Originally posted by devilwasp
your actually saying you have the best of everything ,which is saying that we are inferior saying your the best and we should follow you.
also i suppose this is a exsample of your "liberal BS"?
i said we have the best technology, how does that mean your inferior and we are the best and u should be following us? i DO think this country is the
greatest, however i never ever said u were inferior or u should follow the u.s.a, your making stuff up. ofcourse i think my country is the greatest, i
love my country, but it dont mean i think any1 is inferior or subhuman or w.e u wanna call it. and im not a liberal, i dont like liberals, and they
will most likely be the downfall of my country.
Originally posted by devilwasp
America's health system is a tangled, highly fragmented web that often wastes resources by duplicating efforts, leaving unaccountable gaps in
coverage, and failing to build on the strengths of all health professionals, says Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st
Century, a new report by a committee of the Institute of Medicine. The report calls for immediate action to improve care -- in all aspects and for
everyone -- over the next decade, and offers a comprehensive strategy to do so.
this is from the national acadimies advisors on nature science and engineer and medicine.
also 42.6million people in america were UNINSURED for medical insurance in 1999,also the USA is only country in the western world except from South
america that doesnt provide a NHS.now telll me that is the best health system. also the best doctors? exsplain? you cant have the worlds best doctors
in everyfield.also your ranked 26th in industrialised countries in infant mortalilty rates.exsplain?
sure our health system isnt perfect, nothing is ever PERFECT, but hopefully the right people will get elected this year and this can be resolved. but
id rather have what we have here than this:
Here’s the latest attempt to somehow keep the ever-spiraling costs of free British health care under control.
Westcountry doctors are to be offered payments of ?100 for every patient they keep out of hospital, in a controversial drive to cut waiting lists.
The scheme, being pioneered by Torbay Primary Care Trust, is designed to encourage family doctors to be more proactive in dealing with the care of
elderly patients and those with complex long-term health problems.
Supporters claim the initiative, which is due to begin within the next few days, will improve patient care and cut “unplanned” admissions to hospital
by up to 15 per cent. The scheme, which could also slash primary care trust (PCT) bills for hospital treatment, has already attracted national
attention, with around 40 PCTs across the country now considering similar initiatives.
But concerns have been raised that incentive payments to doctors could be seen as unethical and damage trust with patients who might feel clinical
decisions were being influenced in an inappropriate way. The Torbay scheme will offer GP practices ?75 for every patient with a chronic illness for
whom they develop a detailed care plan. They will receive an extra ?25 if the patient does not have to go to hospital.
You might be surprised to learn this, but here in America we have a system very similar to this one, and it’s already in place. It’s been in place
for hundreds of years. It’s called the free market, and its power to keep costs down are unmatched by any government program in history.
See, in the UK everyone is entitled to free health care. Therefore, every time someone gets a sniffle, they go to the doctor. Why not, it’s free.
And their doctor might send them to be admitted at a hospital. Why not, it’s free. Costs are increasing, and waiting lists are growing, all because
there is a finite amount of resources and an infinate demand for them. This is the very nature of systems where prices and/or availability are
artificially controlled. (Housing shortages in rent controlled areas are another great example.)
In America people, like with any other expense, weigh the costs to the benefits of going to the doctor. Is it worth paying a $10 co-pay (or more) to
get seen for my sniffle? Is it worth paying $30 (or more) for a prescription to take care of this sniffle? Or should I just take the day off work,
swallow a couple of aspirin, and stay in bed for free?
It is this cost/benefit analysis on the part of the consumer that keeps people away from the doctor in America. You can say whatever you like about
how heartless this is, but the fact is that if the goal is to keep costs down this is the best way of doing it.
So, in a novel example of thinking outside the box, the British are trying to do a short of top-down version of the free market incentive. Since they
can’t to anything to decrease the demand for services, they are trying to financially incentivise the decision-makers in the British system (the
doctors) into not sending people into the hospital. The goal? To reduce costs and burden on the health care infrastructure.
Say what you like about the benefits of socialized health care, but as with all human endeavors one thing is plainly clear. When you tell someone
that something is (a) their right, and (b) at no cost to them, they will use it at every concevable opportunity. And in a world with finite resources
this is not a good thing.
OR
It’s another socialized medicine success!
A 21-year-old man died of appendicitis after he was refused treatment at an emergency clinic because he didn’t have his provincial health card with
him.
Gerald Augustin complained of stomach pains on Thursday but the receptionist at the St-Andre medical centre told him he had to return home to get his
health card. He didn’t make it back to the clinic in Montreal’s east end.
