It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'I wouldn't be here if not for the NHS': Stephen Hawking defends UK's 'Orwellian' healthcare a

page: 15
30
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by blueorder
 


Whatever - you break the rules, you deal with the consequences.


how sad, I'm sure I'll live with the consequences, go tell teacher to prepare the naughty step




This is still not addressing the points raised by KK in which he posted the CIA's own figures for social healthcare, not to mention the UN

Here, just for you I'll post the links again, so that you can properly address them without recourse to the red herring of (ahem) "complexity"

www.cia.gov...
As you can see, this ranks the UK at 36 and the US at 50.

Please take somoe time to peruse this United Nations publication, and then give us your thoughts on the issues raised which stand in direct opposition to the case you have put forth thus far.




I already responded to his post- Ive already stated that the MASSIVE difference in life expectancy of 4 years (WOW!) from the TOP (Japan) to the US is hardly worth following the example of the world's 3rd biggest employer- maybe some americans should stop getting so fat, that would help boost their life expectancy


[edit on 13-8-2009 by blueorder]

[edit on 13-8-2009 by blueorder]




posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


So you've had time to read and respond to the UN document?

I think not.

Nor have you proven in any way, shape or form that corporate healthcare is superior to social healthcare.

Have you fillibustered and obfuscated?

Most definitely, YES.

Have you answered the questions or even read the documents?

A resounding, NO.

And I know this because the difference between the US and Japan in the CIA is more 6 years than 4.

Now would you like 6 more years of life?
Or is it only of no consequence when it happens to others...

[edit on 13/8/2009 by budski]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by blueorder
 


So you've had time to read and respond to the UN document?

I think not.

Nor have you proven in any way, shape or form that corporate healthcare is superior to social healthcare.

Have you fillibustered and obfuscated?

Most definitely, YES.

Have you answered the questions or even read the documents?

A resounding, NO.

And I know this because the difference between the US and Japan in the CIA is more 6 years than 4.



BUDDY, all that self righteous waffling is even more hilarious because I REPEAT- there is 4 YEARS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE US.
Quality, so ironic !



Now would you like 6 more years of life?



I'll try and cut back on the cakes then eh ;-)




Or is it only of no consequence when it happens to others...
[edit on 13/8/2009 by budski]


all deaths are individual, I might die at 50, all OTHERS will have their own death dates, what sort of piffle is this



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


Which just proves you haven't read it, or have a reading comprehension problem.

The CIA link puts Japan at 84.36 years, and the US at 78.11
In what mystical branch of mathematics is that 4 years difference?

Now, I repeat, would you like a life expectancy of 78 or 84, assuming you were going to be as "average" in this regard as you seem to be in the intellectual/mathematical stakes.

Or are you quiute happy to die young, simply because people were more concerned with corporate profits than the health of their fellow citizens?



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by System
I really don't see what everyones problem is with this national healthcare...

...I used to work for the NHS in a London hospital. But that's not why I'm defending it.


^ ^ ^ Nuff said.

LOL !!!


[edit on 13-8-2009 by LyricusMagna]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Tell me thats not real?

Its insane.

Anyone who has their appendix out probably has half that amount spent on them when you factor in the GP time, the consultation, the surgeons time, the anaesthetist, the support staff in theatre, the costs of the theatre time itself, the bedspace, the nursing staff and the heating and accomodation costs and any associated medication/aftercare that is required.

I personally have probably had more than that figure spent on me during my life because of various ailments/operations/treatments I have received.

Any long term treatment that requires some form of surgery, extensive therapy or prolonged consultations will have much much more than that spent on them during the course of their treatment.

What the hell has happened to rational thought over there?



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


I've never had anything more out of the NHS other than treatment for chickenpox as a child and shingles as an adult ... couple of courses of prescription meds.

And as a taxpayer all my adult life I'm happy to fund folk like you because I know, one day, I'll need the care you've already had. And that you and others will fund that care in my time of need.

Oh dear. It sounds a bit little too harmonious. But it's true.

I love the NHS and hardly ever use it.

