Leaked Cables, Cuban Healthcare System

[Big_Banana]

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
Question: If you were going on a hike in a remote area…would you trust what you read in a book on which trails to take or would you listen to somebody who grew up in that area and hiked those woods all of his life? [/quote]

Just to point out, you’re immediately assuming that the book and the hiker would point out different trails. If the book were well put together by someone of experience, as it should be done, then I don’t think there would be many differences.
[/quote]

That is a pretty big if. The world usually doesn’t work that way.[/quote]

So you mean to say, experts don’t write about what they know? Pardon me if I find that ridiculous. Sorry if sarcasm went undetected.[/quote]

I am saying people put together shoddy books that rarely contain enough information. Especially about hiking trails.

[heavythrower]

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
Question: If you were going on a hike in a remote area…would you trust what you read in a book on which trails to take or would you listen to somebody who grew up in that area and hiked those woods all of his life? [/quote]

Just to point out, you’re immediately assuming that the book and the hiker would point out different trails. If the book were well put together by someone of experience, as it should be done, then I don’t think there would be many differences.
[/quote]

here is a life lesson that you will learn eventually kid, just because somebody knows how to argue better does not make that person RIGHT.

I know this will sound condescending, I really do not mean it that way, but live in the real world another 20 or so years and you will realize this.

[florelius]

the age argument is bullshit and irrelevant to the discussion. Anyone who uses age, proffesion, bodyweight etc
are using it because they lack relevant arguments, I propose that anyone that get a counterargument
of that sort ignores the person who uses it. btw that type of argumentation is juvenile.

as an example.

If I used that type of arguments in a thesis at the university I would at best get a low grade or at wourst flunk. If anyone wants to argue that please go ahead, but you will look dumb if you do.

[heavythrower]

ok fella, write your thesis on how great Cuba is, then actually go to little Havana in Miami and convince the people who are 50-60 years old who lived in Castro’s Cuba a good part of their life.

my argument is more than valid.

I can lurk dozens of threads on this forum, and watch the conservatives link tons of bullshit to support there point of view, then the libs post an equal amount of links to support exactly the opposite.

in this “information age” one can find bullshit to support just about any argument they want.

age, real life experience, they matter…anyone who wants to argue that please go ahead, but you will look dumb if you do.

the guy got real personal and told me to “get my shit together” before I dared question his mad interwebz debating skillz…what a laugh.

the people who put their lives in my hands every day and the two households who I support with my income think my shit is together pretty good.

If you think somebodies personal experience means nothing, and it does not count when keeping score in the all important internet argument game, well, that shows what a really small and unimportant person you really are.

For example, I think I know quite a bit about the healthcare field, I know lots about treatment and management of many different terminal diseases, but I am not about to preach to somebody who is, say, fighting terminal cancer right now about how they should feel about it.

[florelius]

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
ok fella, write your thesis on how great Cuba is, then actually go to little Havana in Miami and convince the people who are 50-60 years old who lived in Castro’s Cuba a good part of their life.

my argument is more than valid.

I can lurk dozens of threads on this forum, and watch the conservatives link tons of bullshit to support there point of view, then the libs post an equal amount of links to support exactly the opposite.

in this “information age” one can find bullshit to support just about any argument they want.

age, real life experience, they matter…anyone who wants to argue that please go ahead, but you will look dumb if you do.

the guy got real personal and told me to “get my shit together” before I dared question his mad interwebz debating skillz…what a laugh.

the people who put their lives in my hands every day and the two households who I support with my income think my shit is together pretty good.

If you think somebodies personal experience means nothing, and it does not count when keeping score in the all important internet argument game, well, that shows what a really small and unimportant person you really are.

For example, I think I know quite a bit about the healthcare field, I know lots about treatment and management of many different terminal diseases, but I am not about to preach to somebody who is, say, fighting terminal cancer right now about how they should feel about it. [/quote]

u mad?