About four hours later, a friend alerted police and called an ambulance for the man, who had a fatal attack of appendicitis in his apartment. He was
pronounced dead in hospital.
Rouslene Augustin, administrator at the St-Andre clinic, said the man didn’t appear to have any urgent symptoms when he came to the clinic.
“If this guy was an emergency case, we would accept him if he had his card or not,” she said.
“I don’t see what we did wrong. I’m not defending the clinic, we just followed the rules."
If you like the service you get at the DMV or Post Office, you’re going to love government run health care. (he's reffering to the DMV and post
office in usa, (lol) (dont know if the one in the UK is as annoying)
OR
Today’s socialized health care success comes to you from Quebec.
Nearly 1,150 hip-surgery patients in Quebec will be tested for hepatitis and HIV after a commonly used surgical tool was improperly sterilized at 12
hospitals, the provincial Health Department said Tuesday.
A department spokeswoman said the recall could be expanded as the province continues its investigation into the handling of a metal reamer used during
hip-replacement surgery. “About 40 hospitals use this tool,” spokeswoman Dominique Breton said in an interview.
Okay, sounds like simply a case of human error, right?
The sterilization alert is the second in Quebec this year.
Last month, the government asked more than 1,100 people to be tested for HIV and hepatitis after a woman who practised acupuncture illegally for 25
years failed to follow proper cleaning techniques.
The Quebec cases followed a number of similar health scares in Ontario that led to an audit of hospital sterilization techniques in that province.
The Canadian Healthcare Association, which represents provincial hospital organizations, said health-care budget cuts have led to a decline in
cleaning procedures. [Emphasis added]
What? You mean that when the government runs your health care the quality of service goes down? I’m shocked, I tell you… shocked! How can Michael
Moore explain this? I mean, I thought everyone in Canada loved each other so much that they would gladly tax themselves into oblivion to provide for
every single medical need. How can this be?
(those last statements r from the articles author not me)
OR
Living in America
God bless the greedy, unequal, capitalist American medical system.
An experimental vaccine wiped out lung cancer in some patients and slowed its spread in others in a small but promising study, researchers say.
Three patients injected with the vaccine, GVAX, had no recurrence of lung cancer for more than three years afterward, according to the study of 43
people with the most common form of the disease, non-small cell lung cancer.
The findings were published in Wednesday’s Journal of the National Cancer Institute (news - web sites). The research was funded in part by Cell
Genesys, a pharmaceutical company that hopes to produce the vaccine.
The vaccine, developed by researchers at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, is years away from reaching the market, if ever. The researchers
hope to apply for Food and Drug Administration approval in three years.
“The results are very promising for patients with non-small (cell) lung cancer, which is frequently resistant to chemotherapy,” said Dr. John
Nemunaitis, a Baylor oncologist who led the study.
Let us not forget, dear friends, that the World Health Organization ranked the United States “37th in the world in overall health system performance
and 72nd on population health in its 2000 WHO report.” I’m curious just which of the 36 countries with superior systems to ours are leading the world
in development of artificial hearts and cures for lung cancer. Thirty years from now, when these treatments have migrated from the world of science
fiction to routine procedures, the WHO will undoubtedly find some other criteria with which to impugn what is far and away the greatest health care
system in the world.
Well, i REALLY HOPE this isnt what you think the U.S' healthcare system should turn to, socialized medicine which if im not mistaken is what is
practiced in your country, Scotland, cuz ur in the U.K. well either way, compared to that medical system, im quite happy with the one here.
Originally posted by devilwasp
your comanche? couldnt fire cause it crashes? sea knight transport? sinks and fills with sand? oh wait arent they BAD signs of an AF or what about the
number of apaches dieing over kosovo?
so, becuz of some crashes or what not, the entire airforce is a piece of garbage, is that what ur insinuating, the truth is the United States Air
Force has the most sophisticated and technologically advanced aircraft in the world today. Combined with the best-trained pilots, ground crews, and
other support personnel, the Air Force ensures air superiority and support for virtually every mission undertaken by the U.S. Military.
but in kosovo::
In March 1999 the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) began a campaign to halt Serbian repression of people of Albanian descent living in the
province of Kosovo in Serbia. The NATO campaign lasted 78 days and consisted almost entirely of the use of air power. The U.S. Air Force provided a
significant portion of the air power used in the bombing campaign, including B-2 bombers that flew nonstop from their bases in the United States to
their targets in southeastern Europe, refueling in flight and returning to the United States without ever landing. While fixed military targets were
relatively easy to hit, the Serbian army dispersed its force in the field, making it much more difficult to destroy. Rugged terrain, poor weather, and
the decision to keep NATO aircraft flying at altitudes above the range of Serbian air defenses reduced significantly the amount of damage that the air
campaign actually inflicted on the Serbian army.