Imagine that, A happy taxpayer.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


just to play devil's avocado, I'll use the same aruement the other side would in this case: ""so, what does one anecdotal story prove or change here? any system no matter how poorly designed can do it right at least once"



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
-I mean it is well established that Americans are prone to obesity, they have higher standards of living and fast food consumption and this factor alone (without other national differences such as gun deaths) will lead to the greater likelihood of earlier death-


Just once I'd like to have a discussion in this forum WITHOUT someone bringing up Rush Limbaugh.

It is obvious you want to ignore hard data / statistics. Granted "Quality of Life" can be a difficult commodity to quantify, so all we can go on is longevity. However to dismiss 4 years of life as insignificant, is absurd. Think of what can be achieved in that time.

By the way........bolding text is a 7 character keystoke function. Hard to imagine you bolded something by 'mistake'.



Cheerio.

[edit on 13-8-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


Do the Japanese have a better quality of life than Americans?

They certainly live longer - on average 6 and a bit years.

Do they have social medicine?
Well yes, of a type, which is based on a universal healthcare insurance system.
No insurance? No problem as they also run something similar to the UK national insurance scheme.

So, the top country in the lists which were linked all have national healthcare systems of one sort or another.

Whereas the "richest" country in the world doesn't, and according to the CIA they are 50th on the list of average life expectancy.

I don't know about my fellow hamster, but I'm sensing a pattern here...

Although it's probably not one that some of the more militant folks want to hear - after all, the people who suffer most through lack of healthcare are the poorest.



[edit on 13/8/2009 by budski]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   
"The World Health Organisation ranks Britain's healthcare as 18th in the world, while the US is in 37th place."

That is interesting. According to Nationmaster, the USA spends 13.9% of its GDP on health care, while the UK spends only 7.5%. UK life expectancy is slightly higher.

The USA isn't getting much of a bang for its buck. I know the USA is a well off country but can it really afford to waste 7.4% of its GDP and get little extra back? Can any country afford to do such a thing on a long term basis?

By the way, Stephen Hawking goes to the same doctors and gets the same treatment as anyone else with his condition in the UK.

The NHS is pretty good, it costs half as much as the US system and everyone is covered.

Sounds pretty good to me.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 



Did you forget that Japan has one of the highest, if not the highest suicide rate in the world?...
since 1996-2008 30,000 Japanese people have committed suicide PER YEAR. That's at least 360,000 Japanese people who have committed suicide until 2008 in 12 years.

www.gallup.com...

If Japan is so great why are so many Japanese killing themselves?

Do you also think that Japan is free of murders?...

Japan is evidence of what lunatics will do to murder other people when "they have no guns"...


Japan knife attack leaves 7 dead
By Bruce Wallace, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
June 09, 2008

A lone attacker rammed a truck into pedestrians, then slashed his way with a survival knife through Sunday shopping crowds in one of Tokyo's most popular neighborhoods, killing seven people and wounding 10.

Police quoted Tomohiro Kato, 25, as saying he came to the Akihabara district, a canyon of computer and electronics stores, vowing to "kill people."

articles.latimes.com...

But most Japanese are resorting to suicide, and there are even suicide pacts.


TOKYO -- Glued to a computer screen in his north Tokyo apartment, the stocky, part-time sushi delivery man spent weeks searching the recesses of the Internet. Going simply by the handle "Murata," the 28-year-old surfed for online companions harboring his same dark interest: the desire to die.

He found what he was looking for on a host of new Japanese-language Web sites such as "Underground Suicide" and "Deadline." Promising to supply most of the materials, he made arrangements to kill himself with two anonymous Internet friends on a mid-May afternoon. Face to face for the first time, the three young men drove to a tranquil mountain pass six hours north of Tokyo. They shared sleeping pills, and then -- following detailed instructions posted on a Web site -- set charcoal alight inside their car and died from carbon monoxide poisoning.

