Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
View Poll Results: Should America adopt a free for all health plan funded by taxes?
Yes.
40 60.61%
No.
21 31.82%
I don't care.
4 6.06%
I haven't thought about it.
1 1.52%
Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

Quick Reply
Search this Thread
Inventor
#326 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 4:31 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Wild Missingno
Americans going to Mexico for healthcare:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/...alth-care_N.htm


Okay, can't/couldn't help it:

Are you telling me, that Americans are going to Mexico and they are not being called illegal aliens/illegal immigrants? No one is yelling and screaming that they should go back where they came from and stop taking advantages of their system that they didn’t pay taxes into? I am shock!
Advertisement
Forum Resident
#327 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 4:31 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Lauren
The history debates in any country are always fascinating. The debate in Australian history is in regards to the 'black armband' view, whether it should be taught or the sanataised version. (which tells you my point of view)

Davious, you are flat out lying about the stat that Americans are the most generous. It is a flat out lie. 2005 study The United States is behind Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweeden, Netherlands, Portugal, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Ireland, United Kingdom, Finland, Germany, Canada, Spain, Australia, Austria, New Zealand, Greece and Japan. That's number 21 on the list. That link is a combination of government and private donations. (according to the graph, America gives 0.2% of its GDP to aid)



(I counted 22) America was second last. I couldn't find a stat of individual givings, but I'm sure its out there.


Here is a whole lot that say the US is the most charitable nation.

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu4roJ...om/id/16638810/

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu4roJ...ble_nation.html

Quote:
According to the Charities Aid Foundation [1],

* 1. United States - 1.67%
* 2. United Kingdom - .73%
* 3. Canada - .72%
* 4. Australia - .69%
* 5. South Africa - .64%
* 6. Ireland - .47%
* 7. Netherlands - .45%
* 8. Singapore - .29%
* 9. New Zealand - .29%
* 10. Turkey - .23%
* 11. Germany - .22%
* 12. France - .14%

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu4roJ...table_countries

Erasing One Big Astounding Mistake All-around
Theorist
#328 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 4:37 PM
Just to clarify, the % shown in Nick's quote as well as the Wikipedia article is Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, which is unbiased towards nations with higher populations, because its a percentage, not total money given.

And, while I can't speak for Nick's reasoning for making it an issue, I can speak to my own...If you are going to accuse the United States of being uncompassionate, make sure it is true. Not only have American citizens donated billions and billions to various charitable causes, but they have also donated their lives defending many of those who now attack it. You can attack the US now, but deep down you know that if some tragedy would ever befall your nation, that the US would be the first one to offer aid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama on ABC's This Week, discussing Obamacare
What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore
umm...Isn't having other people carry your medical burden exactly what national health care is?
Forum Resident
#329 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 4:56 PM
Quote: Originally posted by urisStar
Okay, can't/couldn't help it:

Are you telling me, that Americans are going to Mexico and they are not being called illegal aliens/illegal immigrants? No one is yelling and screaming that they should go back where they came from and stop taking advantages of their system that they didn’t pay taxes into? I am shock!




I'm shocked too that you didn't bother to look into Mexico's immigration laws first.

Quote:
Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:

* Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)

* Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)

* Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)

* The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)

Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:


* Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)

* A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)

* A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).

Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:

* Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)

* Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)

Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:

* Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)

* Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)

* Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.

Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,

* "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)

* Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)

* Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)

Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:


* A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)

* Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)


Quote:
“INMIGRANTE” – VISA FM2 – IMMIGRANT VISA

An immigrant is the foreigner that enters Mexico legally for the purpose of remaining permanently in the country, until he obtains the Immigration status of “Inmigrado” Immigrated person or permanent resident. This status requires applying for an FM2 VISA. The FM2 Visa is extended (refrendo) every year until completing five years. At the end of five years, the foreigner can apply for another FM2 visa or request a “Declaration as an Immigrated Person” (Declaratoria de Inmigrado) Once the status of ‘INMIGRADO” is granted, the foreigner can live and be involved in any legal activity in Mexico. This status is permanent and does not require further renewals or extensions. There are 9 categories of immigrant visa (FM2); they are as follows:



1. INDEPENDENT INCOME. This refers to the foreigner who wants to reside permanently in Mexico and live on resources brought from outside the country. These resources may include interest produced by the investment of capital in certificates, stocks, and bonds of the State or the national institutions of credit or others determined by the Secretary of Government or from any permanent income that comes from outside the country. The minimum amount required is presently 400 times the daily minimum wage (19,468 pesos) in the Federal District and 200 hundred days minimum wage (9,734 pesos) for dependent family members.

2. INVESTORS. Foreigners that seek immigration in order to invest their capital in industry, commerce, provided that it contributes to the economic and social development of the country and that is maintained during the time of the residency of the foreigner at a minimum amount of $40,000 pesos times the daily minimum wage in the Federal District.

