Neoconservatism vs conservatism

[Gen. Volkov]

I did, we pay the most in the world by a mile.

Not exactly. Luxembourg, Norway, and Switzerland all pay very close to what we do.

US is 45th in life expectancy (well below those crummy Europeans)
42nd in infant mortality (again, behind those crummy europeans)

Both of these are far more dependent on lifestyle and culture than the healthcare system, and thus, are not good indicators of it's functioning. In all the statistics in the second list, the US is a little worse or a little better in all the areas given. The US does not have a shoddy system.

As I recall slavery was written into the Constitution...

Well sort of, it was a law that pertained to slaves, and how much they counted in the census.

I still don't think this is something the federal government should be involved in, it's big enough as is.

[The Beatles]

Not exactly. Luxembourg, Norway, and Switzerland all pay very close to what we do.

For twice as many surviving children, twice as many hospital beds, 3-4 extra years of life... www.overpay.ftw

That goes for your second comment as well.

But anyway, if you don't like those statistics, why don't you link some health-related statistics?

[Nuclear Raunch]

Uhhh how is infant mortality a lifestyle thing? I mean I think the number of infants who eat Big Macs, drink heavily, smoke, and don't get enough excersize are statistically insignificant.

There's also a bit saying that if a slave escaped and fled to a different state the state he fled to would have to return said slave to original owner.

EDIT: Just double checked and I call BS on your claim that the US did better in some categories. Our best showing was nurses per capita and we were dead middle, better than 7 others and worse than 7 others. In every other category we ranked either last or second to last behind England.

Damn that's sad, it's too bad the healthcare industry donates so much damn cash, it would be a huge benefit for the nation to manage our healthcare responsibly.

[Kraken]

oooooh boy.
this will be the last post that i will submit to this thread.

Nuke:

Very typical response, if someone mentions an area we can and should improve they get bashed as being America haters and are urged to move. But while it's not OK for me to mention an area of improvement (our suspect heath care) it's perfectly OK for you to mention an area for improvement (our borders) www.doublestandardsftw.com

and its a very typical response that you just gave. you cannot put your blinders off to see what you have around you. no, you just want to look at life through the lens of Cynicism and never do you point out anything good about the country. why do you do that? because you are blind to it. you rather feel like most out there that entitilement is truth, when you cannot bring yourself to struggle and achieve. you look to comedians for truth, to others wit for answers, to sketchy half-truths for belief and yet you seem uncapable of coming up with anything yourself. i am not whole heartingly critizing you because i count you as a friend, but i am alarmed at people out there who look ever elsewhere and not inward and who lack a love for thier country. healthcare and borders are two very very different topics as one is an invasion and the other is not. the people who have a tendency to whine and moan about health care are those who have to pay exorbant amounts for what they recieve, the ones who are to lazy or poor to purchase health insurance for themselves, or the pundents and politicals out there who wish to feed it to the masses for votes. I am for Free Market Economics and believe in a democratic society. sorry, but we will just have to disagree on this point here and thusly i encourage you to write and post in this topic as much as you wish, but i will not be responding to it anymore. Doctors have the right to charge what they wish, they put themselves through tough schools and paid for it and it is thier right to go on and do what they wish with it. It is a failacy to think that people of free enterprise should be regulated and told what to do by the government. But, on one final note on this subject, I do wish that it was all cheaper, that insurance was cheaper, that anyone can afford healthcare, but at the same time, i do not wish to abadon what this country stands for at its roots, democracy and all that it intails. if we have a difference of opinion on that: so be it, but we are not going to agree.

First of all I find great irony in a Bush supporter complaining about a lack of freedom and linking to the Constitution, thanks

you see, its that type of remark that shows your inability to understand anyhing about President Bush, you simply binge and purge the crap that you watch and read. so be it, but its not witty.

Secondly a democracy has absolutely nothing to do with the type of healthcare available. You can have privatized health care in a communist, republic, democracy, monarchy, dictatorship, or theocracy. Likewise a social health care program can be available in any of the forementioned government types.