Ok lets say I where to wright a thesis on the cuban healthcare system and my hypothesis where that it where excellent. To support my hypothesis I had to back it up with alot of arguments that where relevant to the subject and that where rootet in empiric data. My age, job, salary, number of kids is irelevant to the topic. The only thing relevant is arguments that proov or disproov the hypothesis. Thats was my point. I also broath it up because some of the guys at PWI attachs the person instead of the argument and even if some find that cool, macho or whatever, its not proving them right, it just shows that they are out of any good counterarguments.

btw: good for you that you are a father, you seem proud of that. I am happy for you( no kidding ). And in a discussion about raising kids, your experience in that would count, but I dont see what it has to do with the cuban healthcare.

take care.

[John_S1]

Cuban health care is a joke, people are fleeing the country. If you have a massive amount of people fleeing your county there is a massive problem. The thing with statistics is you can make them say whatever you want them to say.

What has the Cuban system given the rest of the world? Refugees? What medicine have they contributed? None? We see the low cost of their medicine and compare it to the money we have, yet when you compare it to what they get it is actually very very expensive.

These are what need to be addressed, because if we start throwing around statistics both sides have them to support their own claims. You have to get to the root of the problem to actually have an intelligent argument.

I can pull up the statistic 86% of all people love their health care coverage. We can also point out that when world leaders need health care, they come to the USA.

[kilpaba]

His point is simply ATTACK THE ARGUMENT and NOT THE PERSON. If the stats are bullshit, it is incumbent on you to show HOW they are bullshit. Simply waving your hands and saying “I don’t think that is true from my experience so it isn’t” is not a good argument. Your world view is by definition extremely limited.

Experience does matter, no one is claiming it doesn’t, but if we are talking about macro-scale things it becomes much less relevant. There is also the fact that people are often just plain out and out wrong in their perceptions and interpretations of things. This is why we have objective data in the first place.

The only example I can think of off hand is that people are often extremely bad at knowing what will make them happy (according to the “Science of Happiness”). They think if they just get more money, for example, that they will then be happier, but once basic needs are met this has been shown to be false. Lottery winners revert back to the same baseline happiness score after the initial euphoric wave dissipates. So why are most people still chasing money? Doesn’t our perception of things dictate what is true? Not always it would appear.

Once again for the record, I am a Libertarian who does in fact think the Cuban Health Care system is not as good as people would make out. I am just saying we need to actually debate if we are going to learn anything. No one said it was supposed to be easy.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

[quote]orion wrote:You mean the refutation of one point of approximately twenty?

[/quote]

There weren’t many other “points” in there, and anyway, the fact that they lied about something so easily verified casts doubt on the rest of the cable, as well, especially since this isn’t the first time they’ve done this.

Not that I expect you to have a problem with sources just because they’re full of lies.

[quote]See, we agree!

They could have bought that equipment anywhere if it werent for the fact that after 50 years of communism they are shit poor dirt kickers.

One would expect that the pure awesome of collectivized medicine would have surpassed anything capitalism has to offer anyway. [/quote]

Apparently, you’ve stopped even pretending to read anything that doesn’t agree with you. As one of the articles mentions, they can’t buy some supplies anywhere else.

And once again, you haven’t been paying attention: Cuba’s system has surpassed anything the capitalist world has to offer in terms of efficiency. They have a quality of life comparable to ours, with only a fraction of our output. And the US, with it’s $14 trillion GDP, can’t even provide health insurance to all of its citizens.

Not that I would expect you to notice this, as any logic you’re capable of deploying goes right out the window when it’s time to defend your ideology.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

kilpaba wrote:How do you envision the government being run by the people more than a pure democracy (admitting we have a pseudo-republican set up in the US)? Similarly, without a governing body to enforce all of the social welfare rules how would many of these socialized practices be put into effect? Force seems the only option here and it isn’t immediately obvious how you could achieve a more pure governmental body than under “capitalism” (to be fair what you are describing is more akin to fascism).