3. PROFESSIONAL. The foreigner who immigrates in order to exercise a profession. The foreigner must document their credentials for that profession. They must validate any studies or university degrees in Mexico.

4. POSITIONS OF CONFIDENCE. The foreigner who immigrates in order to assume positions of supervision, sole administrator of a corporation, or others of absolute confidence in companies or institutions established in the Republic.

5. SCIENTIST. The foreigner who immigrates in order to direct or perform scientific research or diffuse scientific knowledge, to prepare researchers or perform work as docents.

6. TECHNICIAN. The foreigner who immigrates in order to perform research applied within manufacturing production or perform technical or specialized functions.

7. FAMILY MEMBERS. The foreigner who immigrates in order to live under the economic dependence of the spouse or a blood relative, “Immigrant”, “Immigrated person”, or Mexican in direct lineage without limit of degree or transversal up to the second degree.

8. ARTISTS AND ATHLETES. The foreigner who immigrates in order to perform artistic or sports activities.

9. ASSIMILATED PERSONS. The foreigner who immigrates that has had or has a Mexican spouse or child and that are not found to be covered in the latter sections. What is interesting is that if a foreigner comes to Mexico and has a child, they are eligible for immigrant status under this section, and are eligible for naturalization as a Mexican national after two years.


Mexico has better Immigration laws then we do. Thats the

Erasing One Big Astounding Mistake All-around
Test Subject
#330 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 5:04 PM
I am 56 years old. I had health insurance while my husband worked. He recently lost his job. I am pretty healthy and am looking for a job, but have not yet found one. My husband is 60 years old, and his Cobra insurance will expire in 6 months. He has diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol. No private insurance company will cover him due to preexisting conditions. We are just praying he makes it until he can get on Medicare. We have a small savings and we own our home, but one hospital stay without insurance will wipe us out financially. Our daughter is confined to a wheelchair due to a birth defect. She is thankfully covered by Medicaid, but has a limited number of doctor visits, prescriptions, etc. Both of us have worked hard since we were very young. My husband started working in a grocery store when he was 13 years old. I have numerous friends about my age who have lost jobs or work at places that do not offer health insurance. I live in rural Mississippi, USA. I feel that those with health insurance are the ones most against those of us without, and wonder why they want to see us suffer.
Inventor
#331 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 5:13 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC


I'm shocked too that you didn't bother to look into Mexico's immigration laws first.





Mexico has better Immigration laws then we do. Thats the



That is the point, not only are their immigration laws better, they/the people, sound more adult-ish and intelligent! Please, don't enlighten me on how they need our help/money as it seem big business like it better there also!
Instructor
#332 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 5:25 PM
Quote: Originally posted by urisStar
That is the point, not only are their immigration laws better, they/the people, sound more adult-ish and intelligent!
Nah, I'm betting there's just as many idiots in Mexico as there are in the U.S. The idiots there just happen to speak Spanish, so we never hear from them.
Inventor
#333 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 5:26 PM
Quote: Originally posted by laundry232000
I am 56 years old. I had health insurance while my husband worked. He recently lost his job. I am pretty healthy and am looking for a job, but have not yet found one. My husband is 60 years old, and his Cobra insurance will expire in 6 months. He has diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol. No private insurance company will cover him due to preexisting conditions. We are just praying he makes it until he can get on Medicare. We have a small savings and we own our home, but one hospital stay without insurance will wipe us out financially. Our daughter is confined to a wheelchair due to a birth defect. She is thankfully covered by Medicaid, but has a limited number of doctor visits, prescriptions, etc. Both of us have worked hard since we were very young. My husband started working in a grocery store when he was 13 years old. I have numerous friends about my age who have lost jobs or work at places that do not offer health insurance. I live in rural Mississippi, USA. I feel that those with health insurance are the ones most against those of us without, and wonder why they want to see us suffer.


Your story is more common than you may think! A lot of people our age are hurting due to job lost, lost in their 40lK, all or most of their retirement savings went/going bye, bye.

I don’t think what is going on is about healthcare, (you and every American knows this),and within 10 years we will see who is standing.

Quote: Originally posted by Wild Missingno
Nah, I'm betting there's just as many idiots in Mexico as there are in the U.S. The idiots there just happen to speak Spanish, so we never hear from them.


Or maybe they all moved to America where they felt more at home!
Scholar
#334 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 10:44 PM Last edited by Vanito : 8th Sep 2009 at 12:02 AM.
Quote: Originally posted by davious
First, Obama was not the first to attempt it. Democrats have been trying it since the 1930s, and there has been a resounding lack of support for it by the American People. Former President Bill Clinton tried to resurrect it too, and it was probably the greatest defeat of his Presidency. In fact, Health Care was one of Clinton's primary issues when he ran for President in 1992. Bill Clinton ran into the same problems Obama is...not only did he face opposition from Republicans, but he also faced opposition from within his own party, who had a majority at the time, just like Obama does. And just like with Obama, there were enough Democrats who opposed it to ensure its failure.