Actually now that I think about it a democracy may very well be the best form of government for a social health care program. It's probably the method that allows us the greatest amount of power over how our health care is run. If there's 7-8 insurance companies and each one are the same it's a matter of picking your poison, however in a democratic republic we can vote people/changes in/out. Less profitable but healthier options won't be dismissed immediately.

refer to the crap i wrote above for whiter or not a democracy has anything to do with the type of healthcare available. and what you say in the second part sums it up: "social health care program", which is socialist and not democratic. but! do realize that if the government has thier hands in it, your choices will be limited (i felt this when i was getting it whilst in the military with Tri Care) and it boils down to Entitlements, which, too many have thier hands open in thier beliefs and too little hands are giving. when it boils down to having to pay for this type of Socialistic program, who is going to pay the brunt? not you nor i, but those who make more and is it fair then? consider that and then do whatever with it, but it isnt democratic in the least bit. but we are simply going to have to disagree. cool?

Quality+affordable=good
Expensive+shoddy=bad

except, who is to say the government regulated health care is going to be Quality and affordable? *laughs*, really, affordable to who? those who pay the brunt of the taxes? not to you, right, so you dont have to worry about the affordable part. the rest is your opinion. we disagree.

Uhhh how is infant mortality a lifestyle thing? I mean I think the number of infants who eat Big Macs, drink heavily, smoke, and don't get enough excersize are statistically insignificant

the point there is that it is a llfestyle thing that the parent involved is affecting the unborn child by thier lifestyles...think about it.... I am about to become a father for the Fourth and final time (im getting my wiener chopped off) and we are having a homebirth. why? because of intervention on behalf of the big buisness of hospitals which causes so many problems to mothers and infants. want to discuss this further: fine, but thats it. everything else, i am done with.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Beatles:

we have come along way to disagree.

now! final words on my behalf:

Thanks for your reply. Will reply too, but I just want to say: when citing statistics, leave Canada out. It has a nice system, but not even in the same league as most European UHC systems.

Why leave Canada out? is it not a socialised health system? is it not one of the many models out there? no, i will not leave it out nor will i accept any other model out there. they are one in the same when it comes to the bottom line: taxes and big government, which are my only two major concerns. fair enough?

Women's suffrage, equal rights for people of all color, voting rights for non-landowners... none of these were in the original Constitution. Some were added and today's democracy is different. Maybe in the distant future healthcare will be a part of democracy. Today, it certainly isn't, nowhere, but it is at least part of the abstract term "social justice".

Womens suffrage, equal rights for peeps of all colors, voting rights are not the same as healthcare. those subjects cannot be narrowed down into the same catagory. why? because of the free enterprise aspect of it. sure, slavery may be the closest point you have there as they were apart of economics, but they were freed and now are apart of america. whereas, healthcare knows no bounds on people who need it and people who use it, people everywhere have a choice to have it or not. any rubbish about it not being availiable is simple just that: rubbish. get a job, get a education, pay for what you want, Earn, learn and yearn. but universal healthcare is not an entitilment that should be approached easily, nor with only the poor in mind. refer to what i wrote above for my feelings about it all. this is a democratic society, not a socialst one. simple as that. disagree?

but be careful! Gay commie hippies might have written it!

*laughs*, whoever wrote it, wrote it. i could care less, but it is still an opinion. Social Justice is chaos theory at its best and is a matter of who says what can lie under that title (which amounts to anything anyone wants) good article though.

tantrum answer indeed!

fair enough then eh? i am done. good luck to any and all writings in the future, but i just dont have time to write on this anymore.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This has been a great debate and it will probably continue without my help which is fine by me.
I feel the way i feel.
simple as that.
I love my country and its funny how people are always screaming for change! change! change! but it is those who scream the loudest who do not take time to realise what they have. Beatles does realize this, he came to America because of its wealth and liberalism. fine. i just wish others would take time to see what it has to offer as well, not what it does not have to offer.
I will ever and anon stand by my beliefs that if you do not vote when you are of legal age, then you have no right to say shit about what goes on. this spans Federal elections and Local elections and State Elections.
If things were different, if America was not a Democracy, then i would be in the wrong on my stances. but! Nuke is right when he says the maybe a Democracy is the best when it comes to how to deal with a Universal Healthcare system, but until it can put into place by a majority of Americans, then it will never come to light. that is how a Democracy works.
One final note: I am nationalistic and i support my president. I supported Clinton and Bush Sr. too. I was too young for Reagan and Carter or any prior, but i feel that as citizens, we have a right to dissent and to support, but we do not have a right to be blind and cowish. open your eyes! look everywhere and form your own opinions! take things seriously and at the same time: enjoy your freedoms. they were not paid for by you, but by those who have died fighting for it.

thats it! i am done!

