canada where Canadians are fleeing to New York, Minnesota and Washington just to get MRIs so that they can be diagnosed.
Obviously you don’t understand Jeff’s point because you are blind to the truth which is that Communism fails. And it fails every time. Children in India in need of emergency surgery don’t fly to Cuba. They fly to the United States.
“Insurance” is not a right. Insurance is a luxury that some people get to help defray costs.
As for your warped view on “Democracy” being about redistributing wealth, I think you need to find your self a dictionary and look it up and see that what you claim is not what the word means.
I’m personally glad that we live in a “Republic” based on the unalienable rights of mankind which include the right to have life, liberty, the acquisition of property, pursuit of happiness and so on and not the bastardized “Democracy” Steve envisions we do or should.
My guess - Steve votes Democrat so he can vote himself other people’s wealth because Steve doesn’t make much of his own.
Someone needs to go back and take a basic history course and learn about how communism and socialism always fail because the productive stop wanting to be slaves to the Steves of society. Then they build walls and start shooting anyone that tried to flee and that doesn’t agree to live in the “utopia” the leftist have created.
What a wonderful world that would be!
Me personally? I’d be much happier if there were more true Christians in charge of this country that believed in things like thou shalt not steal (the wages of others), thou shalt not covet (the belongings of others), thou shalt not murder (children because they are not of a certain age), and important stuff like that.
But not people like Steve. Nope. Steal, covet and murder away in the name of the nanny state right Steve?
The problem I have with socialists like Steve D is that they are never content with the workers “paradises” that they already have. It’s not like what Steve desires doesn’t already exist in several varying forms like RRG pointed out. So just move to one of them Steve. Go. Shoo.
Your desire to make the entire world basically socialist by making the United States the same as these other countries tells me what you are really after. What you are really after is control.
If you weren’t after control your bags would be packed and you would be applying for citizenship in Cuba right now where all your socialist dreams could be coming true.
Ms. Peacock, I hope you are aware of the atrocities that have historically been committed by so-called Christians when they were “in charge” of a country. Take a look at the crusades, the Conquistadors, and various other “Christian” holocausts. I find it interesting how willing you are to apply the Ten Commandments to statements made by Steve D. I wonder how the majority of “Christian” leaders would stand up to such scrutiny? Unfortunately, we’ll probably never know, because the individuals who make such comparisons are generally also “Christians,” and naturally will not dare stand up to their own leaders.
Oh, and by the way, I surmise that by your reference to the commandment not to commit murder you are referring to abortion. I’d like to know where Steve D even brought that into the debate. Sounds like you’re making an unwarranted association in attempt to discredit your opposition.
One more thing - if you read the New Testament, perhaps you’ll come to understand that you’ll be following Christ much more closely if you commit yourself to love and charity, rather than merely ranting against “nanny states” and socialist agendas.
“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” - James 1:27
Now, whether the government is an appropriate tool through which to accomplish this goal is questionable, but keep in mind that many people look to the government for aid merely because Christians are not following Christ.
CheshireCat on February 10th, 2008 6:43 pm:
“Ms. Peacock, I hope you are aware of the atrocities that have historically been committed by so-called Christians when they were “in charge” of a country. Take a look at the crusades, the Conquistadors, and various other “Christian” holocausts.”
You are aware that the “crusades” were in response to a land war waged by Muslims right? Oh, I’m sure that that fact wasn’t in your little history book.
“Oh, and by the way, I surmise that by your reference to the commandment not to commit murder you are referring to abortion. I’d like to know where Steve D even brought that into the debate. Sounds like you’re making an unwarranted association in attempt to discredit your opposition.”
It was a general reference expanding on how people don’t follow the commandments.
“Now, whether the government is an appropriate tool through which to accomplish this goal is questionable, but keep in mind that many people look to the government for aid merely because Christians are not following Christ.”
So, you are trying to justify government confiscation of property now? I notice that you didn’t try to hard to discuss how theft by government is just a way the socialists get around the commandments or try and justify it. But then again, socialists can’t really make too many arguments to justify their theft programs.
Whether or not Christians are or are not following Christ is irrelevant. It is still wrong to steal, covet, murder, etc. So get over it.