That does not change my point of thinking USA people are more selfish. Apperantly they were selfish enough to keep public healthcare away for longer. Thats nothing to be proud of. But praise to your politicians for at least trying.

Quote: Originally posted by davious
I am getting really sick of the arrogance of you Europeans. You constantly attack the US for its arrogance, but, are way more arrogant than the American posters are. You want to talk compassion? Why does America kick the Netherlands ass in charitable giving, if you are so compassionate, and we are so uncaring? I am not talking about gross totals here, although if we were, it wouldn't even be close, rather, as a % of each country's GDP, so it is a level playing field...Further, it is private contributions, done by individuals, not the government. The people of the United States, John Doe and Jane Smith...As a people, the United States is the most charitable country on Earth. You will no doubt find some link that says the Netherlands gave more for this or that...but it will be an official government gift only, and will ignore private contributions. It will ignore the fact that private American citizens donated three and a half times what the government did. Nor will it say that among those private citizens donating a record number to charity, that the majority of those who donated called themselves Christian. I am sure the Netherlands has its generous citizens too, don't get me wrong. I am not claiming the Dutch are stingy with money when it comes to charity, despite the stereotypes, of which we discussed in a different thread...However, when you look at the figures, only a great fool would claim the United States is not compassionate.

The charity is a compensation for the lack of healthcare and other help. We pay more to poor people than the USA only we do not call it "charity" but allow it to be done by the government. Only differnce is we do not call it 'charity'.

The USA still has lots of people dying because of lack of healthcare, and complete homeless families. If the USA really would have spend so much money in charity, why are they still there? If you really are so helpfull and charitable, why would there be way more disabled people without help? USA even has homeless families, people who could get their life back stay in the gutter. We have way less homeless, way less people without help. Why are they still there and get less help if you really spend so much on charity? Because in the end, you spend WAY less on peeople than we do. You just give it another name.

Apparently with all the 'charity' USA still does less than holland. Compensation, but poorly compensation, your charity gives people way less help, than us via the government. We do not even have to call it 'charity' its a normal thing here. We vote yes in the government, instead having to call it charity, and give people way more help than your ego-flattering charity. Do not flatter yourself by calling it 'charity' when you let people rot. Dutch do not need to call it some ego flattering name to give. We spend way less on big TVs, cars, loans like the USA. In that way we are indeed very greedy. True stereotype. But for people we are way more social than you, you are the greedy ones on helping people. Including your charity and lack of social healthcare, you spend less on people. Thats not arrogance thats a fact.

Quote: Originally posted by davious
The only thing your posts reveal is that you have an incredibly biased, inaccurate idea of America, and a hypocritical attitude of arrogance, while attacking America for its.
The truth is, you really have no idea what America is really like, the only thing you know is what you are told on television, from news networks that are just as biased as you claim Fox News is. Until you have lived here for an extended period of time, until you have seen the generosity of the American people up close, you have no room to criticize. It is easy to sit back in your chair in your country thousands of miles away, and blast something you have no real knowledge about, isn't it?

As said I have been volunteering for a USA online organisation for over a year. I have disabled friends from the USA over many years. I am homebound because of my disability, so I have many friends online. I do not need to live in the USA to know them well, if you know and speak to USA people daily you get to know the situations fairly well. I would not be able to live in the USA even if I wanted too, because there, no way I would be able to afford the healthcare I get here. I wouldn never want to live there, but even if I would, its impossible for me. People like me do not live in the USA, nor would people like Stephen hawkins survive. We know that. You are the ones denying that.


"When the moon is in the seventh house
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars"
Scholar
#335 Old 7th Sep 2009 at 11:28 PM Last edited by Vanito : 8th Sep 2009 at 12:08 AM.
Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
Vanito, sit and spin. You are totally ignorant of the situation here in the States. So you sit behind a computer screen and read stories of those who slip through the cracks. Do you ever read stories from those whom the system saved? You demand that we completely abandon our system and replace it with one that no one knows shit about. Instead of addressing problems like those who slip through the cracks and helping to catch them. You can fix the problems without destroying the system. But our politicians are opting to destroy the system without regard for those who rely on it.

I know these things because I help with an online disability organisation and have many USA friends. I do not read stories, I talk with people and friends online.

"People slipping through the cracks" are not rare. There are loads of people slipping through cracks in the USA. About everyone NOT from the USA has healthcare. But USA people who are disabled enough to visit most often do not have. I'd say come visit and see how big it is, and to how many organisations we are tied to. Those people "slipping through the crasks" are not rare, nor do your countries statistics show they are rare. You have a whole different definitions of "rare". Come talk with real people, instead of just assume.

Your politics have been failing for over a decade, you are naive to keep believing they will improve. How many more decades do you need to see it is failing?