[Nuclear Raunch]

the people who have a tendency to whine and moan about health care are those who have to pay exorbant amounts for what they recieve, the ones who are to lazy or poor to purchase health insurance for themselves, or the pundents and politicals out there who wish to feed it to the masses for votes.

That pretty much entails 99% of America. We all either don't have it, or pay a lot more than what we receive. The only real exceptions being politicians, lobbyists, and execs that all get it for free.

...........................................................

Psychologically speaking I have a high need for achievement, which basically means that by nature I can't stand to stay at mediocrity. People who have a high need for achievment typically wind up in good career fields fairly early in life and also have a much higher rate of ascension within their respective fields, and it's all because we have to be successful and we have to be constantly improving ourselves. I have already hit the peak that 97% of the people in my field do, and am currently halfway to getting into a highly specialized niche that pays about 3X what the other 97% make. [/background info]

I'll be the first to admit that I don't focus on American achievements much, but that's because I never focus on any achievements much. If we've already achieved it there's nothying good that can come of reflecting on it forever, it's time to get started on our next goal. To me there is no recent accomplishment that needs to be reflected upon right now, maybe if we achieve good quality healthcare for every American citizen (and anyone else who is here legally) we can take an ever so brief moment to celebrate, but then we need to focus on the next biggest area of concern. Hell if all we ever did was reflect on what we have we would still be British property.

If there's an area that if improved will greatly increase the quality of life for every American after us then it is our duty as good American citizens to do everything in our power to get it implemented. If we fail to do so we do a great disservice to our children and our country, and I for one will not stand around and be content with a job half finished. If some people say it's unpatriotic to not dwell on what we have and don't want to make their country better then that is their opinion and I'm fine with that, but I still view them as dead weight that will only slow America's progress.

we are having a homebirth. why? because of intervention on behalf of the big buisness of hospitals which causes so many problems to mothers and infants.

To me that's an embarrassment for the richest country in the world to have their priorities so screwed up that a family has to have a home birth because it's safer. Home births are what they do in 3rd world countries, how could we have let ourselves slip to the point where our hospitals are less safe than a home procedure? For profit companies are fine in most areas of our lives but they cause nothing but problems when they get into our health, our safety, education, or our government. Coincidentally enough my idea on government's role is right in line with that, I think education, health, fire, and police should be available free of charge to all people. In my mind once any of those vectors becomes for profit the quality we receive takes a nose dive, because profit takes a higher precedence than you or I.

*Don't construe any of this as a shot at you for doing a home birth, I will never fault you for looking out for your families safety, I just think it's sad that it may be safer*

[Kraken]

*Don't construe any of this as a shot at you for doing a home birth, I will never fault you for looking out for your families safety, I just think it's sad that it may be safer*

no worries. i said i wouldnt post anymore on the aforementioned topics except this one, so here it is.
and, your analysis on your feelings is very well stated and appreciated.
now!
if you want to know something about hospital births and thier dangers, think about this: standard procedures.
When a mother is in labor, a hospital does not allow that mother to drink or eat during that entire time. why? just in case the have to do surgury. because of this, mothers are at higher risk of death during delivery. My wifes midwife says that all women should drink and eat while in labor if they feel like it...why? because it gives them strength.
Vitamin K, a natural blood clotter. a shot of this Vitamin K is given to an infant after birth and the mother doesnt even know it unless they are informed by research., if a child is Formula fed, then the shot should never be given because of the high doeses of Vitamin K in the forumla, this dramtic amount of Vitamin K has been linked to Childhood Lukemia.
i could go on and on, but women in America! talk about women rights! they need to be informed and realize that when they go into the hospital to have a baby, they are nothing but a cash cow at that point. 40-60% of a hospitals income is through the maternity ward.
so much more to go into...if you ever want to get bored with it. (god knows i knows this only because of my never quiet wife )

[Gen. Volkov]

But anyway, if you don't like those statistics, why don't you link some health-related statistics?

