Yes, but in a publicly funded single payer health care system, there is a huge incentive for public health policy to correct the obese child problem. For example, I think that poor people tend to have less healthy eating habits on average. In a publicly funded system, poor people can access an excellent doctor more easily and can get medical interventions for health problems more expeditiously.
At any rate, I usually enter these conversations to put paid to any ideas that a single payer, government administered healthcare system is necessarily a hell-hole of red tape, extra costs, waiting and substandard care (something I commonly see bandied about)
Thee is no link like that on pg 3. Look, Smooshy, I know you’ve got the afterburners going trying to keep up with the smart people here, but you have to take your time.
You’re making stupid mistakes. Please point to what you’re talking about and I’ll evaluate it. Something you, with your blind obedience to ideology hasn’t seen fit for to do for anyone else in this thread.
One other thought, EP. You said ‘provincial’ government. Does that mean that the Great White North equiv of states are the ones who run them? Do the provinces have leeway to do what they want with their public health plans, to react to what the citizenry wants? Or is it dictated, top down, from the Big Toque?
Here in God’s country, each state has to balance their budget each year. No living off of credit cards (well, Calif does but the piper must be paid eventually) forever. Our fed gov though is willing to mortgage the longterm financial health, even more than it is now, to implement this plan, passing the debt on to the kids. That’s what I find completely unacceptable (well, the most unacceptable).
If some lefty state wanted to do this with their own money, and the citizens were behind that, honestly I wouldn’t have much of an issue with it. In fact I think the heathens in Massachussetts did something like that. If they are cool with it, and can afford it, then fine.
PS there was some sarcasm and snark; those awaiting sense of humor implants need not reply
When the computer lab at your school opens in the morning, go ahead and try out your Google-fu. Look for something like “CBO long term costs of health reform”.
It is a July report. Go to page 12. Or maybe go find my original reply to M4M.
You’re citing something silly. It’s up to you to cite what you’re arguing for. Now if you want to retract your cite by all means. But you’re the one saying you aren’t arguing from ignorance, but I still wait to see some evidence otherwise.
Your claims and opinions are based on lies. You are a gullible shit. You post a fake link to rebut that and can’t be bothered to hunt it down?
so long as you have some federal mandate that stipulates an end result, I don’t think you’d have anyone complaining about letting states tailor these things to suit their own needs. Unfortunately, our federal system doesn’t work like this - States rights’ supporters in South Dakota would scream bloody murder that their right to whore their membership in this Union out to the lowest bidder would be infringed upon by some federal edict.
One other thought, EP. You said ‘provincial’ government. Does that mean that the Great White North equiv of states are the ones who run them? Do the provinces have leeway to do what they want with their public health plans, to react to what the citizenry wants? Or is it dictated, top down, from the Big Toque?
Pretty much what Rumor_Watkins just said. The (federal) Canada Health Act is paramount, and is popular. The provincial government looks after the details.
If I have a problem with a wait list, I’m going to bitch to the Provincial government, and remind them that I vote.
On another note, the latest poll about healthcare reform.
For those who don’t know the WaPo is hardly a mouthpiece of the right.
Now this is the most amazing thing, to me
**Even among those who presumably stand to benefit most from a major restructuring of the insurance market – the nearly one in 5 adults without coverage – there are doubts about the changes under consideration. Those without insurance are evenly divided on the question of whether their care would be better if the system were overhauled. **
This tells me that there are many out there who simply don’t want insurance of any kind, certainly not one forced on them by Gov fiat. I’d suspect that they are usually young, in good health, with little assets (ie, not much to lose before Medicaid, which IS a form of insurance, would kick in).
I won’t quote the job approval stats further down, but many on this board may be sad to see that, should he get HRC passed, it may be Obama’s Waterloo. His numbers are definitely trending in a very scary way, if you’re a Dem.
Another possibility for you to consider: Some of those who replied with doubts about the changes under consideration may have been influenced by those who have painted the changes as an evil socialistic plot by a foreign Kenyan that will cost untold trillions of dollars, and create “death panels” that will put grandma on the ice floes.
How many other countries have you lived in? I bet I could hazard a guess.
ETA: Also, your point about obese kids in the U.S. having something to do with higher mortality rates doesn’t exactly make your case that what works for some countries doesn’t work for others, as obesity obviously doesn’t work for anybody.
Another possibility for you to consider: Some of those who replied with doubts about the changes under consideration may have been influenced by those who have painted the changes as an evil socialistic plot …QUOTE]
Sorry, I don’t buy that. The media machine in this country skews left, not right (well, that’s what I always hear from the right…)
It’s on the Dems to sell their program to the people. They are in power, have been for awhile, and they are the ones pushing change, with no amendments from the GOP being considered.
If they are unwilling or unable to do so, they deserve to lose.
PS if you follow your logic to its conclusion, then wouldn’t the party on the wrong side of every issue always blame the idiocy or gullibility of the great unwashed? That ‘they know better’ and wouldn’t we all be better off if the proles just watched Dancing with the Stars or whatever pap is being pushed on them? Frankly, some might find your line of reasoning elitist and insulting.
Our Mr. Smashy is a wonder of the modern age. Opinions to him are fact so long as they mirror his own. Opposing facts are mere opinions. He is correct by any measure he acknowledges and his being wrong is simply dismissed by fiat.
Mr. Smashy is an amazing testament to the utter vapid stupidity of the 21st century right’s base.
AAAGHHHHH! Not this! Now He Who Must Not Be Named is going to hijack the thread with how much better things were in the '50’s, when everyone was polite and knew their place!
Seriously, the meme that the media machine skews left is a pretty old canard, and flys in the face of observable facts. All of the criticism and noise we have been hearing since Obama was elected attests to that. (I mean, COME ON! There’s a LOT of pretty far out right-wing commentators and a VERY far right leaning cable network out there)
Certainly it is on the Dems. I see a lot of obstructionism coming from the GOP though, and very little constructive comments that would be good coming from a true opposition party.
what obstructionism, EP? The Dems are in charge. They dont need one GOP vote. If they really believe in it, they can get it done tomorrow.
As for the ‘canard’ that the media skews left… well I’m just saying what I hear on talk radio. Seriously, IMHO I think that some go left and some go right. My point was that it’s pretty obnoxious to say that the majority of Americans have been duped, as if there’s no left wing comms machine to get the message out. assuming it’s a message that Americans are interested in.
Seriously, IMHO I think that some go left and some go right. My point was that it’s pretty obnoxious to say that the majority of Americans have been duped, as if there’s no left wing comms machine to get the message out. assuming it’s a message that Americans are interested in.