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
Interestingly, I'm reading an article where in the Netherlands, the Rich are living well longer then the poor, due to the fact they are receiving better quality of health care. http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/neth.html

Read it again:

It highlighted three types of factors that have contributed to health inequalities: behavioural, including smoking, drinking, diet, and exercise; psychosocial, such as stress from long term debt; and environmental, such as living in a deprived area.

It is well known poor people drink more, smoke more exercise less. And they make more debts because they go for those stupid "loan now" advertisements on TV. And live in crappy hoods.
Our government once again tries to fix that and help them where yours still holds to your crappy selfish system is not even giving healthcare to many.

Its to be taken into consideration here, a big group of the poorest people are muslim immigrants, who do not speak our language. They need a other help, like acccesing our system, because they need to fill in dutch papers to get help, and learn how to make use of health care etc. And learn that women do can swim or exercise and go out of the house. And teach their kids dutch so they can go to a proper school. They have an idiot high aount of criminal male offspring between age 15-25.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
Why such a heartless showing of compassion for the poor in the Netherlands? Why is the access to equal health care not similar to all both rich and poor. Thats just inhumane!

Read better. Nowere the article mentions people have less actual access to healthcare. They have less access to a healthy diet, and exercise and more stress from making debts etc.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
And what about equal access to a good education in the Netherlands? Why are the poor being poorly educated, do the Dutch not care about them?

Here everyone can study on a top university unlike the USA. I would say: read some articles before you write, or talk to some dutch people. You are writing nonsense here.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
What an uncaring heartless nation there. They need to change it right now.

I'd say: read something about dutch universities before you write nonsense. You apparently haven't.

Here: I found something in english for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_universities

All citizens of the Netherlands who complete high school on the pre-academic level (VWO) or have the Dutch bachelor's degree HBO are eligible to attend university.

Anyone with good enough results can do VWO (top level high school). VWO does not cost extra money you can do that at public high schools and private high schools, no difference. Only requirement is good study results. After that people can get funding for a university for 4 or 5 years.

Same goes for HAVO high school (middle level high school), which is needed to access HBO. HBO and HAVO are also state funded, it is a possible route for people who learn less fast, but want to do university nontheless. Also they get the chance to do university funded by the state.


"When the moon is in the seventh house
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars"
Forum Resident
#336 Old 8th Sep 2009 at 1:05 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Vanito
I know these things because I help with an online disability organisation and have many USA friends. I do not read stories, I talk with people and friends online.

"People slipping through the cracks" are not rare.
But as you have pointed out, your system is near perfect, why are people slipping through the cracks in your country? Why are you not doing more to address this problem? Instead of criticizing our government as it works out ours. We are addressing our problems. But seek to do it right, not rushed in a bill that no one has read.


Quote:
Read it again:

It highlighted three types of factors that have contributed to health inequalities: behavioural, including smoking, drinking, diet, and exercise; psychosocial, such as stress from long term debt; and environmental, such as living in a deprived area.
I did read it. And I know Netherlands has a government run housing program. Why is your government forcing the poor to live in poor conditions? Do they not care about the poor they force to live in such conditions? Can they not help them by moving them to better areas? Why so heartless? Its disgusting that any government force the poor to live like that when they control the housing in the nation. Selfish is best to describe it. We live in the better areas, while the poor, we force them to live in less desired areas.


Quote:
Our government once again tries to fix that and help them where yours still holds to your crappy selfish system is not even giving healthcare to many.

And ours is not? What then is this whole topic about then? And check the first.

Quote:
For the record, according to the latest figures from the Census Bureau, 45.6 million Americans currently lack health insurance. This is actually down slightly from the 47 million that were uninsured in 2006. However, those numbers don't tell the whole story.

For example, roughly one quarter of those counted as uninsured — 12 million people — are eligible for Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), but haven't enrolled. This includes 64 percent of all uninsured children, and 29 percent of parents with children. Since these people would be enrolled in those programs automatically if they went to the hospital for care, calling them uninsured is really a smokescreen.

Another 10 million uninsured "Americans" are, at least technically, not Americans. Approximately 5.6 million are illegal immigrants, and another 4.4 million are legal immigrants but not citizens.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10449

That means, do the math, that if you subtract those who could have insurance if they enrolled, and those who are here and not Americans, that leaves 18 mil, or 5.9% of Americans who need insurance. So lets toss out every ones and force them into a crappy program instead of working out a system that address those who still need insurance.

Quote:
Its to be taken into consideration here, a big group of the poorest people are muslim immigrants, who do not speak our language. They need a other help, like acccesing our system

And we don't have a large immigrant population that doesn't speak English? Same problem here.

Quote:
And teach their kids dutch so they can go to a proper school. They have an idiot high aount of criminal male offspring between age 15-25.