The U.S. Air Force stands as the most powerful air force in the world. The Air Force has roughly 3,700 operational aircraft of all types, including
bombers, cargo transports, ground-attack-fighter interceptors, and reserve-trainer aircraft. The Air Force also has a substantial number of
helicopters for various missions such as search and rescue, cargo transport, and special operations.
In general the aircraft used by the Air Force are considered excellent aircraft. However, other countries have some aircraft that can match the
quality and firepower of the Air Force’s top planes. The Russian-made MiG-29 Fulcrum, for example, is generally regarded as capable of taking on any
fighter in close air combat, including the U.S. Air Force’s F-15 and F-16. The new F-22 is designed to be superior to the MiG-29. No other country’s
air force can match the combination of size, readiness, and training of the U.S. Air Force. Pilot training in the U.S. Air Force is extensive and
realistic, and includes dissimilar combat training, in which the most modern U.S. aircraft are used to simulate dogfights against enemy aircraft. On
average, U.S. Air Force pilots fly more than 200 hours per year, giving them more training time than air force pilots in any other country.
The Air Force has enough nuclear weapons to destroy any enemy many times over. Its ICBMs are accurate enough to demolish all but the most protected
targets. Other countries, including Russia and China, also have substantial nuclear stockpiles, and these could destroy much of the United States in
an all-out nuclear war. The U.S. nuclear strategy is based on maintaining a large and diversified arsenal to deter any such attack.
so please dont say becuz some choppers went down or what not, that the
usaf is a bad airforce, because it isnt.
Originally posted by devilwasp
crime free enviroments? there are more gun crimes there than most countries around the globe, murder is like a 5th page story.
the most freedoms? sure if you like liveing in a place where drunks can bear arms. the best of everything? yeah thats right , thats why you buy tech
off countries. no one has the best tech , there are great tech but no best tech.
also last time i looked the american/british exchange rate was like what ,1 dollar to 0.555869 pounds, now working on this i would say liveing in
britiain would get you better money.
also funny how this is the SECOND time you have said you are not going to reply.
first off, exchange rates are constantly changing, and it doesnt really mean much, crime rates, WASHINGTON (AP) — The nation's crime rate last year
held steady at the lowest levels since the government began surveying crime victims in 1973, the Justice Department reported Sunday.
The study was the latest contribution to a decade-long trend in which violent crime as measured by victim surveys has fallen by 55% and property crime
by 49%. That has included a 14% drop in violent crime from 2000-2001 to 2002-2003.
"The rates are the lowest experienced in the last 30 years," Justice Department statistician Shannan Catalona said in the report. "Crime rates have
stabilized."
---There is a widely perpitrated myth out there that the US has a higher crime rate then major Western European Nations. According to Interpol and the
FBI this is not the fact.
Per 100,000
* 4161 - US
* 7736 - Germany
* 6941 - France
* 9927 - England and Wales
If you exclude blacks from the Murder Statistics the United States has a lower murder rate then Germany and France(I'm not infering that Black are
inherantly evil, it has to do with welfare policies, racial seperatism, etc)
---A few months ago a report which estimates the crime rate in Europe showed the UK has the highest incident of crime in the western world. From
physical attack(rape,muggings,assualt) to petty theft and burglary, no country among western nations including the usa out ranked the UK. Its gotten
to the point were its not safe to allow your child to play in his/her front yard for fear the neighborhood bullies will assualt your kid.This is a
situation most Americans have never experienced. What contributing factors has caused the crime rate in the UK to spiral out of control? What steps
have been taken to solve the problem and why is crime such a big problem in small uk cities? We normally expect to see some crime in large cities but
its unusual for small towns in the States to experience high crime rates. Towns in the States that have populations of 500,000 you could leave your
front door unlocked and fill safe no one will try to enter your home. Why is that not the case in much of the UK?
and the right to bear arms is important, it is, the right to defend ourselves- against lunatics...theres nothing wrong with the rite to bear arms. oh
and sure u can live in the U.K and make a tiny bit more money, but ud lose out in healthcare, (some doctors i hear eh) and statistically its more
dangerous. well thats enough for today, im done, and ill reply as much as i want to. but the fact is that this is really getting annoying.
