Like i said pitbull your name does not befit you, wow a threat over the internet. Shit Im scared now big man, please forgive me. Like you said before you cannot argue against this so you use threats, wow sounds familiar, just like ACORN mobs. Anywho back to original topic why do you support this poor legislation you poodle? Aka pitbull
Also the conversation, turned to the two black panthers because you said the situation turned hostile at the AARP meeting with the elderly who all probably had canes. Thats how you call them old folks hostile, poodle?
I bet you defend those two goons at philly dont you? Damn chihuahua
[quote]Wrel wrote:
Anyone can make up or find statistics to support an argument, it’s just like the police force duking statistics to reflect political will, it’s bullshit.
[/quote]
I take serious issue with this. Stats can be manipulated, it is true, but they are far, far, far more responsible a way to frame an argument than using one off examples like “my cousin works in a biotech lab” or “my grandfather got cancer and survived”. The sample pool is wider, and if you know your sources, or the least bit about math, you can investigate stats to see which way they lean, or what they don’t account for.
You generalized from single point examples to an overal opinion. I will take national, regional, standardized, investigated stats over “sob stories” (or their opposites) any day.
Further, the stats on survival for the cancers you mentioned in your original post are NOT bullshit just because you want them to be. They are straightforward, unless you can pull up the source for them and show me why the numbers are inflated.
Finally, I personally am unwilling to give up any of my freedom. I do not care what the government promises, my freedom is mine and I won’t give that up. You make the mistake mentioned in the “political test” thread of assuming because people don’t want the government doing it, they don’t want Anybody doing it. That is not true. We want healthcare improved, but we don’t want the gov’t to do it.
[quote]Wrel wrote:
Just out of interest - do you actually know the nationalities of those scientists who won Nobel peace prizes?
This one I love the best “Why not thank or non-socialist medical market for your health? We do more for the science of medicine than all of Europe”
Well, why not thank the Arabs for creating written language, the Chinesse for inventing medicine and an Aussie for discovering penicilin while we’re at!
What does this mean "The top five U.S. hospitals carry out more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other country. " Clinical trials, you say … …
[/quote]
-
Knowing the nationalities of the Nobel scientists is pointless–it clearly stated “US residents” not “white caucasians”. In case you weren’t just playing dumb, the nationality of the scientist working in the US really makes no difference. The point was that the US is the worldwide nexus for advances in the field, which is very supportable.
-
I am very well aware of the Arab, Chinese, and Australian contributions to civilization. I have mentioned them numerous times in conversation with my friends about historical matters. This is a red herring and has no bearing on the topic of US. HEALTHCARE.
-
It means exactly what it says. Clinical trials. Clinical trials, you know, are those things your cousin in the biotech lab is doing to investigate a potential new drug for safety, use, and effectiveness. The US is the world leader in research and development, as well as clinical trials to bring new surgical methods, new analytical methods, new analytical intruments, and new and better medicine to market. This is pretty much undeniable.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
pushharder wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
Why isn’t health care a non-profit entity? I mean, I am all for capitalism, but come on, people’s health? YOu have to draw a line somewhere no?
By that line of thinking the government should be providing all of our food, clothing and housing. After all even those needs are more essential than health care.
Non-profit does not equal “government.”
Our government gives famers our money , in a sense they have socialized our food[/quote]
First correct thing I have ever read from you.
Unaware - you make a fair point in some respects, I don’t have experience of the American system as you do, but I do have private healthcare, so I have seen it from that end over here.
That said, things have changed over here with the NHS and my grandfather did get to choose which health trust he had his operation under (he lives in Yorkshire but went to St James in Newcastle) and he did get to see a consultant to make a decision on what kind of operation he would have of the removal of part of his bowel (sorry, it was a bowel op, not his knee, cross wires).
I don’t know what sort of options he would have had under a different form of healthcare provision, but he is know 98. And spry! So something is working.
You did say 10million people right? That’s 10,000,000. That may only be 3% of the population, but that doesn’t make it any less disturbing.
Like I said, i wasn’t trying to be argumentative, I just like to hear peoples opinions on matters I don’t understand, rather than accept what news outlets tell me, and have statistics thrown at me as the basis of an opinion.