And why is that, why are they being forced to the side and not helped into the system. Here hospitals and work places provide multi languages to help those who do not speak English. Why is your country not following suit and providing aid to those in need and don't speak or read Dutch? And why are their youth turning to crime? Is it due to the fact that the heartless people are not providing them the opportunity they need to get ahead?


Quote:
Read better. Nowere the article mentions people have less actual access to healthcare. They have less access to a healthy diet, and exercise and more stress from making debts etc.

You read better, I said "equal health care". The rich live better, and longer. While the poor in the Netherlands die sooner, and in poorer health.


Quote:
Here everyone can study on a top university unlike the USA. I would say: read some articles before you write, or talk to some dutch people. You are writing nonsense here.


I'm not talking about collage, I'm talking about;

Quote:
Between success and failure
Survey shows significant education discrepancies among second generation immigrants in the Netherlands

No less than one quarter of second-generation immigrants in the Netherlands drops out of school. This is the most alarming result of a recent survey conducted among the second generation of Turkish and Moroccan descent in the two largest Dutch cities – Amsterdam and Rotterdam. However, this is only one side to the story as the survey report also shows that other second generation immigrants are doing extremely well, with a third continuing to higher education. How can these immense discrepancies in educational performance among second generation immigrants be explained?

The high drop-out rate among the children of immigrants – who are consequently labelled as 'at risk youth' – seems to be explained by two main factors: "Of course, the low educational level as well as the disadvantaged position in society of the parents of the second generation is part of the explanation", said Liesbeth Heering, International Coordinator of the survey from the Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI). "However, the inability to cater for the diversity of the pupils in Dutch schools, especially in vocational schools, is an equally big problem" continued Heering.


We can continue this little dance if you wish. I've got about another 2 weeks before World 42 starts and am well versed in world events and situations. And so forth.

Erasing One Big Astounding Mistake All-around
Scholar
#337 Old 8th Sep 2009 at 6:00 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
But as you have pointed out, your system is near perfect, why are people slipping through the cracks in your country? Why are you not doing more to address this problem? Instead of criticizing our government as it works out ours. We are addressing our problems. But seek to do it right, not rushed in a bill that no one has read.

I am talking about my USA friends here, not about dutch friends. My ducth friends all have insurance. My USA friends do not they are the ones in the shit.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
I did read it. And I know Netherlands has a government run housing program. Why is your government forcing the poor to live in poor conditions? Do they not care about the poor they force to live in such conditions? Can they not help them by moving them to better areas? Why so heartless? Its disgusting that any government force the poor to live like that when they control the housing in the nation. Selfish is best to describe it. We live in the better areas, while the poor, we force them to live in less desired areas.

The government does not force the poor to live in poor conditions. One of the biggest problems of poor areas is that most of the people who live there are mostly immigrants. They are often muslim, have halal stores etc and want to live together. The neighborhood goes crap because many of the youth are criminals. The goverment is trying to get them to learn dutch and adapt but its hard.
Anyway, its just provocation from your side - your country has 'ghettos' and once again is worse.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
And ours is not? What then is this whole topic about then? And check the first.

As said I am referring to my USA friends. Read my posts some better.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
That means, do the math, that if you subtract those who could have insurance if they enrolled, and those who are here and not Americans, that leaves 18 mil, or 5.9% of Americans who need insurance. So lets toss out every ones and force them into a crappy program instead of working out a system that address those who still need insurance.

If only your country would do that. But they failed to do so over a decade.. and still there are no signs of improvement. They USA still lets the disabled sink in the shit.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
And why is that, why are they being forced to the side and not helped into the system. Here hospitals and work places provide multi languages to help those who do not speak English. Why is your country not following suit and providing aid to those in need and don't speak or read Dutch? And why are their youth turning to crime? Is it due to the fact that the heartless people are not providing them the opportunity they need to get ahead?

They are not forced to the sides, their parents are doing a crappy job. The mums are not allowed much, the boys do not have to listen to them because they are women, the dads do not teach their children much, because in their original home country, the state would punish the kids for outside criminality. There are folders in arabic with the housedoctor, but those people first need to know such a thing as a housedoctor exists, which some have no idea off. And the men need to know they can send their women there, some men do not agree with their muslim woman going to a male doctor. Same goes for treatment in hospitals.
The problem with the youth is, because their parents don't speak dutch well, their kids often fail at school. They teach them muslim values which would work in their country, but have a bad effect in dutch society.
Its a shame culture instead of an admit culture. As a man in holland if you make a mistake and admit it, your seen as strong. In morroco its the opposite. They do not admit mistakes which makes it harder to correct them when they go criminal. They keep denying. They want fast money status is important so they often go crimial. Another problem is they have disrespect for women, so women are not too fond to hire them. Their home is muslim, the world outside is not muslim, and that does not match. If dad at home calls all non muslim women hookers, and they outside have to deal with women, they draw the short straw. Same goes for gay people. The muslim girls do much better, they work hard to become independant, but those guys are often criminal. End results is the muslim grils do not want to marry the boys anymore. They are emancipated, the dudes are not.

