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

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by blueorder

 

Sorry, my mistake, the print off I did mixed up the figures somehow and put Japan where Macau should be and missing some figures off the end.

But the point still stands - just substitute Macau (which also has a national social healthcare system) for Japan.

I had already mentioned that I was focussing on Japan because Macau and Andorra were not reasonable comparisons given their size

My previous questions remain, and your level of fitness or otherwise has less to do with your life expectance than you think.

Ever heard of genetic factors?

Please do not be presumptious, I advise on Critical Illness cover, a large part of which is based on genetics

Now, how would ou like to have a genetic disorder that wasn't covered by health insurance because they classed it as a pre-existing condition? (which happens all the time)

Think you might be glad of a social healthcare system then?

get it out of your head that I am anti social healthcare (this makes no sense in the US sense as it does have social healthcare in a different form already)

I reckon the US politicians deem the NHS as 'evil' because if US citizens heard more about it, they would want it there too!

Since 1948, nearly all hospitals in the UK were run by the National Health Service. The vision was for free, good quality healthcare for all - and it worked!

It was funded by the Government (taxpayers) - and no-one had to pay for treatment - ever. Stephen Hawking is just making the point that, had he been born in America, he probably would have been dead through insufficient funds or healthcover to BUY treatment.

Those on this thread that whinge about the NHS have obviously never been to the US and tried to get free health care.

reply to post by blueorder


No it's not nonsense, the NICE guidelines are very clear on this.

The table of treatment guidelines may vary according to age group and mitigating factors, but that's it.
So yet again, you're wrong.

I have been factual in what I said about Hawking, you however have moved into the realm of "if's, buts and maybe's" which prove nothing except your desperation.

To listen to you, anyone would think you paid money for the tummy tuck yourself

Nobody ever said the NHS is perfect, just that it's an awfull lot better than the alternative.

tell you what, you love the US so much, go and live there for a while and see how you get on when you become ill, then come back and critisize a free for all healthcare system.

Originally posted by blueorder
get it out of your head that I am anti social healthcare (this makes no sense in the US sense as it does have social healthcare in a different form already)

So what's your problem.

You don't live in the US, and really have no idea about the social issues apart from a brief snapshot, but now you are an expert on why they should or shouldn't have social healthcare?

They don't have social healthcare as we do.

Nothing like it.

As for your focus, I care not a jot where YOU want to focus.
I'll focus where I want to for whatever point I want to make, Macau is just as applicable as anywhere if economies of scale are applied.

[edit on 14/8/2009 by budski]

Originally posted by budskiNo it's not nonsense, the NICE guidelines are very clear on this.

The table of treatment guidelines may vary according to age group and mitigating factors, but that's it.
So yet again, you're wrong.

I am not wrong, I said it may be uniform in guidelines which is exactly what you have confirmed- IN Practice it depends on the individuals involved, the hospital etc

You can wave all the "GUIDELINES" you want, that does not make me wrong, because I stated it was only uniform on paper and in guidelines


Yet again- ironic given your Japanese faux pas

I have been factual in what I said about Hawking, you however have moved into the realm of "if's, buts and maybe's" which prove nothing except your desperation.

That makes no sense, bottome line is no one can tell if Hawkings would be alive or dead if he lived in the US- that is inherently speculative and involves "maybes", and "ifs"so quite what you are winging it about "desperation" is baffling

To listen to you, anyone would think you paid money for the tummy tuck yourself

You think I should be exempt from paying towards the NHS in my tax- excellent, good luck with explaining that to the revenue

Nobody ever said the NHS is perfect, just that it's an awfull lot better than the alternative.

don't be such a drama queen, believeing harem scarme stories about the US

US life expectancy is 78.11 and the UK is 79.01- hardly "awful lot" better EVEN IF YOU MAKE THE ASSUMPTION (and indulge in the "ifs" you cry about above) that the difference is entirely due to the health service

tell you what, you love the US so much, go and live there for a while and see how you get on when you become ill, then come back and critisize a free for all healthcare system.

