Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#6041
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2XJzb.226145$Dw6.802274@attbi_s02...
> In article
<Pine.SOL.4.44.0312041139430.24084-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu>, Daniel J.
Stern wrote:
>
> > ...at *substantially* higher cost, start to finish, whether that cost
was
> > directly to me for treatment, surgery and meds or indirectly via
insurance
> > premiums.
>
> or taxes for that purpose should the USA adopt such a system.
Exactly. Actual costs for National healthcare equal to what we have now
would be higher than current costs. To see lower costs you will see reduced
levels of patient care.
#6042
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2XJzb.226145$Dw6.802274@attbi_s02...
> In article
<Pine.SOL.4.44.0312041139430.24084-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu>, Daniel J.
Stern wrote:
>
> > ...at *substantially* higher cost, start to finish, whether that cost
was
> > directly to me for treatment, surgery and meds or indirectly via
insurance
> > premiums.
>
> or taxes for that purpose should the USA adopt such a system.
Exactly. Actual costs for National healthcare equal to what we have now
would be higher than current costs. To see lower costs you will see reduced
levels of patient care.
#6043
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2XJzb.226145$Dw6.802274@attbi_s02...
> In article
<Pine.SOL.4.44.0312041139430.24084-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu>, Daniel J.
Stern wrote:
>
> > ...at *substantially* higher cost, start to finish, whether that cost
was
> > directly to me for treatment, surgery and meds or indirectly via
insurance
> > premiums.
>
> or taxes for that purpose should the USA adopt such a system.
Exactly. Actual costs for National healthcare equal to what we have now
would be higher than current costs. To see lower costs you will see reduced
levels of patient care.
#6044
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One wrote:
>
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free".
Actually I think you have it wrong. In the US, the guy with good health
insurance is liable to act just like the guy in Canada. The really rich guy in
the US, may call his persoanl assistant to get the asprin. The really poor guy
in the US may walk into the Emergency room becasue he doesn't have to worry
about paying and the asprin will therefore be "free.". The poor guy in the
middle with mediocre health insurance may just take the two asprin even though
he has the same headache every day for months and only go to the Doctor when the
tumor in his brain has grown to the size of an orange.
Ed
#6045
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One wrote:
>
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free".
Actually I think you have it wrong. In the US, the guy with good health
insurance is liable to act just like the guy in Canada. The really rich guy in
the US, may call his persoanl assistant to get the asprin. The really poor guy
in the US may walk into the Emergency room becasue he doesn't have to worry
about paying and the asprin will therefore be "free.". The poor guy in the
middle with mediocre health insurance may just take the two asprin even though
he has the same headache every day for months and only go to the Doctor when the
tumor in his brain has grown to the size of an orange.
Ed
#6046
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One wrote:
>
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free".
Actually I think you have it wrong. In the US, the guy with good health
insurance is liable to act just like the guy in Canada. The really rich guy in
the US, may call his persoanl assistant to get the asprin. The really poor guy
in the US may walk into the Emergency room becasue he doesn't have to worry
about paying and the asprin will therefore be "free.". The poor guy in the
middle with mediocre health insurance may just take the two asprin even though
he has the same headache every day for months and only go to the Doctor when the
tumor in his brain has grown to the size of an orange.
Ed
#6047
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycan be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One wrote:
>
>
> Mine is 162, what's your's Lloyd?
> It's simple really. The Canadian Government allows X amount of money for
> healthcare in a given year. When actual costs exceed that amount, the
> patients must wait until more money is found. True costs are much higher
> because people feel if they are paying for "free" healthcare then they are
> going to use it.
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free". Once the budget is spent though, you take a number and
> wait for new budget appropriations, or you come to America where healthcare
> comes before budget considerations. You bash our healthcare system, but
> people come here from virtually every nation on Earth for treatment, because
> we have the best hospitals, the best Technology, the best Treatment, Period.
> Your plan would destroy all that, and not only hurt Americans, but every
> criticaly ill patient on Earth who currently benifits from it.
> I know this is to complex for your limited intellect to comprehend though,
> so lets just say that you are wrong again, as you always are.
>
>
>
>
Yes, that is just the way we do it!!!!
Only 50% of the work force shows up for work on any given day because
the rest are at the hospital having some ailment or other treated!!!
Get a life! The same low-lifes that crowd your "County" ERs for free
medicare are crowding our ER for their freebies.
Most people using hospital services are their because they need to be!
Lets compare, shall we?
Can. US
Life expectancy at birth? 82.7 66.9
Inpatient Care Beds/1,000 pop 20 17
Acute Care Beds/1,000 pop 35 29
I could go on, but I won't.
The US has more practising specialists and physicians than we have here,
just nobody can get to them because they are all golfing (|>)) ours just
have to work a full day (and then some).
I have been in this system for a long time, it works. It doesn't work
perfectly for everybody, but it works. I'd rather get really sick here,
than really sick there.
Dan, from Canada
>
>
> Mine is 162, what's your's Lloyd?