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
You read better, I said "equal health care". The rich live better, and longer. While the poor in the Netherlands die sooner, and in poorer health.

And the USA disableds die becaue of lack of help. You are making no sense here you are just provocating. Your country fails to even gives all people insurace yet you go whine about food and exercise. It makes no sense.

Between success and failure
Survey shows significant education discrepancies among second generation immigrants in the Netherlands

Quote: Originally posted by Amish Nick_SC
No less than one quarter of second-generation immigrants in the Netherlands drops out of school. This is the most alarming result of a recent survey conducted among the second generation of Turkish and Moroccan descent in the two largest Dutch cities – Amsterdam and Rotterdam. However, this is only one side to the story as the survey report also shows that other second generation immigrants are doing extremely well, with a third continuing to higher education. How can these immense discrepancies in educational performance among second generation immigrants be explained?

[i]The high drop-out rate among the children of immigrants – who are consequently labelled as 'at risk youth' – seems to be explained by two main factors: "Of course, the low educational level as well as the disadvantaged position in society of the parents of the second generation is part of the explanation", said Liesbeth Heering, International Coordinator of the survey from the Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI). "However, the inability to cater for the diversity of the pupils in Dutch schools, especially in vocational schools, is an equally big problem" continued Heering.

One of the big problems is the language. The other is their morals and values towards western society. The schools are now offering an extra year to teach middle school students dutch. Because otherwise they still have less chance. Another peoblems is the parents WANTING the kids to go to a muslim school. One muslim school already lost funding because education was crap. Its hard to educate the muslim parents to teach them how to do well in western society. If the keep acting the muslim-way they get themselves in trouble. They often go do the "fast money" studies if they go study at all, its an attitude problem. As said, the female muslims do much better. The male ones often ruin it for themselves. Immigrants from not-muslim countries also do well. Hindues, indonesiasn, chinese never give much trouble and do well in schools.


"When the moon is in the seventh house
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars"
Inventor
#338 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 8:58 AM
http://sickforprofit.com/

"The Health Insurance Racket:
Getting Rich by Denying Americans Care
CIGNA’s Edward Hanway spends his holidays in a $13 million beach house in New Jersey. Meanwhile, regular Americans are routinely denied coverage for the care they need when they need it most.
Welcome to the American health insurance industry. Instead of helping policyholders attain the health security they need for their families, big insurance companies get rich by denying coverage to patients. Now they’re sending lobbyists to Washington, DC to twist the arms of lawmakers to oppose reform of the status quo. Why? Because the status quo pays."

Or just plain sick!
Lab Assistant
#339 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 11:57 AM
I don't understand why a lot of Americans are against free health for all!Granted that there is no perfect model but gravitating to a system that allows the poor and the ones who actually And sorry to say America does not have the best health care or doctors! I know for a fact that doctors who want to know the latest procedures actually learn from India, and its amazing what they can do.I find Americans quite clueless as to what happens outside their on country.How can a doctor working in a hospital in US turn away a sick or dying individual just because they have no insurance thats inhumane!
Alchemist
#340 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 12:03 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Trinity77
How can a doctor working in a hospital in US turn away a sick or dying individual just because they have no insurance thats inhumane!


<offtopic>
money makes the world go 'round.
</offtopic>

EDIT: though, to be fair, its not the doctors' choice. its the people behind the doctor, who're able to dictate their line of action. doctors do not get to pick and choose their patients, they are told a criteria and they must adhere to it, same as any other job.

"The more you know, the sadder you get."~ Stephen Colbert
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." ~ Jon Stewart
Versigtig, ek's nog steeds fokken giftig
Scholar
#341 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 1:55 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Trinity77
I don't understand why a lot of Americans are against free health for all!Granted that there is no perfect model but gravitating to a system that allows the poor and the ones who actually And sorry to say America does not have the best health care or doctors! I know for a fact that doctors who want to know the latest procedures actually learn from India, and its amazing what they can do.I find Americans quite clueless as to what happens outside their on country.How can a doctor working in a hospital in US turn away a sick or dying individual just because they have no insurance thats inhumane!

Depends on.. if its an a emergency they are helped, if its not an emergency they are left to rot till it turns into an emergency.


"When the moon is in the seventh house
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars"
Forum Resident
#342 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 2:52 PM
Quote: Originally posted by Trinity77
I don't understand why a lot of Americans are against free health for all!Granted that there is no perfect model but gravitating to a system that allows the poor and the ones who actually And sorry to say America does not have the best health care or doctors! I know for a fact that doctors who want to know the latest procedures actually learn from India, and its amazing what they can do.I find Americans quite clueless as to what happens outside their on country.How can a doctor working in a hospital in US turn away a sick or dying individual just because they have no insurance thats inhumane!
Because again, its not free.