You go move there and experience it since you are providing harem scarem stories about it- and wow, you can console yourself with the thought that you may live 0.9 years longer (On average)



[edit on 14-8-2009 by blueorder]

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


There are barley any medical supplies on the Island because of the huge embargo that the U.S placed on the island for having a Communist regime. www.freetrade.org... Only in 2000 were medical supplies allowed to be purchased from the U.S. So by 2001 i doubt the impact would have been felt.

Cuba is well known for having some of the best doctors in the world, and ship them to other South American countires for the teaching of their doctors and treatments of patientswww.thehealthcareblog.com... www.latinamericanstudies.org... They even offered the U.S a 1000 doctors after Katrina, but were ridiculously refused.

But a Doctor without tools is like an army without Artillery or Tanks, severly limited.

Originally posted by budski

Originally posted by blueorder
get it out of your head that I am anti social healthcare (this makes no sense in the US sense as it does have social healthcare in a different form already)

So what's your problem.

You don't live in the US, and really have no idea about the social issues apart from a brief snapshot, but now you are an expert on why they should or shouldn't have social healthcare?

They don't have social healthcare as we do.

Nothing like it.

As for your focus, I care not a jot where YOU want to focus.
I'll focus where I want to for whatever point I want to make, Macau is just as applicable as anywhere if economies of scale are applied.

[edit on 14/8/2009 by budski]

0.9 years of a difference (on average- and that is IF, and it is a big IF we atttribute all the difference to the NHS).

Stop getting irrational- as for me being an expert on the US system, it now appears you are an expert on ALL systems, from Macau to Japan, ironic there buddy

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

 

There are barley any medical supplies on the Island because of the huge embargo that the U.S placed on the island for having a Communist regime. www.freetrade.org... Only in 2000 were medical supplies allowed to be purchased from the U.S. So by 2001 i doubt the impact would have been felt.

Cuba is well known for having some of the best doctors in the world, and ship them to other South American countires for the teaching of their doctors and treatments of patientswww.thehealthcareblog.com... www.latinamericanstudies.org... They even offered the U.S a 1000 doctors after Katrina, but were ridiculously refused.

But a Doctor without tools is like an army without Artillery or Tanks, severly limited.

Yeah right, that is why floods of immigrants try to reach the shores of Cuba, don't believe the "hype" (is that tripe?)

reply to post by blueorder


Harem Scarem stories?

Not at all.

I just know I'd rather live in a society that has social healthcare than one that doesn't.

0.9 may not sound like a lot, but taken over a sample of nearly 300 million as opposed to 60 million it means an awafull lot to those at the bottom who can't afford insurance, to say nothing of quality of life.

My points about NICE guidelines stand and remain relevant and correct despite your attempts to move the goalposts.

And if you want to talk about faux pas' let's talk about your "typo's" shall we?
Not to mentiion the fact that you are incapable of quoting or attributing information correctly...

Originally posted by budski
Harem Scarem stories?

Not at all.

oh but it is buddy

I just know I'd rather live in a society that has social healthcare than one that doesn't.

move to the US it has social healthcare

0.9 may not sound like a lot, but taken over a sample of nearly 300 million as opposed to 60 million it means an awafull lot to those at the bottom who can't afford insurance, to say nothing of quality of life.

0.9 is tiny, it is terribly insignificant

My points about NICE guidelines stand and remain relevant and correct despite your attempts to move the goalposts.

you are just making things up now, once again I stated that uniformity may be demanded in guidelines but the reality is obviously different- quoting "quidelines" does not produce uniformity of experience

And if you want to talk about faux pas' let's talk about your "typo's" shall we?

can do, not me getting all arrogant about "faux pas"< we all make mistakes, including you buddy

Not to mentiion the fact that you are incapable of quoting or attributing information correctly...

Your pants must be on fire buddy billy liar- kudos

[edit on 14-8-2009 by blueorder]

reply to post by blueorder


OK let's play your silly little game shall we?

oh but it is buddy

I'm not your "buddy" and nor are you american.
Can anyone say "pretentious"?

move to the US it has social healthcare

Really?
Show evidence the the US has a comprehensive system of social healthcare which is on a par with that in the UK, France or other nations which have national social healthcare schemes and that are of the same standard.