There are many ways, and opinions differ. Some socialist and quasi-socialist countries form “neighborhood groups” (I’m not entirely sure what they call them) to organize local political affairs. The power to immediately recall any representative would have to be in effect, and one of the most important changes would be to remove the obscene influence of money on elections by making public financing mandatory, permitting no donations.

The biggest effect would probably come from extending democracy into the economic realm, and allowing the people to have a say in our economic priorities.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

John S. wrote:One of the single greatest smack downs I have ever seen.

Hehe, you must not have seen many then, as he is still using the same basic logical fallacies that you conservatives are so fond of.

By the way, John, where’s that currency crisis you’ve been hyperventilating about for all this time?

“The currency crisis begins now.”

-John S.

(5/6/2010)

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

John S. wrote: What medicine have they contributed? None?

Whoops!

“Yet Cuban biotechnology is now, among other things, leading the way in the development of a new generation of anti-cancer therapies expected to be available to the European market by 2008.”

“Although it is a small country with only 11 million people, it now boasts 52 scientific research institutes in the capital and more than 12,000 scientists on the whole island.”

“Cuba pulled off its first scientific coup with the discovery of a new vaccine for meningitis B in the late 1980s. The vaccine controlled epidemics at home, and obtained good results abroad especially in Argentina and Brazil.”

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/cuba-ailing-not-its-biomedical-industry

See John? This is the disadvantage of shooting your mouth off and making a bunch of claims when you don’t know what you’re talking about–you’re frequently wrong.

But let me guess: you’ll follow up with a hostile post in which you accuse me of a being a blind zealot.

PS This link was again the very first one that came up after a Google search. That’s to whoever was talking about being able to “find bullshit to support anything you want” on the Internet. If your argument fits facts, you don’t have to look that hard.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

John S. wrote:What has the Cuban system given the rest of the world?

Sorry, John:

“Fidel is threatening to provide massive amounts of medical aid to improve the health of poor Latin Americans. Rather than a fifth column promoting socialist ideology, these doctors provide a serious threat to the status quo by their example of serving the poor in areas in which no local doctor would work, by making house calls a routine part of their medical practice and by being available free of charge 24/7, thus changing the nature of doctor-patient relations. As a result, they have forced the re-examination of societal values and the structure and functioning of the health systems and the medical profession within the countries to which they were sent and where they continue to practice. This is the current Cuban threat.”

“By the close of 2005, Cuban medical personnel were collaborating in 68 countries across the globe. Consequently, Cuban medical aid has affected the lives of millions of people in developing countries each year. And to make this effort more sustainable, over the years, thousands of developing country medical personnel have received free education and training either in Cuba or by Cuban specialists engaged in on-the-job training courses and/or medical schools in their own countries. Today, over 10,000 developing country scholarship students are studying in Cuban medical schools.”

[quote]Countries in which Cuba provides collaboration in Health by region, December 2005
The Americas
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Aruba, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Ecuador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Venezuela, Dominican Republic, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, St. Lucia, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago
Africa
South Africa, Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cape Verde, Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Lesotho, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Chad, Uganda, Zimbabwe, RASD, Algeria
Asia
Qatar, Yemen, Laos, Pakistan, East Timor, Indonesia
Europe
Italy, Switzerland, Ukraine
Source: Statistical Registers of the Central Medical Cooperation Units, 2005 Statistical Yearbook of the Cuban Ministry of Public Health[/quote]

Cuban Medical Diplomacy: When the Left Has Got It Right

While we drop bombs, Cuba sends doctors.

[kilpaba]

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

kilpaba wrote:How do you envision the government being run by the people more than a pure democracy (admitting we have a pseudo-republican set up in the US)? Similarly, without a governing body to enforce all of the social welfare rules how would many of these socialized practices be put into effect? Force seems the only option here and it isn’t immediately obvious how you could achieve a more pure governmental body than under “capitalism” (to be fair what you are describing is more akin to fascism).