Doctors do not treat people without pay.
Hospitals do not provide rooms without incurring cost.
Medications are not distributed without expecting compensation.

It has to be paid for, and simply put, the burden no matter what Obama and the politicians say, will have to be paid for by the middle class. You simply can not tax the rich enough to pay for it.

You try and taxing industries to pay for this, the industries will pass that cost on to their customers who have to pay higher cost for those goods. Middle class.

You need to also learn the law here. All hospitals are bound by federal law to treat those who are unable to pay for their care. The hospitals then try and find ways of passing those cost onto who ether can, or on to insurance companies, or seek reimbursement from the Government. So the claim that some one is dying is simply turned out is fully faulse. The Federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) ensures that those who can not pay get treatment.

Erasing One Big Astounding Mistake All-around
Scholar
#343 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 4:36 PM
I am now agiast health care for everyone. Now that Obama has stated that he wants to FINE people who do not BUY health care under the new bill.

Disclaimer: I am just being a goof ball, please ignore me if offended.
Theorist
#344 Old 16th Sep 2009 at 4:49 PM Last edited by davious : 16th Sep 2009 at 4:59 PM.
The "fine" idea comes from their faulty car insurance analogy, when the two are nothing alike. It is a lie to say that states require everyone to purchase car insurance, and that if you don't, you get fined...why? Because, if you don't own a car, you do not need car insurance. You can't equate that with health insurance, what would be the "car"? Your body? So, if you don't have a body, you wouldn't need health insurance...you would have to be dead. I don't have to own a car, but I do have to own a body. So, clearly not the same.

Further, this is Democrat logic for you: you can't afford health care? Okay, I will fine you thousands of dollars.

Where is the logic in that? If you can't afford the health care, you can't afford to pay the fine either...DUH.

Plus, how do you determine who can and can't afford it? What is the income level? Is it per household, or per person? Where is the logic in forcing people to pay in to a health care system, lets say, 100 dollars a month, for a service they may never or rarely use, when that 100 dollars could be spent on food, or utilities, something they need to use every day?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama on ABC's This Week, discussing Obamacare
What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore
umm...Isn't having other people carry your medical burden exactly what national health care is?
Forum Resident
#345 Old 17th Sep 2009 at 12:27 AM
Quote: Originally posted by DrowningFishy
I am now agiast health care for everyone. Now that Obama has stated that he wants to FINE people who do not BUY health care under the new bill.
TBH, I'm not against reform. Just this bill as it is written. And I've said it before too.

Its too much at once and doesn't really address the problems.

Need a PDF reader to read this. Tired of screen shotting them.

http://www.micra.org/about-micra/do...fordability.pdf

Gist of it is this, Tort reform, and opening up all the states to competition of insurance companies will help drive down cost. That means insurance, cost less, and more people can buy it more affordable.



Now that is not a full solution, but it is a very strong start. From there, prescription reform, and then some form of legislation to address Insurers dumping people due to health issues should about pick up the rest and what is not covered could maybe be done in some form of government assistance. No need for a take over or public option. And on top of it, it would be cheaper then hell since much of it would be done in the free market arena.

Erasing One Big Astounding Mistake All-around
Forum Resident
#346 Old 18th Sep 2009 at 5:40 AM
Tort reform is a joke. A conservative joke, although I'm not sure why, because there is nothing really pro-capitalism about tort reform. We need laws that allow people and corporations to sue each other when one tries to weasel out of a paid contract or inflicts damage.

Like when you pay an insurance company to cover you, and then when you get sick, they come up with a bullsh** reason to not pay for your coverage, forcing you to waste your time in court, and possibly waste the last few months of your life arguing. The sooner you die, the faster they win.

Now the argument for tort reform goes like this: If it's harder for people to sue insurance companies that cheat their customers, then the insurance companies will save money and thus be able to charge less for insurance.

Of course they will. You could charge less to your customers, too, if you sold them empty boxes rather than the products they thought they purchased. The reason you can't do that is because it is fraud.
Forum Resident
#347 Old 18th Sep 2009 at 5:46 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Doc Doofus
Tort reform is a joke.
**You re-stated after I posted, so I changed.**

And you live in a state that did Tort reform.

One thing I find interesting. When asked why Dems don't or wont consider any form of Tort reform is because they fear the lawyers.

Erasing One Big Astounding Mistake All-around
Forum Resident
#348 Old 18th Sep 2009 at 5:58 AM
Heh, I googled that one rather quickly, because I knew that wasn't true about tort reform in Texas.

http://cherryhill.injuryboard.com/m...googleid=270440

Quote:
Texas Tort Reform is NOT a Model for Nationwide Health Care Reform

[...]Are the tort reformers right? Well, let’s look at Texas. Several years ago, the state passed a stringent medical malpractice law that capped awards for pain and suffering at $250,000, and brought the number of malpractice lawsuits down dramatically.