0.9 is tiny, it is terribly insignificant

Now you're showing your ignorance, and trying to frame something to suit your argument.
Let's call it one percent for the sake of argument.
One percent variance taken over a population of 300 million is a tiny amount?
If it's that tiny, start counting from zero, then let me know when you're finished #

you are just making things up now, once again I stated that uniformity may be demanded in guidelines but the reality is obviously different- quoting "quidelines" does not produce uniformity of experience

Then show proof of this difference.
The fact is that the guidelines are adhered to, but the guidelines are comprehensive.
Is that the bit you're having difficulty with?
Comprehensive?
The fact that different guidelines have to be applied to different age groups, different levels of general health etc does not in any way diminish the point I made.
Just your understanding of it

can do, not me getting all arrogant about "faux pas"< we all make mistakes, including you buddy

Shall we say "pretentious" again?
"Buddy"
You're the one who brought up the subject of faux pas, after making plenty of them yourself.
Forget that did we?

another blatant lie

Really?
You think that the use of bold indicates the correct way of quoting sommeone else's work and also counts as properly attributing it?
I pointed this out to you before, the fact that you are unable to do it speaks volumes.
And if you think I'm lying, hit the old alert button there.
Knowingly posting false material is against the rules after all.
Except I think that you are the one who is lying.
Have you quoted correctly and properly attributed the sourced material in your initial reply to my post about the WHO on this page?

No, nothing like it.

If you can't work it out, just ask for help.
Don't be afraid, no-one will think any less of you.
Honest...


See, anyone can make a little step by step cherrypicking post.

It's not hard and shows that you lack debate skill of any sort everytime you do it.



[edit on 14/8/2009 by budski]

[edit on 14/8/2009 by budski]

Originally posted by budskiOK let's play your silly little game shall we?

Check her out

I'm not your "buddy" and nor are you american.
Can anyone say "pretentious"?

Sure can buddy!

Show evidence the the US has a comprehensive system of social healthcare which is on a par with that in the UK, France or other nations which have national social healthcare schemes and that are of the same standard.

Did someone mention "goal posts shifting"- you said, and I quote, as you appear to get quite "foggy" on such matters


"I just know I'd rather live in a society that has social healthcare than one that doesn't."

so, quite CORRECTLY, I said move to the US as it has social healthcare- now obviously you are kicking yourself for not coming off with the sentence you have now dreamed up, but hey, your original sentence has been dealt with

Now you're showing your ignorance, and trying to frame something to suit your argument.
Let's call it one percent for the sake of argument.

here comes the arrogant buddy, and no buddy, no I won't, it is 0.9, ok buddy

One percent variance taken over a population of 300 million is a tiny amount?
If it's that tiny, start counting from zero, then let me know when you're finished

#

that is nonsensical gibberish- it is a 0.9 variance on average life expectancy, not on the populations of the respective countries (or, in your more bizzarre case, specifically the US)- this is some bizzarre retarded reasoning my good 10-4 buddy rubber duck is coming up with.

I've checked back with the CIA table, and yes, it definitely relates to average life expectancy and not on the population size of America.

You are big on averages aren't you, it means you will live on AVERAGE, 0.9 years longer in the UK, bet you feel really invincible now!!

he he so funny

you are just making things up now,

stop calling me a homosexual

Then show proof of this difference.

I received different treatment in the A&E from everyone else I have known who has ever been in

The fact is that the guidelines are adhered to, but the guidelines are comprehensive.
Is that the bit you're having difficulty with?

Comprehensive?

did you go to a rather bad Comprehensive?