There are many ways, and opinions differ. Some socialist and quasi-socialist countries form “neighborhood groups” (I’m not entirely sure what they call them) to organize local political affairs. The power to immediately recall any representative would have to be in effect, and one of the most important changes would be to remove the obscene influence of money on elections by making public financing mandatory, permitting no donations.

The biggest effect would probably come from extending democracy into the economic realm, and allowing the people to have a say in our economic priorities.
[/quote]

In terms of the “neighborhood groups” I could get behind something like that, because it seems like that is decentralizing authority and putting it in the hands of the people most likely to know how to use that authority for that area’s good. But this would seem to fall squarely in the state’s rights camp rather a stronger central government. For example, what if that local group decided it wanted a purely free market with no taxation or welfare system? If it could do this a central government becomes much more like what the US had in its earliest days. If the central government could override this it makes these groups powerful only insofar as they don’t get noticed.

I agree with the spirit of your campaign finance reform as well, but I am not sure I would extend it to private human citizens. That would be a limitation of individual rights as I see them. Corporations are another can of worms entirely. However, if the major complaint is corruption as an issue with “capitalism” (again supporting particular businesses/industries is a fascist policy, not a free market/capitalist one) can we realistically expect any different outcome with an even more powerful government socialist government?

I guess my overriding point is that humans are corruptible. That input will never change. The only way to really limit the effect of corrupt people to dominate others and society is to give them LESS power not MORE. This is why I am such a proponent of smaller/more localized government. I firmly believe people will generally be corrupted in such a powerful position as government offers regardless of the system.

[Ryan_P_McCarter]

kilpaba wrote:In terms of the “neighborhood groups” I could get behind something like that, because it seems like that is decentralizing authority and putting it in the hands of the people most likely to know how to use that authority for that area’s good. But this would seem to fall squarely in the state’s rights camp rather a stronger central government. For example, what if that local group decided it wanted a purely free market with no taxation or welfare system? If it could do this a central government becomes much more like what the US had in its earliest days. If the central government could override this it makes these groups powerful only insofar as they don’t get noticed.

Yes, that is one major goal–to decentralize power and limit any one institution or organization’s ability to use coercive measures.

As to your hypothetical question, about the locals wanting a free market (or whatever), I have no very good answer for you. Because it would depend on the way the group was structured, specifically its extent (what constitutes local; a city, a county, a state?), and how their proposed changes would affect other areas. In addition, there would have to be some set of “local” issues that these groups would be empowered to deal with, and some “federal” issues that are decided and enforced on a national level. To give an obvious example, a single county, or state could not vote to exempt themselves from all federal taxes, for obvious reasons (unless they desired to totally secede from the country, which I would not necessarily oppose, but that’s a whole 'nother issue).

However, in your specific example, I can say pretty confidently that the citizenry would not desire a free market. Poll after poll shows Americans are firmly in favor of Social Security, as well as aid to lower-income earners, and until recently with the health care fiasco, they were firmly behind universal health care as well. Although I suppose this response is dodging your question, to some extent.

I should also note that I am not necessarily arguing for a totally “socialized” economy. If the citizens decide that they don’t need the government to get involved in the soft drink industry, for instance, I don’t have much of a problem with that. In other words, I have no problem with a mixed economy.

I agree with the spirit of your campaign finance reform as well, but I am not sure I would extend it to private human citizens. That would be a limitation of individual rights as I see them. Corporations are another can of worms entirely. However, if the major complaint is corruption as an issue with “capitalism” (again supporting particular businesses/industries is a fascist policy, not a free market/capitalist one) can we realistically expect any different outcome with an even more powerful government socialist government?

I then respectfully disagree with you here–I have no problem violating this particular individual right to ensure that our future representatives, who make incredibly important decisions, campaign on an even field.