It seems like a debate that is set to rage and rage.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Wrel wrote:
“My grandfather recently received a similar surgery and similar treatment, but he never sacrificed any freedom”
I’m sorry, what part of my grandfathers freedom did he sacrifice to recieve this care? We pay tax, much like everyone else (Wesley Snipes aside), I still am not clear what the objection to a public run system is. Yes, I appreaciate that it’s not a perfect system but what is? I promised myself I wasn’t goingto quote “Sicko”, or even reference it, but in that program (I do not say documentary) a chap has to decide which one of his two fingers he can have reattached cos he can’t afford both. Does this seem right? Surely society is about raising people up so people don’t have decide if they wanna keep the bird-finger or there nose picking finger?!?!
You and I obviously have a different definitions of rights. I believe only in negative rights as per the US constitution. The idea of positive rights directly contradicts negative rights in practice.
Your reference to paying taxes is ridiculous. Yes, we pay taxes, that doesn’t mean I can’t have objections to more taxes. That’s like saying there is no difference between someone stealing your tv and stealing your tv in addition to jewelry.
As for the rest of this:
" …In 2004, the health care industry spent three times as much as Europe per capita on biomedical research.[10] Companies provide medical products such as pharmaceuticals and medical devices. In 2006, the United States accounted for three quarters of the world’s biotechnology revenues and 82% of world R&D spending in biotechnology. [9][7]. The amount of financing by private industry has increased 102% from 1994 to 2003.[19] Governmental research institutes such as the National Institutes of Health are key in funding basic research.
The top five U.S. hospitals carry out more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other country. Between 1975 and 2008, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to U.S. residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined. In 29 of the 34 years between 1975 and 2008, a scientist living in the U.S. either won or shared in the prize.�??�?�¢??
"
Anyone can make up or find statistics to support an argument, it’s just like the police force duking statistics to reflect political will, it’s bullshit.
You’ve quoted specific fields of medicine, ie biotechnology, to support your overall opinion.
Just out of interest - do you actually know the nationalities of those scientists who won Nobel peace prizes?
Nationalities aren’t being discussed as of yet. The systems that allowed for the best innovation is. And country of origin has exactly 0 to do with that. Why deflect the statistics rather than address them. Our private medical companies far outspend your government system per capita in R and D. Period.
This one I love the best “Why not thank or non-socialist medical market for your health? We do more for the science of medicine than all of Europe”
Well, why not thank the Arabs for creating written language, the Chinesse for inventing medicine and an Aussie for discovering penicilin while we’re at!
Because I wasn’t making unsubstantiated claims about these things. Oh, and I’m allergic to penicillin.
What does this mean "The top five U.S. hospitals carry out more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other country. " Clinical trials, you say … …
Yes, a key element in R and D.
First if all - I am sorry you’re allergic to penicllin.
I understand your opinion, but I will have to respectfully disagree with it.
Spending doesn’t reflect quality, look at the healthcare systems in Germany, Swizerland etc, neither does volume of clinical trials relect the quality or productivity of R&D, as per the development of anti-clotting drugs, and those used to treat certain forms of cancer and heart disease.
You are right in some regards, the money involved in research does dictate the volume of nobel prizes awarded, but surely these benefits should be made available to everyone (within reason), not just those that can afford it. I cite the Aids drugs used in Africa that are clones of the more expensive kinds that they cannot afford.
I suppose i’m just been taken aback by the weight of resentment against the bill, but you have the right to potest and oppose it, and if you disagree with it then you should. It’s democarcy in action.
It just seems odd to me that a country that guarantee’s peoples right to the pursuit of happiness, doesn’t offer as much stock in there health.
[quote]Wrel wrote:
First if all - I am sorry you’re allergic to penicllin.
I understand your opinion, but I will have to respectfully disagree with it.
Spending doesn’t reflect quality, look at the healthcare systems in Germany, Swizerland etc, neither does volume of clinical trials relect the quality or productivity of R&D, as per the development of anti-clotting drugs, and those used to treat certain forms of cancer and heart disease.
You are right in some regards, the money involved in research does dictate the volume of nobel prizes awarded, but surely these benefits should be made available to everyone (within reason), not just those that can afford it. I cite the Aids drugs used in Africa that are clones of the more expensive kinds that they cannot afford.
