If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Single Payer Universal Health Care
mike gray wrote:
Best to wait five or six years before raising the healthcare issue. why 5-to-6 years? iow, what scenario do you see that would support waiting 5/6 years? e.g. given that Kerry wins in 2004, and has the good sense to not immediately press for "universal (USA) medical insurance"... is that what you mean? --------------------------- on another topic and fwiw, somewhere in this thread guy commented that "A universal system seem to be the way to go. It will not happen, Too much profit for some in the present mess." to my view, the one/only solution to our very high USA medical costs is to take the health care bucks out of the pocket of the system and put them back into the pockets of sll of our USA citizens i personally don't think that it will happen, but it is *clearly* the only thing that will work in the long run my guess is that you think the same --------------------------- also, you've now posted 29x in this thread. (or 39x?) why is this so important to you? all ears, bill t1 since '57 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Single Payer Universal Health Care
willbill wrote in message ...
mike gray wrote: Best to wait five or six years before raising the healthcare issue. why 5-to-6 years? Under the assumption of Kerry in the Whitehouse and reelected, that would put him into his second term so the fallout won't be on him? That requires that he is elected in the first place. Have you noticed? He doesn't use the SPUC word anymore. iow, what scenario do you see that would support waiting 5/6 years? e.g. given that Kerry wins in 2004, and has the good sense to not immediately press for "universal (USA) medical insurance"... is that what you mean? --------------------------- on another topic and fwiw, somewhere in this thread guy commented that "A universal system seem to be the way to go. It will not happen, Too much profit for some in the present mess." to my view, the one/only solution to our very high USA medical costs is to take the health care bucks out of the pocket of the system You mean out of the pocket of the hospitals, physicians, and pharmacists? and put them back into the pockets of sll of our USA citizens You can do that now. Opt out of insurance and grow your own herbs. i personally don't think that it will happen, but it is *clearly* the only thing that will work in the long run Putting the money into the pockets of Congressmen to dole out as they think is best for you? Do you know what the Congressional health plan looks like? Hey, if that's good enough for Congress, that's good enough for me. my guess is that you think the same --------------------------- also, you've now posted 29x in this thread. (or 39x?) why is this so important to you? Why did you count the number of posts? all ears, bill t1 since '57 js |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Single Payer Universal Health Care
In article ,
MuscleMan wrote: On 25 May 2004 15:45:09 -0500, (Herman Rubin) wrote: In article , Peanutjake wrote: No matter who is running for president I am in favor of Single Payer Universial Health Care. I am not. It is likely to take you months or even years for a diabetic to get referred to an endocrinologist if this is done. This is already true here. I've paid for months b4 without getting anything back, not even a return phone call. I know people in Canada, it's not true there. I have seen a posting on a diabetic mailing list from someone in Saskatchewan who stated that there were two endocrinologists for the entire province. There are not enough here, but there are more. .................. Also, all cases where someone is denied medical care which could have been obtained without government intervention can sue the body of lawmakers for immediate access to such at the price which would have been there otherwise, and any delay is subject to multiple damages. If we did this right now, we would have a universal payer system. But you cannot do this without making major revisions to the Constitution. At this time, the only penalty which can be visited on lawmakers for their actions as such is not to be reelected. You can make everyone equally poor. You cannot make everyone rich, no matter what you do. Sure? Try Norway. When it broke and formed it's gov't round the turn of last century, the usurpers were union members. The result was country with no poor, universal health care, and a large middle class, as we used to have. Less crime too. What you call no poor I would call all poor. Socialism does not work, as it removes incentives. There was probably a large emigration of those who could earn money to the US. A smaller amount of less rich aristocrats too. Some thing we used to be famous for also. We have no aristocrats. We have lots of rich people, who are highly restricted by stupid governments from investing in real innovations. -- This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Chemically beating children: Pinellas Poisoners Heilman and Talley | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 4th 04 11:26 PM |
Criminal medical CAM at Hawai'i's John A Burns School of Medicine | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | November 25th 03 02:04 AM |
PPAC, vaccinations and chiro bouncer Bob (Bob Dubin, Diplomate, American Board of Chiropractic Censorship) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 1 | September 6th 03 08:55 PM |
Universal health plan is endorsed | Pregnancy | 0 | August 15th 03 03:50 PM |