To the second question, yes, we can expect a different outcome. Just as financial managers probably invest their own money differently than that of their clients, our socialist representatives would generally govern differently than their capitalist counterparts. Our present leaders are accountable to business groups, not the people. The goal is to make the government simply a subset of the people, not a largely seperate class, as they are now. To do this, it will at least be necessary to deprive this class of their control of the means of production.

[quote]I guess my overriding point is that humans are corruptible. That input will never change. The only way to really limit the effect of corrupt people to dominate others and society is to give them LESS power not MORE. This is why I am such a proponent of smaller/more localized government. I firmly believe people will generally be corrupted in such a powerful position as government offers regardless of the system.
[/quote]

Then our goal is the same, and we disagree on the methods by which to achieve it. In my estimate, it is not the government that oppresses. The government is a tool, like a handgun, which may be used to protect the people or rob them. Just as no one would ever put a revolver on trial for murder, we should not waste our time endeavoring to limit the power of “the government,” as if the government is some alien entity here to exploit the people. Rather, we should find out who controls the government (which, if it were not already painfully obvious, this recession [which has only further consolidated control of capital and grown the reckless institutions such as Goldman Sachs, JP MorganChase, etc. which are largely the authors of our current suffering] ought to have removed all doubt), and how they are able to maintain their monopoly on its power, and then divest them of this power.

You can leglislate, litigate, and defund all you want to in an effort to control the government, but it will all be in vain until you address the REAL mechanism which enables abuse–the near monopoly over the means of production (and thus, the function of society) by those who control the government.

[kilpaba]

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
You can leglislate, litigate, and defund all you want to in an effort to control the government, but it will all be in vain until you address the REAL mechanism which enables abuse–the near monopoly over the means of production (and thus, the function of society) by those who control the government.
[/quote]

On this count we could not agree more. I think it is shameful that certain businesses and industries are favored in this country and it wreaks of mercantilism and corruption. My method would be to bar the government from subsidizing ANY industry under any circumstances and being totally neutral in the economy and restricted to that capacity.

As I mentioned in another thread we debated on together, most often monopolies/cartels really only persist where they are able to get the government to box out the competition via legal mechanisms. I think many of the factors socialists complain of with big business would disappear were government disallowed to subsidize any business or group.

Perhaps you are more of a libertarian than you think!

On the campaign finance issue, I am of a mixed mind on it. Public financing would correct some problems, and given the power of government I could concede on this point, I still doubt it would remove the corruption element and ultimately powerful interest’s ability to influence the government via the check book. Would average people be able to bribe the way wealthier individuals would? Both monetarily and time wise they would not. So ultimately you would be boxing out grassroots campaigns like what Ron Paul had for example. Again I believe depowering helps minimize the damage, but in principle I am in agreement with what you want to see happen, at least in outcome.

[John_S1]

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

John S. wrote:One of the single greatest smack downs I have ever seen.

Hehe, you must not have seen many then, as he is still using the same basic logical fallacies that you conservatives are so fond of.

By the way, John, where’s that currency crisis you’ve been hyperventilating about for all this time?

“The currency crisis begins now.”

-John S.

(5/6/2010)
[/quote]

Still breaking down, remember you ran out of this forum when Europe started collapsing.

Rising food prices? Check. Rising gas prices? Check. Yep seems so far sense I have said that things are going the way I said they would.

Still don’t know why your up my ass, considering I have been right. I am bigger stronger and smarter then you, don’t know why you continue down this course.

Perhaps someone hasn’t told you, your dream state was tried a few times and failed, didn’t even make it 100 years and was full of corruption.

[John_S1]

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

John S. wrote:What has the Cuban system given the rest of the world?