I suppose i’m just been taken aback by the weight of resentment against the bill, but you have the right to potest and oppose it, and if you disagree with it then you should. It’s democarcy in action.
It just seems odd to me that a country that guarantee’s peoples right to the pursuit of happiness, doesn’t offer as much stock in there health.
[/quote]
If spending doesn’t reflect quality, why did you start bragging about what your country spends on r and d? You brought up the subject, not me. I was merely refuting your statement.
Like I said, we are a country of negative rights, not positive rights. It’s why we disagree with this so much. Our right to pursue happiness is a NEGATIVE right. It means others aren’t allowed to hold you back. It DOES NOT mean you are entitled to anything.
As I was saying before, negative and positive rights are mutually exclusive. If you add as a guarantee the positive right of healthcare to x group of people, you lose the negative right of self determination and the right of property for y group. I find negative rights to be the only true and ultimately important rights.
You see, the left and right on the political spectrum define freedom differently. The right define it as self determination, freedom from interference (this is the classical American view), the left essentially define it as being free from worry about food, retirement, healthcare est. (I’m guessing this is more your view). You see both anarchists and socialists(or communists if you will) see their view as being the freest society possible, they just define freedom differently.
Think about it as the difference between an adult and a child (I’m not insinuating negative things about either philosophy with this comparison). Who is more free, a child, or an adult?
A child can run about aimlessly with no worry or responsibility of any kind. In a sense the child is incredibly free. And in a sense the child is a prisoner to the will of it’s parents. It has no worry, but is not self determined.
An adult can do as it pleases, go where it wants, and make choices (good or bad). In one sense this is very free, but you now also have to work to eat, and suffer the consequences of poor decisions. To a socialist the adult is a slave to need and worry.
It all seems like even trade offs in theory, but in the real world, the parent (government) is at least as prone to poor decisions as the individual, and treating an individual as a child leads to childlike behavior (less productivity, more careless decisions, est.) You remove negative consequences and people lose motivation to do well.
You don’t mind sacrificing a little self determination for a little piece of mind, some of us do. The reason it can’t be an “agree to disagree” situation is the fact that your way requires my participation, my money, and my health all in the pot betting on the government to do something right.
[quote]jre67t wrote:
Like i said pitbull your name does not befit you, wow a threat over the internet. Shit Im scared now big man, please forgive me. Like you said before you cannot argue against this so you use threats, wow sounds familiar, just like ACORN mobs. Anywho back to original topic why do you support this poor legislation you poodle? Aka pitbull
[/quote]
GRRRR
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
pushharder wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
Why isn’t health care a non-profit entity? I mean, I am all for capitalism, but come on, people’s health? YOu have to draw a line somewhere no?
By that line of thinking the government should be providing all of our food, clothing and housing. After all even those needs are more essential than health care.
Non-profit does not equal “government.”
Our government gives famers our money , in a sense they have socialized our food
First correct thing I have ever read from you.[/quote]
Wish I could say the same about you, all I get from you is fantasy.
[quote]jre67t wrote:
Also the conversation, turned to the two black panthers because you said the situation turned hostile at the AARP meeting with the elderly who all probably had canes. Thats how you call them old folks hostile, poodle?
I bet you defend those two goons at philly dont you? Damn chihuahua [/quote]
GRRRR your making me mad now 
Did anyone see Rep Sheila Jackson answer her cellphone during a townhall yesterday? She did it 3 times. There is video of her answering her phone while people were trying to voice her opinion. Just rude and pathetic.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Did anyone see Rep Sheila Jackson answer her cellphone during a townhall yesterday? She did it 3 times. There is video of her answering her phone while people were trying to voice her opinion. Just rude and pathetic. [/quote]
I don’t think so, seriously, it’s not like she was doing a god job at the meeting or as a Representative, so she did something she would be useful at like talking on the phone, haha!
[quote]tom63 wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
Did anyone see Rep Sheila Jackson answer her cellphone during a townhall yesterday? She did it 3 times. There is video of her answering her phone while people were trying to voice her opinion. Just rude and pathetic.
I don’t think so, seriously, it’s not like she was doing a god job at the meeting or as a Representative, so she did something she would be useful at like talking on the phone, haha! [/quote]
If I was there, seeing that would have really pissed me off. I have seen how some of the people in Iowa have stood up to raise their voice, she would have been shouted out of the room there.