Because A) I'm Lazy I don't feel like putting as much into this one as I usually do and C) I'm lazy.

Uhhh how is infant mortality a lifestyle thing? I mean I think the number of infants who eat Big Macs, drink heavily, smoke, and don't get enough excersize are statistically insignificant.

Quit being facetious. It's annoying. You know very well what I meant. If not, I'll spell it out for you. The parents lifestyle has a huge impact in the child. DUH!

For twice as many surviving children, twice as many hospital beds, 3-4 extra years of life

Like I said, infant mortality and life expectancy has more to do with lifestyle than healthcare. So all they get is more hospital beds per person.

EDIT: Just double checked and I call BS on your claim that the US did better in some categories. Our best showing was nurses per capita and we were dead middle, better than 7 others and worse than 7 others. In every other category we ranked either last or second to last behind England.

I'm calling BS on you Nuke, you stated you were calling BS, and then went on to prove my very point. Middle of the road with nurses is part of what I was claiming. But ok, you have a point, we are a bit behind in some of those statistics, especially the important ones like doctor-patient ratio. But we aren't THAT far behind. And we do lead the world in medical research and development of new medical technologies. So we must be doing SOMETHING right. It's certainly not SHODDY! (Sorry, I'm just getting tired of hearing people denigrate our healthcare system, it's not perfect, and there is room for improvement to be sure, but it's not a BAD system. A bad system is what they have in China, or Russia, or one of many many African countries, compared to those countries, even Canada is a shining jewel.) (Russia's system used to be quite good, but then the government collapsed, China's would be better if not for the 2 billion inhabitants of that country)

Don't construe any of this as a shot at you for doing a home birth, I will never fault you for looking out for your families safety, I just think it's sad that it may be safer

It probably isn't unless you have a trained physician on hand in your home. There is alot of BS that goes on over births in hospitals, but the reason that one goes to a hospital to have a child is because in case anything should go wrong, there are trained physicians on hand to deal with it, who will most likely be able to save the lives of the mother and child.

[Kraken]

It probably isn't unless you have a trained physician on hand in your home

erm..we have a midwife, who is not a trained pyhysician, but instead, a trained midwife. who can act as a Doula if we needed to get to a hospital. so no physician is nessesary.

sorry, just needed to clear that up.

[The Beatles]

Before you leave the topic forever, there is one thing I want to clear up.

There is nothing mutually exclusive about socialism and democracy. <span style='font-size:28pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:red'>SOCIALISM IS A FORM OF DEMOCRACY.</span></span>

Thank you, I will look at the rest and post as appropriate later.

Why leave Canada out? is it not a socialised health system? is it not one of the many models out there? no, i will not leave it out nor will i accept any other model out there. they are one in the same when it comes to the bottom line: taxes and big government, which are my only two major concerns. fair enough?

Leave Canada out because Uganda also has a privatized healthcare system. Do you want me to compare Sweden to Uganda and conclude that socialism is best? Compare apples to apples, i.e. the best of each system or the worst of each system. Leave Canada out, or leave America out.

Actually, in everything else I agree with what you said. America will get universal healthcare if and when its citizens demand it. If it doesn't have it by the time I could live here, I will probably go home -- nothing personal, I've said many times I like America.

Yep, we came a long way to agree to disagree... but considering how ill-tempered the first few pages were, good progress, I'd say.

(To Nuke... I'd add a few more areas to the ones you mention... cemetery lots and anything to do with death, for instance. Companies make ridiculously large, completely unjustified, and frankly unethical profits on death and all its paraphernalia. I for one would nationalize cemeteries.)

they need to be informed and realize that when they go into the hospital to have a baby, they are nothing but a cash cow at that point.

You need to be informed: every citizen is nothing but a cash cow to the doctors. You are a walking goldmine, should you get ill, and that's why most privately funded research is into treatments, not cures. You are also a goldmine if you die, to your family, but at least the insurance helps there.

[Gen. Volkov]

erm..we have a midwife, who is not a trained pyhysician, but instead, a trained midwife. who can act as a Doula if we needed to get to a hospital. so no physician is nessesary

As long as she has enough medical training to know when something is serious enough that you need to go to the hospital, I suppose that works too. But I still wouldn't recommend it.

