Greg <greg@greg.greg> wrote in message news:<3FD16141.AA7C7E88@greg.greg>...
> Lloyd Parker wrote:

> > >I have a friend who went to the Doctor for a routine physical. The Doctor
> > >did not like whaat he saw on the treadmill test and checked him into the
> > >hospital, where he had a balloon angioplasty that same afternoon. How long
> > >would he have waited "on the list" in Canada for the same treatment,
> >
> > How long would he have waited here if he were poor or had no insurance? He
> > wouldn't have even had the routine physical, and you know it.
>
> Only in LloydLand. Medicare, Medicaid, and state medical assistance in the USA
> pays for such services every day. Many hospitals and their doctors operate free
> clinics for low income patients in addition to this.

And you think that this care is somehow 'free'? Talk about
fantasyland. You think that the large cost of the emergency C-section
for the pregnant woman who can't afford to see an obstretician or get
prenatal vitamins aren't a cause of the average American paying twice
as much total for healthcare as the average Canadian, so it must all
be because American medical care is twice as good?

 

Bill Putney wrote:
>
> "C. E. White" wrote:
>
>
>>Lesbian couples can even have children.
>
>
> Technically, no. There has to be a real ----- involved somewhere.
>
> Bill Putney

I've never known there to be any shortage of penises that would
volunteer for just such a mission(ary)!

|>))

Dan

 

Bill Putney wrote:
>
> "C. E. White" wrote:
>
>
>>Lesbian couples can even have children.
>
>
> Technically, no. There has to be a real ----- involved somewhere.
>
> Bill Putney

I've never known there to be any shortage of penises that would
volunteer for just such a mission(ary)!

|>))

Dan

 

Bill Putney wrote:
>
> "C. E. White" wrote:
>
>
>>Lesbian couples can even have children.
>
>
> Technically, no. There has to be a real ----- involved somewhere.
>
> Bill Putney

I've never known there to be any shortage of penises that would
volunteer for just such a mission(ary)!

|>))

Dan

 

Greg wrote:
>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>
>>In article <tdudnVxyI7goDlKiRTvUqA@texas.net>, Steve <no@spam.thanks> wrote:
>>
>>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a form
>>
>>of
>>
>>>>subsidy to Boeing?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
>>>free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
>>>companies, and I have no problem with that.
>>>
>>
>>It's subsidizing US companies by giving only them government contracts.
>
>
> Which is not a "subsidy."
>


But what do you call fully funding the development of say 3 x-planes by
three different manufacturers to fulfil a need for a fighter? All of
the technology of flight that is developed goes back into their
commercial applications at relatively little cost.

Dan

 

Greg wrote:
>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>
>>In article <tdudnVxyI7goDlKiRTvUqA@texas.net>, Steve <no@spam.thanks> wrote:
>>
>>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a form
>>
>>of
>>
>>>>subsidy to Boeing?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
>>>free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
>>>companies, and I have no problem with that.
>>>
>>
>>It's subsidizing US companies by giving only them government contracts.
>
>
> Which is not a "subsidy."
>


But what do you call fully funding the development of say 3 x-planes by
three different manufacturers to fulfil a need for a fighter? All of
the technology of flight that is developed goes back into their
commercial applications at relatively little cost.

Dan

 

Greg wrote:
>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>
>>In article <tdudnVxyI7goDlKiRTvUqA@texas.net>, Steve <no@spam.thanks> wrote:
>>
>>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a form
>>
>>of
>>
>>>>subsidy to Boeing?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
>>>free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
>>>companies, and I have no problem with that.
>>>
>>
>>It's subsidizing US companies by giving only them government contracts.
>
>
> Which is not a "subsidy."
>


But what do you call fully funding the development of say 3 x-planes by
three different manufacturers to fulfil a need for a fighter? All of
the technology of flight that is developed goes back into their
commercial applications at relatively little cost.

Dan

 

russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote in message news:<AqudncBx780URk2iRTvUqQ@speakeasy.net>...
> In article <7dc396f584336d32b246a944411c15de@news.teranews.co m>,
> Brandon Sommerville <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote:
> >
> >It's not quite that simple. If you need a procedure, they evaluate
> >how urgent it is. If it's extremely urgent you get bumped to the top
> >of the list. If it's not so urgent, you get on the waiting list and
> >get done after others who have been waiting longer are processed. If
> >you don't want to wait and can afford it, you go to somewhere that you
> >can pay for the procedure, which is down south. A great system if
> >you're wealthy.
> >
> >I know that no matter what happens, if I blow out my knee I'm going to
> >get an MRI. It may take 8 weeks, but I'll get it and it won't cost me
> >anything extra. Can you say the same thing?