The deaths of the three men marked only one incident in an extraordinary string of Internet suicides to hit Japan. Over the past six months, police investigators say at least 32 people -- mostly in their teens and twenties -- have killed themselves nationwide after meeting strangers online. Many more young Japanese have entered into online suicide pacts, but either failed in their attempts or backed out at the last minute.

www.users.cloud9.net...

There is even a forest where they go to kill themselves. It has been nicknamed "Suicide Forest."


Desperate Japanese head to 'suicide forest'

Aokigahara Forest is known for two things in Japan: breathtaking views of Mount Fuji and suicides. Also called the Sea of Trees, this destination for the desperate is a place where the suicidal disappear, often never to be found in the dense forest.

Japan's suicide rate, already one of the world's highest, has increased with the recent economic downturn.

current.com...

BTW, appart from Japanese people committing suicide for economic woes, one of the causes happens to be "healthcare problems".






[edit on 13-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


So, what you are saying is that without the suicide rate the average life expectany in Japan would be even higher.

Thanks for pointing that out.

You should also be aware that culturally suicide in Japan carries no stigma and is often seen as "noble" even today.

It is not seen as a cowards choice the way it is in the west, nor is it seem as shamefull.

You really should avail yourself of these facts before proving my point for me, especially when you post a sentence saying


most Japanese are resorting to suicide, and there are even suicide pacts.


Like there aren't suicide pacts in other countries?

And if most Japanese are resorting to suicide, why do they have such a comparitively high population and the highest life expectancy in the world.

What you are asserting makes no sense.

Japan doesn't have the highest suicide rate, by any means.

I suggest you look to Eastern Europe for that.





[edit on 13/8/2009 by budski]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by gpzrd350
"The World Health Organisation ranks Britain's healthcare as 18th in the world, while the US is in 37th place."

This has already been debunked.
See the links below regarding the WHO to see why that ranking system is bogus.

Here is a article by Stanford University. It clearly points out the major problems with the NHS and why it sucks compared to the U.S. system.

Standford University Study

Oh, and let's not forget that the NHS is the worlds 3rd largest employer.
Just image the number of employees it would take to run the American system. Is this what we really want? I don't think so.

A NHS type of system just would NOT work in America especially considering that the U.S. has about 5 times the population of the UK.

NHS is world's biggest employer after Indian rail and Chinese Army

And before someone starts spouting off about the WHO ranking, let me make a few points:
For starters, the WHO ranking system is bogus for many reasons and the entire organization is a leftist group. So don't put them on a pedastal because they are about equal in standing as the UN.

The main reasons the WHO ranks the U.S. 37th is because they add deaths from non natural causes into its calculations. Because of the size of the U.S., we rank number one in car accident fatalities worldwide which of course skews the results. This little fact has nothing to do with healthcare. Boy, the leftists like to skew results.

If you took rankings based on how well the health care was actually performed USA ranks at the very top in several categories.

Here is an article about this subject:
WHO Lies About US Health Care System

Even more in depth here:
CATO Institute

The U.S. system is the best in the world already. Our system is what advances most of the medical technologies which the socialist systems suck up. If the U.S. has a socialist system then medical breakthroughs will suffer greatly.

I am not saying our system is perfect, but there is no need to reinvent the wheel when all we have to do is make some minor tweaks to the current system.

[edit on 8/12/2009 by WhatTheory]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


No, i am pointing out that many Japanese people are killing themselves, and part of the reason for this is "healthcare problems."

Don't be turning around this problem trying to claim it strengthens your case, when it doesn't.

There is discontent in Japan, mostly because of the economy, but this has a lot to do with healthcare, or at least mental healthcare.

Do you actually think Japan is the only place where this is happening?

Why are the Danish suicide rate double that of the U.S.?

In general European countries have more suicide than the U.S., and quite a few have doubled the suicide rate than the U.S.

Even France has at least double the suicide rate of the United States.

Some people claim this is seasonal, yet Iceland has a low suicide rate, and it is the most northern country than any countries in Europe.


yglesias.thinkprogress.org...

[edit on 13-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
............
The main reasons the WHO ranks the U.S. 37th is because they add deaths from non natural causes into its calculations. Because of the size of the U.S., we rank number one in car accident fatalities worldwide which of course skews the results. This little fact has nothing to do with healthcare. Boy, the leftists like to skew results.