They are just guidelines buddy, reality is muchos different, but you can wave your wee book of guideliness all you want- the only "proof" that offers is that guidelines exist

The fact that different guidelines have to be applied to different age groups, different levels of general health etc does not in any way diminish the point I made.
Just your understanding of it

That is not what I implied or said- so again you have just strung a random accusation at me, kudos BUDDY boy

Shall we say "pretentious" again?
"Buddy"

yes we can BUDDY

You're the one who brought up the subject of faux pas, after making plenty of them yourself.
Forget that did we?

well actually it was you, do you have a memory problem?

Really?

yes

You think that the use of bold indicates the correct way of quoting sommeone else's work and also counts as properly attributing it?
I pointed this out to you before, the fact that you are unable to do it speaks volumes.

Yes, epsecially with the link above- and furthermore you accused me of selectively quoting from the WHO, when I didn't, I quoted it word for word from the included link, and as yet, in your arrogance, you have not admitted your error

And if you think I'm lying, hit the old alert button there.
Knowingly posting false material is against the rules after all.
Except I think that you are the one who is lying.
Have yopu quoted correctly and properly attributed the sourced material in post by blueorder" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">this post?

No, nothing like it.

If you can't work it out, just ask for help.
Don't be afraid, no-one will think any less of you.
Honest...

I I ever need help, I'll ask someone with a few loaves in the basket, so I'll not be contacting you BUDDY

See, anyone can make a little step by step cherrypicking post.

Why change the habit?

It's not hard and shows that you lack debate skill of any sort everytime you do it.

[edit on 14/8/2009 by budski]

Muchos funny buddy, your posts are just lessons in arrogance, errors and blustering- kudos my AMIGO BUDDY!

[edit on 14-8-2009 by blueorder]

NHS Orwellian and evil?
What they mean is how dare those who have to live on a pittence be allowed free health care, NHS might get a lot of bad press but I have had plenty of good experiences with NHS personally.
Of course some idiots who don't live here will try to do a lot of guess work, watch Michael Moores Sicko.
And Yanks, you worry about having to pay through the nose to survive illnesses and even have a baby, I know which sounds more evil and Orwellian to me.
Now if you will excuse me I am off to see the doctor for free, then get my prescription for free and I have to go to the hospital where they will treat me for free, prescribe medication and fetch it for me for free and refund my travel costs, Damn that evil NHS!!!

Should I want a hospital bed in a room treat like a hotel to get exactly the same treatment I have the option of going private on my own cost.
Anything that isn't some scam money making process is seen as evil by fat cats who don't care about how little Joe Schmo living in a crap estate on minimum wage will pay to fight some illness that without medication and regular hospital visits will worsen and eventually kill him.

[edit on 14-8-2009 by keepithush]

Originally posted by keepithush
NHS Orwellian and evil?
What they mean is how dare those who have to live on a pittence be allowed free health care, NHS might get a lot of bad press but I have had plenty of good experiences with NHS personally.
Of course some idiots who don't live here will try to do a lot of guess work, watch Michael Moores Sicko and Yanks, you worry about having to pay through the nose to survive illnesses and even have a baby, I know which sounds more evil and Orwellian to me.
Now if you will excuse me I am off to see the doctor for free, then get my prescription for free and I have to go to the hospital where they will treat me for free, prescribe medication and fetch it for me for free and refund my travel costs, Damn that evil NHS!!!

Michael Moore is as impartial as some of the extreme right are who oppose the health care scheme

Michael Moore is not the issue here, watch the part where he can't quite get his head around parents walking out of a hospital with their baby without paying up.
The issue at hand is NHS is doing its job, yes there are some horror stories of waiting to see a doctor and such but when you go to A&E with people in their for stupid reasons and on most nights alcohol related problems then yes theres going to be a few hours wait, look hard enough into anything and its easy to find the negatives and extenuate them while ignoring the positives.

You step on a rusty nail and the blood is oozing, you go to hospital where they treat your wound and give you a tetanus shot, They send you on your way with instructions to clean the wound and contact your GP (dr) what happened, if needed further creams and ointments and a follow up appointment to make sure all has healed well.
How much would that cost you? personally I rest easy that I can get all that for free.

reply to post by blueorder


Look the point is OUR system IS better than the USA...