No. That's because I have an American health insurance plan. Like
most, it penalizes doctors who send too many patients for expensive
things like MRIs so they ration them, to coin a phrase, to the
patients who obviously really need them. When my knee went out to the
point where I couldn't walk from my parking spot into work without
having to stop at least once halfway, I had to go to my 'gatekeeper'
primary care physician, who got me an appointment with a specialist 8
weeks later, who got an X-ray that showed absolutely nothing, and told
me to come back in two weeks if it didn't get better. This is a state
with several medical schools, many health insurers competing with each
other, medical centers in every two bit town, and one of the highest
qualities of medical care in the US, as best as anyone can measure
these things. The underlying fact is, of course, that as in most cases
there wasn't really anything the doctor could do for me in the end
except prescribe pain meds which were less effective than over the
counter Aleve, and just wait for whatever the hell it was to get
better on its own. Any MRIs would mostly be for his benefit, so I
couldn't sue him for negligence if it turned out to be cancer or
something.

>
> Not exactly. In my case (hip rather than knee, but same idea), it was
> same day (first MRI) and later in the week (second MRI) and it still
> didn't cost me anything extra. There was no urgency in the medical
> sense. The more complex MRA did take a month, because it had to be
> scheduled with both the radiology department and the MRI center. No
> rationing involved.

 

russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote in message news:<AqudncBx780URk2iRTvUqQ@speakeasy.net>...
> In article <7dc396f584336d32b246a944411c15de@news.teranews.co m>,
> Brandon Sommerville <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote:
> >
> >It's not quite that simple. If you need a procedure, they evaluate
> >how urgent it is. If it's extremely urgent you get bumped to the top
> >of the list. If it's not so urgent, you get on the waiting list and
> >get done after others who have been waiting longer are processed. If
> >you don't want to wait and can afford it, you go to somewhere that you
> >can pay for the procedure, which is down south. A great system if
> >you're wealthy.
> >
> >I know that no matter what happens, if I blow out my knee I'm going to
> >get an MRI. It may take 8 weeks, but I'll get it and it won't cost me
> >anything extra. Can you say the same thing?

No. That's because I have an American health insurance plan. Like
most, it penalizes doctors who send too many patients for expensive
things like MRIs so they ration them, to coin a phrase, to the
patients who obviously really need them. When my knee went out to the
point where I couldn't walk from my parking spot into work without
having to stop at least once halfway, I had to go to my 'gatekeeper'
primary care physician, who got me an appointment with a specialist 8
weeks later, who got an X-ray that showed absolutely nothing, and told
me to come back in two weeks if it didn't get better. This is a state
with several medical schools, many health insurers competing with each
other, medical centers in every two bit town, and one of the highest
qualities of medical care in the US, as best as anyone can measure
these things. The underlying fact is, of course, that as in most cases
there wasn't really anything the doctor could do for me in the end
except prescribe pain meds which were less effective than over the
counter Aleve, and just wait for whatever the hell it was to get
better on its own. Any MRIs would mostly be for his benefit, so I
couldn't sue him for negligence if it turned out to be cancer or
something.

>
> Not exactly. In my case (hip rather than knee, but same idea), it was
> same day (first MRI) and later in the week (second MRI) and it still
> didn't cost me anything extra. There was no urgency in the medical
> sense. The more complex MRA did take a month, because it had to be
> scheduled with both the radiology department and the MRI center. No
> rationing involved.

 

russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote in message news:<AqudncBx780URk2iRTvUqQ@speakeasy.net>...
> In article <7dc396f584336d32b246a944411c15de@news.teranews.co m>,
> Brandon Sommerville <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote:
> >
> >It's not quite that simple. If you need a procedure, they evaluate
> >how urgent it is. If it's extremely urgent you get bumped to the top
> >of the list. If it's not so urgent, you get on the waiting list and
> >get done after others who have been waiting longer are processed. If
> >you don't want to wait and can afford it, you go to somewhere that you
> >can pay for the procedure, which is down south. A great system if
> >you're wealthy.
> >
> >I know that no matter what happens, if I blow out my knee I'm going to
> >get an MRI. It may take 8 weeks, but I'll get it and it won't cost me
> >anything extra. Can you say the same thing?

No. That's because I have an American health insurance plan. Like
most, it penalizes doctors who send too many patients for expensive
things like MRIs so they ration them, to coin a phrase, to the
patients who obviously really need them. When my knee went out to the
point where I couldn't walk from my parking spot into work without
having to stop at least once halfway, I had to go to my 'gatekeeper'
primary care physician, who got me an appointment with a specialist 8
weeks later, who got an X-ray that showed absolutely nothing, and told
me to come back in two weeks if it didn't get better. This is a state
with several medical schools, many health insurers competing with each
other, medical centers in every two bit town, and one of the highest
qualities of medical care in the US, as best as anyone can measure
these things. The underlying fact is, of course, that as in most cases
there wasn't really anything the doctor could do for me in the end
except prescribe pain meds which were less effective than over the
counter Aleve, and just wait for whatever the hell it was to get
better on its own. Any MRIs would mostly be for his benefit, so I
couldn't sue him for negligence if it turned out to be cancer or
something.

>
> Not exactly. In my case (hip rather than knee, but same idea), it was
> same day (first MRI) and later in the week (second MRI) and it still
> didn't cost me anything extra. There was no urgency in the medical
> sense. The more complex MRA did take a month, because it had to be
> scheduled with both the radiology department and the MRI center. No
> rationing involved.