Not too long ago I posted an article about this very thing. That WHO ranks countries on healthcare MOSTLY BECAUSE OF IDEALS, and not because of facts, and they rig their data so it SEEMS that SOCIALIST IDEALS ARE BEST....when they are NOT.

I will see if i can dig up that article again, it might take me some time.

[edit on 13-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You can try and turn it anyway you want, but the fact of the matter is that even with a high suicide rate (athough certainly NOT the highest) Japan still has the highest life expectancy in the world, and ONE of the reasons for that is their social healthcare system.

Now you can choose to ignore the cultural issues at work in Japan if you want to, but all that proves is that you are missing a huge part of the picture.

Besides which, we are talking about life expectancy and its relation to social healthcare, not suicide rates for whatever reason.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
In the last 25 years I have used the NHS numerous times
Broken tibia and fibia: 2 ops 3 week in hospital plus physiotherapy.
Broken arm: 2 ops 1 week in hospital plus physiotherapy.
Broken thumb.
Throat abcess (quincy's) 1 day in hospital. painkillers, antibiotics free.
I have also been to hospital with a blood clot in my keg a dislocated ankle and medial ligament damage in my knee.
My five year old son was diagnosed with arthritis in his knee when he was two years old. He has spent a good few weeks in hospital had MRI scans and has to have 6 monthly checkups on his knee and eyes (for uvitis a disease that can lead to blindness and caused by arthritis) My son leads a normal life after steroid injections in his knee.
So I reckon I have had my moneys worth compared to the tax I pay and I am definately indebted to the NHS.
Like a few posts from the UK have mentioned the NHS does have its problems but I have always been looked after well.
Regarding private healthcare in the UK not long ago I went to visit a friend who had gone private, he had a large flatscreen tv, cable, a room to himself, a very good food menu (NHS food is not renowned for its cuisine).
BUT, his consultant was the same guy who sorted my broken arm out and I also saw my local GP working there as well.

Also recently I broke a tooth and was in agony, I could'nt get straight in to my Dentist (part NHS funded) so I went online to see if there were any short term pain remedies available, I was astounded by the number of people in the US who had been using pain relief remedies for months while their teeth deteriorated because they had to save up to visit the dentist for abcesses etc. When I eventually got sorted it cost me £15.
Please could I ask a couple of questions from you ATSers in the states.
How much does healthcare cost per month for a family ?
Whats a checkup and filling cost at the dentist. ?
If someone had a heart attack with no healthcare what happens ?



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by WhatTheory
............
The main reasons the WHO ranks the U.S. 37th is because they add deaths from non natural causes into its calculations. Because of the size of the U.S., we rank number one in car accident fatalities worldwide which of course skews the results. This little fact has nothing to do with healthcare. Boy, the leftists like to skew results.


Not too long ago I posted an article about this very thing. That WHO ranks countries on healthcare MOSTLY BECAUSE OF IDEALS, and not because of facts, and they rig their data so it SEEMS that SOCIALIST IDEALS ARE BEST....when they are NOT.

I will see if i can dig up that article again, it might take me some time.

[edit on 13-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]


Whilst you ignore the CIA report which places the US at number 50?

or the UN report into healthcare trends and longevity?

Convenient that you BOTH ignore those when they are both posted within plain and easy reach.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Whilst you ignore the CIA report which places the US at number 50?

I'm not ignoring anything, I have not seen the report. Show me this CIA report.


or the UN report into healthcare trends and longevity?

The UN is even worse than the WHO regarding healthcare because of their biased, skewed and misleading reports.


Oh, and yet conveniently ignore the reports I linked regarding the WHO and how they rank. Don't you think it's faulty logic to include deaths by car accidents to rank a healthcare system? I would hope so.

Nobody has debunked the links I provided which prove the problems with national healthcare and the problems with the WHO ranking system. Hmmm.......


[edit on 8/13/2009 by WhatTheory]



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join