Why? BECAUSE

We allllll pay for it.. THEY DO NOT they pay SOMEONE to INSURE THEM then they need a stupid CARD thing to say LOOK IM COVERED

How dumb is that? well its dumb because WITHOUT insurance you could end up DEAD

Think im kidding? go live in the USA because i know people "like many others who do"

and the SYSTEM stinks..

Is the NHS perfect? NO

do i ever need to worry about being ran over or being sick? NO

we have 2 different systems and i for one LOVE and enjoy MINE i have no worries what so EVER

and the day some little retard on the other end of the phone says Are you covered thats the day the goverment gets tossed out on its EAR..

I pay for My care AND people who are sick when i am not...

or do you think that its wrong?

reply to post by keepithush


Thats the point tho mate its not "free" we all pay for it

We all chip in... over in the usa its every insurance company for them self

Much like the american way really... wild west gun ho..

load of cobblers the NHS is 1/3 the age of the united states....

The usa is only the new kid on the block when it comes to history we should know

WE USE TO OWN THE PLACE... little tiny weeny england use to OWN the usa..

ask them why we dont have an empire any more? becuase when we needed them to help in a war

they made us give it up.... Thats why its called the commonwealth

FACT

reply to post by budski


I just want to point out the USA does have a Goverment run system its called medicade

its for the older people.. BUT they still get ripped off..

They PAY an INSURANCE company???

Ask the POTUS.. the USA pays 6K MORE than ANY other nation on the planet??

6K?? PER PERESON? and guess were most of that goes?

INSURANCE COMPANIES LOL

I mean think about it.. if your car is mashed up you get shelled out by your "claim"

I am not a CAR im a human and i dont want no idiot telling me sorry sir but your claim does not cover u for a BROKE LEG

that my friend is GREED and INSANITY

reply to post by WhatTheory


ever here of medicade?

do you even know what social means? lol

You have police who are paid BY U

Teachers who are paid BY U

shall i keep going?

You seem to mix up socilaism with them pesky russians..

Im sorry to inform you my friend but the world has moved on.. this is not the wild west the usa is NOT the worlds most econmic supper house it once was

You want to see change? i suggest you look at china

because in about 20 years You will have a sleeping dragon to deal with..

And thats only the start... u forget the world does not revolve around the USA

inida alone has more people.. in fact its the WORLDS biggest democracy..

the only reason the usa is were it is because you LOVE guns.. and your the WORLDS biggest arms dealer..

Get the point?

Good.. now dont let that REALITY check hit you on your way out

Originally posted by Dermo
reply to post by Double Eights

 

You have to pay for a myriad of things with your taxes that you may or may not want, many of them completely criminal, overpriced and completely unjustified.

People, especially Americans from my experience, don't bring up these things but will still give out stink about the idea of free healthcare for everyone.. Simply because they feel others don't deserve it and don't want to pay for them.

Get over it.. It won't make a difference to your taxes, get your respective governments to stop blowing up countries or wasting that money on stupid investments and use THAT money for free healthcare to ensure all its citizens are happy and healthy.

IMO, the big "Anti healthcare" reform ideal is a remnant of cold war 'pro excessive capitalism, anti anything with the word social or commune in it" conditioning. Guess what.. the excessive capitalism thing doesn't work with healthcare.. Everyone taking their cut from development to hospital so in the end it costs 100x more than it should for you to get your tonsils checked by an overworked and overpaid, depressed, prescription drug addicted doctor.

BTW, if this system comes in, you can always go and get private healthcare if you want to fork out tens of thousands to get a cast on your arm.

Also, for the record, I don't fall into the category of people in my country who qualify for free healthcare so no point in calling me a commie.

Agree with you here, i dont hear people here complain about social security in Massachusetts for instance .I've known people there who just ate from uncle sam's hand[ridiculous]..but a new health care program is Orwellian? and evil?

Dont they teach you in the military to never leave one behind? how about your fellow countrymen at home who have to sell their houses to pay for ridicule cancer treatment..

[edit on 14-8-2009 by Foppezao]