Yes, socialism is a form of democracy, but I think what Kraken means is that it's not like OUR form of democracy, with free market capitalism and such. It's also a lot more vulnerable to totalitarianism than other forms of democracy.

Yep, we came a long way to agree to disagree... but considering how ill-tempered the first few pages were, good progress, I'd say.

Yup, I'd say so too, on RWL and many other places this would have turned into a Flame war, no doubt.

To Nuke... I'd add a few more areas to the ones you mention... cemetery lots and anything to do with death, for instance. Companies make ridiculously large, completely unjustified, and frankly unethical profits on death and all its paraphernalia. I for one would nationalize cemeteries.

Unethical? Huge profits? Where do the profits come in? The coffins? The flowers? The funeral procession? I'm a bit confused on this on, but then this is one area I'm not very familiar with. Could you explain this a bit, or give me a few good links?

[The Beatles]

OUR form of democracy

And guess what? America's democracy isn't like "our" form of democracy with UHC and everything. Doesn't mean you should use "democratic". I never denied America is democratic, just not very fair on social equity.

Like I said, infant mortality and life expectancy has more to do with lifestyle than healthcare. So all they get is more hospital beds per person.

BS BS BS Infant mortality has nothing in the slightes to do with parent lifestyle!

(You were right, Kraken, we have found ways to continue the discussion even without you... )

[Gen. Volkov]

Infant mortality has nothing in the slightes to do with parent lifestyle!

BS! BS! BS! BS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Infant mortality has EVERYTHING to do with parent lifestyle. If you mother is a fat lazy American who eats crap all day, chances are the child will be receiving that crap as well. If your mother is coke-whore, chances are, she's not going to be taking good care of you. If your mother took drugs or drank alcohol while pregnant, you have a MUCH higher chance of dying as an infant than other children. It's complete and utter BS to say that the parents have no effect on the health of the infant.

And guess what? America's democracy isn't like "our" form of democracy with UHC and everything. Doesn't mean you should use "democratic". I never denied America is democratic, just not very fair on social equity.

I wasn't defending, idolizing or taking one side or another on that. I was ONLY saying what I thought Kraken meant. I thought I was very clear on that. So don't lecture me.

You need to be informed: every citizen is nothing but a cash cow to the doctors. You are a walking goldmine, should you get ill, and that's why most privately funded research is into treatments, not cures. You are also a goldmine if you die, to your family, but at least the insurance helps there.

While privately funded research is part of our healthcare system, I think it's terribly unfair to say that doctors merely see patients as a cash cow. I doubt highly one would become a doctor without caring for people, there are more lucrative lines of work out there that don't require 6 years of med school on top of 4 years of college.

I relate this to my own experience, up until recently, I wanted to become a vet, because I love animals, and yes, because the money is good. But if I was just after money, I would have been a business major, most of the reason I wanted to be a vet was because I love animals and I want to help them. Now I am a pure biology major, which I will likely end up making not even half as much money with, but I'm still one because I love animals, and I want to study them, and help save them from becoming extinct.

[Kraken]

As long as she has enough medical training to know when something is serious enough that you need to go to the hospital, I suppose that works too. But I still wouldn't recommend it.

how about 12 years of experience and hundreds of babies succesfully delivered.
and of course you do not reccomend it, you are uninformed.

here is her website: http://webpages.charter.net/jcmidwife/home.html

be sure to read such great reads on the site like: Statistics about Homebirth, Epidurals - Real Risks for Mother and Baby, But What If...? (you seem to need that one the most) and so much more!

[Freenhult]

That website was very re-assuring. D:

[Gen. Volkov]

how about 12 years of experience and thousands of babies succesfully delivered.
and of course you do not reccomend it, you are uninformed.

Good for her, I do not mean to be insulting you Kraken, so don't insult me. I am quite well informed. I just think that a person who has gone through 8-10 years of schooling plus quite a few internships, and was a resident for a year might have a bit more knowledge on medical issues than someone who has not.

That said, I'm sure she's a great midwife.

I did not intend to start, nor will I continue an argument about this. My opinions are my opinions, you have yours. Let's just leave it at that OK?

(And yes, I did read what you suggested, and have my own opinions on the subject, but as I said, they are my opinions, and I don't feel like sharing them)