Sorry, John:

“Fidel is threatening to provide massive amounts of medical aid to improve the health of poor Latin Americans. Rather than a fifth column promoting socialist ideology, these doctors provide a serious threat to the status quo by their example of serving the poor in areas in which no local doctor would work, by making house calls a routine part of their medical practice and by being available free of charge 24/7, thus changing the nature of doctor-patient relations. As a result, they have forced the re-examination of societal values and the structure and functioning of the health systems and the medical profession within the countries to which they were sent and where they continue to practice. This is the current Cuban threat.”

“By the close of 2005, Cuban medical personnel were collaborating in 68 countries across the globe. Consequently, Cuban medical aid has affected the lives of millions of people in developing countries each year. And to make this effort more sustainable, over the years, thousands of developing country medical personnel have received free education and training either in Cuba or by Cuban specialists engaged in on-the-job training courses and/or medical schools in their own countries. Today, over 10,000 developing country scholarship students are studying in Cuban medical schools.”

[quote]Countries in which Cuba provides collaboration in Health by region, December 2005
The Americas
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Aruba, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Ecuador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Venezuela, Dominican Republic, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, St. Lucia, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago
Africa
South Africa, Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cape Verde, Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Lesotho, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Chad, Uganda, Zimbabwe, RASD, Algeria
Asia
Qatar, Yemen, Laos, Pakistan, East Timor, Indonesia
Europe
Italy, Switzerland, Ukraine
Source: Statistical Registers of the Central Medical Cooperation Units, 2005 Statistical Yearbook of the Cuban Ministry of Public Health[/quote]

Cuban Medical Diplomacy: When the Left Has Got It Right

While we drop bombs, Cuba sends doctors.
[/quote]

LOL, want to pull up America’s contribution and foreign aid and compare it to Cuba dollar to dollar?

Want to put up America’s medical contribution compared to Cuba’s? Isn’t it like 60+% of all new medine is created in America. What is the percent Cuba gives? Lets get to some hard facts and not cherry pick shall we.

The reason I pick apart your posts is because I don’t take you seriously. No offence but after you fled the forum after Europe started collapsing and reapeared while there is a lul there shows all that needs to be said about you.

[John_S1]

[quote]kilpaba wrote:
His point is simply ATTACK THE ARGUMENT and NOT THE PERSON. If the stats are bullshit, it is incumbent on you to show HOW they are bullshit. Simply waving your hands and saying “I don’t think that is true from my experience so it isn’t” is not a good argument. Your world view is by definition extremely limited.

Experience does matter, no one is claiming it doesn’t, but if we are talking about macro-scale things it becomes much less relevant. There is also the fact that people are often just plain out and out wrong in their perceptions and interpretations of things. This is why we have objective data in the first place.

The only example I can think of off hand is that people are often extremely bad at knowing what will make them happy (according to the “Science of Happiness”). They think if they just get more money, for example, that they will then be happier, but once basic needs are met this has been shown to be false. Lottery winners revert back to the same baseline happiness score after the initial euphoric wave dissipates. So why are most people still chasing money? Doesn’t our perception of things dictate what is true? Not always it would appear.

Once again for the record, I am a Libertarian who does in fact think the Cuban Health Care system is not as good as people would make out. I am just saying we need to actually debate if we are going to learn anything. No one said it was supposed to be easy. [/quote]

Type his name into google, you will see on many forums he has had the data thrown at him time and time again.

Ryan is a troll, that is why we make fun of him. He used to be all up my ass trying to attack me for talking about the upcoming currency crisis, I said it would start in Europe first and when it did he fled the forum.

The debate has already been done over and over again about Medicine. America makes the most medicine with the whole of Europe in second. When drugs are left up to the private sector they produce more, now we can get into if federal funding actually reduces the quality of drugs released into the market, and with that we look at human motivation(but as a fellow libertarian you know this).

Most of what needs to be said about this subject was said in the first 5 pages of this thread.

The fact that Cuba won’t let the film be shown in it’s country because it would piss the people off speaks volumes.

Bringing up the fact that people are fleeing the country is a legitament argument. It show’s something is wrong there.