> It's simple really. The Canadian Government allows X amount of money for
> healthcare in a given year. When actual costs exceed that amount, the
> patients must wait until more money is found. True costs are much higher
> because people feel if they are paying for "free" healthcare then they are
> going to use it.
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free". Once the budget is spent though, you take a number and
> wait for new budget appropriations, or you come to America where healthcare
> comes before budget considerations. You bash our healthcare system, but
> people come here from virtually every nation on Earth for treatment, because
> we have the best hospitals, the best Technology, the best Treatment, Period.
> Your plan would destroy all that, and not only hurt Americans, but every
> criticaly ill patient on Earth who currently benifits from it.
> I know this is to complex for your limited intellect to comprehend though,
> so lets just say that you are wrong again, as you always are.
>
>
>
>
Yes, that is just the way we do it!!!!
Only 50% of the work force shows up for work on any given day because
the rest are at the hospital having some ailment or other treated!!!
Get a life! The same low-lifes that crowd your "County" ERs for free
medicare are crowding our ER for their freebies.
Most people using hospital services are their because they need to be!
Lets compare, shall we?
Can. US
Life expectancy at birth? 82.7 66.9
Inpatient Care Beds/1,000 pop 20 17
Acute Care Beds/1,000 pop 35 29
I could go on, but I won't.
The US has more practising specialists and physicians than we have here,
just nobody can get to them because they are all golfing (|>)) ours just
have to work a full day (and then some).
I have been in this system for a long time, it works. It doesn't work
perfectly for everybody, but it works. I'd rather get really sick here,
than really sick there.
Dan, from Canada
#6048
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycan be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One wrote:
>
>
> Mine is 162, what's your's Lloyd?
> It's simple really. The Canadian Government allows X amount of money for
> healthcare in a given year. When actual costs exceed that amount, the
> patients must wait until more money is found. True costs are much higher
> because people feel if they are paying for "free" healthcare then they are
> going to use it.
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free". Once the budget is spent though, you take a number and
> wait for new budget appropriations, or you come to America where healthcare
> comes before budget considerations. You bash our healthcare system, but
> people come here from virtually every nation on Earth for treatment, because
> we have the best hospitals, the best Technology, the best Treatment, Period.
> Your plan would destroy all that, and not only hurt Americans, but every
> criticaly ill patient on Earth who currently benifits from it.
> I know this is to complex for your limited intellect to comprehend though,
> so lets just say that you are wrong again, as you always are.
>
>
>
>
Yes, that is just the way we do it!!!!
Only 50% of the work force shows up for work on any given day because
the rest are at the hospital having some ailment or other treated!!!
Get a life! The same low-lifes that crowd your "County" ERs for free
medicare are crowding our ER for their freebies.
Most people using hospital services are their because they need to be!
Lets compare, shall we?
Can. US
Life expectancy at birth? 82.7 66.9
Inpatient Care Beds/1,000 pop 20 17
Acute Care Beds/1,000 pop 35 29
I could go on, but I won't.
The US has more practising specialists and physicians than we have here,
just nobody can get to them because they are all golfing (|>)) ours just
have to work a full day (and then some).
I have been in this system for a long time, it works. It doesn't work
perfectly for everybody, but it works. I'd rather get really sick here,
than really sick there.
Dan, from Canada
>
>
> Mine is 162, what's your's Lloyd?
> It's simple really. The Canadian Government allows X amount of money for
> healthcare in a given year. When actual costs exceed that amount, the
> patients must wait until more money is found. True costs are much higher
> because people feel if they are paying for "free" healthcare then they are
> going to use it.
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free". Once the budget is spent though, you take a number and
> wait for new budget appropriations, or you come to America where healthcare
> comes before budget considerations. You bash our healthcare system, but
> people come here from virtually every nation on Earth for treatment, because
> we have the best hospitals, the best Technology, the best Treatment, Period.
> Your plan would destroy all that, and not only hurt Americans, but every
> criticaly ill patient on Earth who currently benifits from it.
> I know this is to complex for your limited intellect to comprehend though,
> so lets just say that you are wrong again, as you always are.
>
>
>
>
Yes, that is just the way we do it!!!!
Only 50% of the work force shows up for work on any given day because
the rest are at the hospital having some ailment or other treated!!!
Get a life! The same low-lifes that crowd your "County" ERs for free
medicare are crowding our ER for their freebies.
Most people using hospital services are their because they need to be!
Lets compare, shall we?
Can. US
Life expectancy at birth? 82.7 66.9
Inpatient Care Beds/1,000 pop 20 17
Acute Care Beds/1,000 pop 35 29
I could go on, but I won't.
The US has more practising specialists and physicians than we have here,
just nobody can get to them because they are all golfing (|>)) ours just
have to work a full day (and then some).
I have been in this system for a long time, it works. It doesn't work
perfectly for everybody, but it works. I'd rather get really sick here,
than really sick there.
Dan, from Canada
#6049
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycan be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One wrote:
>
>
> Mine is 162, what's your's Lloyd?
> It's simple really. The Canadian Government allows X amount of money for
> healthcare in a given year. When actual costs exceed that amount, the
> patients must wait until more money is found. True costs are much higher
> because people feel if they are paying for "free" healthcare then they are
> going to use it.