So the cost of health care in Texas must also be down, you suppose, since doctors don’t face the same malpractice threats as the rest of the country. Eh, No. In fact, Texas is home to three of the top ten most expensive cities in the country to receive health care: McAllen, Harlingen and Corpus Christi. In each of these cities, every Medicare patient is costing the country more than $10,000 a year (a couple thousand more than the national average)...


The kind of tort reform that they are talking about here is tort reform focused on medical malpractice cases, doctors being sued by patients for fouling up an operation, that kind of thing. Now I think we should be able to sue in such cases and get whatever punitive damages are suitable. The fact that this might stimulate a doctor in the future to do more tests "defensively" to cover his ass against lawsuits sounds fine to me. So I'm not in favor of that kind of tort reform either. But the type of tort that I'm talking about specifically is not addressed as much as it should be at all. I am talking about when insurance companies cut off their customers that they have taken money from. That's fraud, and it is widespread in the industry and takes many forms, and it costs people their lives, not their dollars.

It has nothing to do with lawyers, although I'm only speaking for myself. I felt the same way back when I was a hardcore Atlas Shrugged libertarian. Lawsuits are what keep people honest without the intervention of government. It's illogical to be anti-big-government and anti-lawsuit as well.
Test Subject
#349 Old 18th Sep 2009 at 5:30 PM
Removing all complications and side-speak...not mentioning the bill itself or what it says...ignoring the fact that hospitals (at least in the state of Mississippi) are prohibitted from refusing care based on a lack of insurance...ignoing all of that. Having recently medically retired from the USAF for damage sustained in countries other than my own.
The US government is 160000 claims behind for the new GI Bill - they only had three years to prepare and its been available since May 2009. The gov't can't manage veteran health care without exposing them to all kinds of administrative delays and contamination. The US gov't is over 1000000 claims behind for veteran disability, 1000000 people that were already IN a form of governement health and already has their information IN the gov't system and the US gov't can't process their claims?.
You want these people to be in charge of your health care? Are you freakin' nuts? The gov't can't handle 1000000 veterans how do you think they'll do when its 310000000 US citizens?
Scholar
#350 Old 18th Sep 2009 at 6:36 PM Last edited by Vanito : 18th Sep 2009 at 6:47 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by davious
Further, this is Democrat logic for you: you can't afford health care? Okay, I will fine you thousands of dollars.

Where is the logic in that? If you can't afford the health care, you can't afford to pay the fine either...DUH.

Plus, how do you determine who can and can't afford it? What is the income level? Is it per household, or per person? Where is the logic in forcing people to pay in to a health care system, lets say, 100 dollars a month, for a service they may never or rarely use, when that 100 dollars could be spent on food, or utilities, something they need to use every day?

It depends on the way the system is set up. In holland*, noone gets fined but the unwilling. (though there are exceptions on moral grounds for people who think illness is gods will etc)

The big majority of people can pay insurance in holland, belgium etc. Its much cheaper to get insurance etc than in the USA. The more people pay, the lower the price because it is divided over many. The few people who really have a too low income get funded by the state and get a small or bigger extra depending on their too low income.

The poverty limit here is decided on basic things like beeing able to have some small house/appartment, enough costs for basic food, enough to send your kids to public school, further education etc. State funds basic utilities like washing machines for the really poor here too. It is not easy to live on a minimum income as provided here, but people do not get homeless or chanceless unless they want to. Nor do their kids grow up without chances.

Paying healthcare does not endanger housing, food or utilities, something they need to use every day here. In fact the state protects anyone from that beeing endangered. Its not great to be poor, you can do not much you are at the bottom of society, but you will survive and have a chance to get out. Not do your kids become chancless. Noone wants to be poor, its only a small group. People with no food, daily utilites like washing machines, do not happen here, unless they want to.

The state is protecting both itself and the people here.

Many people assume they do not need health care, but if they get an illness or accident tomorrow they are having a problem. And the USA too, because they have a big chance of losing another tax paying citizen and possibly helping the whole family into poverty (aka low or no tax payers).

Emergencies get help, but if people need revalidation, or medicines to be able to work again, and cannot a afford it, what happens to them? Or their families? Its both a waste of people, and a waste of tax payers.

Its is not just humane grounds, its also better or the cash. Our right wing politicals realise that too. May be hard to get such a system going, but once it goes, it pays off. More tax payers = more money.

*No this is not "holland morality", I am too lazy to look up half of western europes rules.

Quote: Originally posted by Stompsem67
You want these people to be in charge of your health care? Are you freakin' nuts? The gov't can't handle 1000000 veterans how do you think they'll do when its 310000000 US citizens?

Yeah that may be a problem.

Vote for Harry Potter to get your problems fixed. (j/k, its our our minister president)


"When the moon is in the seventh house
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars"
 
Page 14 of 16
Back to top