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free". Once the budget is spent though, you take a number and
> wait for new budget appropriations, or you come to America where healthcare
> comes before budget considerations. You bash our healthcare system, but
> people come here from virtually every nation on Earth for treatment, because
> we have the best hospitals, the best Technology, the best Treatment, Period.
> Your plan would destroy all that, and not only hurt Americans, but every
> criticaly ill patient on Earth who currently benifits from it.
> I know this is to complex for your limited intellect to comprehend though,
> so lets just say that you are wrong again, as you always are.
>
>
>
>
Yes, that is just the way we do it!!!!
Only 50% of the work force shows up for work on any given day because
the rest are at the hospital having some ailment or other treated!!!
Get a life! The same low-lifes that crowd your "County" ERs for free
medicare are crowding our ER for their freebies.
Most people using hospital services are their because they need to be!
Lets compare, shall we?
Can. US
Life expectancy at birth? 82.7 66.9
Inpatient Care Beds/1,000 pop 20 17
Acute Care Beds/1,000 pop 35 29
I could go on, but I won't.
The US has more practising specialists and physicians than we have here,
just nobody can get to them because they are all golfing (|>)) ours just
have to work a full day (and then some).
I have been in this system for a long time, it works. It doesn't work
perfectly for everybody, but it works. I'd rather get really sick here,
than really sick there.
Dan, from Canada
>
>
> Mine is 162, what's your's Lloyd?
> It's simple really. The Canadian Government allows X amount of money for
> healthcare in a given year. When actual costs exceed that amount, the
> patients must wait until more money is found. True costs are much higher
> because people feel if they are paying for "free" healthcare then they are
> going to use it.
> For example, in America a guy wakes up with a headache, he takes two asperin
> and goes about his business. In Canada the same guy would think, hey, I
> could take two asperin, but I'm paying half my paycheck every week to the
> Government for "free" healthcare, I'm going to get my moneys worth. So he
> heads to the emergengy room for a full examination, at the end of which the
> Doctor prescribes two asperin. THAT is why your health care plan falls short
> in every single country it is used in, far to many people visiting the
> Emergency room for minor ailments they could treat themselves, simply
> because it's "free". Once the budget is spent though, you take a number and
> wait for new budget appropriations, or you come to America where healthcare
> comes before budget considerations. You bash our healthcare system, but
> people come here from virtually every nation on Earth for treatment, because
> we have the best hospitals, the best Technology, the best Treatment, Period.
> Your plan would destroy all that, and not only hurt Americans, but every
> criticaly ill patient on Earth who currently benifits from it.
> I know this is to complex for your limited intellect to comprehend though,
> so lets just say that you are wrong again, as you always are.
>
>
>
>
Yes, that is just the way we do it!!!!
Only 50% of the work force shows up for work on any given day because
the rest are at the hospital having some ailment or other treated!!!
Get a life! The same low-lifes that crowd your "County" ERs for free
medicare are crowding our ER for their freebies.
Most people using hospital services are their because they need to be!
Lets compare, shall we?
Can. US
Life expectancy at birth? 82.7 66.9
Inpatient Care Beds/1,000 pop 20 17
Acute Care Beds/1,000 pop 35 29
I could go on, but I won't.
The US has more practising specialists and physicians than we have here,
just nobody can get to them because they are all golfing (|>)) ours just
have to work a full day (and then some).
I have been in this system for a long time, it works. It doesn't work
perfectly for everybody, but it works. I'd rather get really sick here,
than really sick there.
Dan, from Canada
#6050
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <vsur9s30fp9c43@corp.supernews.com>, The Ancient One wrote:
> "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> Stern wrote:
>> > ...at *substantially* higher cost, start to finish, whether that cost was
>> > directly to me for treatment, surgery and meds or indirectly via insurance
>> > premiums.
>> or taxes for that purpose should the USA adopt such a system.
> Exactly. Actual costs for National healthcare equal to what we have now
> would be higher than current costs. To see lower costs you will see reduced
> levels of patient care.
Or both. I imagine the same processes that do everything in US government.
We are talking about handing over health care to the same people that
give us a poor return on our money with things like 55mph speed limits,
red light cameras, shoddy roads, CAFE, and all sorts of other regulations
and poorly done jobs that are worse than doing nothing at all. Why does
anyone really want these people running health care too?
> "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> Stern wrote:
>> > ...at *substantially* higher cost, start to finish, whether that cost was
>> > directly to me for treatment, surgery and meds or indirectly via insurance
>> > premiums.
>> or taxes for that purpose should the USA adopt such a system.
> Exactly. Actual costs for National healthcare equal to what we have now
> would be higher than current costs. To see lower costs you will see reduced
> levels of patient care.
Or both. I imagine the same processes that do everything in US government.
We are talking about handing over health care to the same people that
give us a poor return on our money with things like 55mph speed limits,
red light cameras, shoddy roads, CAFE, and all sorts of other regulations
and poorly done jobs that are worse than doing nothing at all. Why does
anyone really want these people running health care too?