Surprise: PA College Slashes Instructors' Hours to Avoid Obamacare

But nevertheless... I think healthcare should be something we all have, whether or not we have a job.. it should paid be paid for taxes the same way that public parks, roads and transit systems, education and other things are paid for.. it would also force the medical industry to correct it's insanely high fees for many of those procedures.

reply to post by miniatus

Where to start??? Oh I know how about we look at your statement about the medical industry. Those insanely high fees are also caused by the cost of doing business, like malpractice insurance. You can thank your fellows who sued over everything. Legitimate lawsuits are one thing but how many people make money by suing everyone and everything around them? Or is it just the medical professions fault? All those public parks, roads and transit systems, well the gov't didn't build as much of it as they like to claim. The parks, look into how many people and/or orginization's donate the land to the gov't. The roads and transit systems were another thing that in the begining were created by private industry, not the gov't. The gov't again inherited them from those who first made them. Read a little history and see what exactally the gov't has built and mismanaged. Most thru-ways systems were built paid for binds that tolls were supposed to pay off. Once the bill was paid tolls were supposed to end. Did that happen? So you want to rely on our gov't that is notorious for screwing up things with over regulations and plain out graft?

Ok I did think a minute about this, which is about all it's worth. I just recently attended the 100th birthday of a longtime Church member. Are people in other countries living longer than that? What statistics do you have to back up that some socialist planning is making people live longer than having state of the art technology ?

STATS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR


As you can see the USA is barely outliving the Czech Republic, Poland and Mexico, 3rd world countries. At least these countries like Mexico only spends $823.00 to die young vs. USA's $7290.00. A great nation like the mighty USA shame on you....pitiful.
For the rest of your points, see kaylaluv posts.

reply to post by kaylaluv


Yes, the Mises Institute has an axe to grind with anti-Capitalist propaganda.

reply to post by brice


Unions are for women, commies and men whose B**ls ain't dropped. Unions are UnAmerican and very european. Unions are driving business out if business. Hostess Inc. for one. Plus driving wages down in this country by supporting these stupid "laws", forcing companies to cut hours worked.

reply to post by brice

When Moore or others refer to the WHO index as proof that private health care doesn’t work, they aren’t being totally honest because they fail to disclose that the index lowers the scores of systems that don’t satisfy socialist presumptions.

reply to post by brice


I am familiar with Layla and her stance on things. I do not think we have ever agreed on anything.

For every pro soicalist healthcare blog or site I can find one that sandblasts all the pro socialist hype.

www.freemarketcure.com...

Al Gore was able to promote his faulty climate change ideas based on a faulty hockey stick graph.
LIkewise people can give faulty or misleading informationabout healthcare and longevity based on the same kind of faulty or biased agenda.

It is curious that the United States ranked below Europe in the World Health Organization’s 2000 World Health Report, which rated 191 countries’ medical systems. In his documentary Sicko, socialist Michael Moore makes hay out of the fact that the United States placed 37th, behind even Morocco, Cyprus, and Costa Rica. This ranking is used to “prove” that state-controlled health care is superior to the “free market.”

This ranking is curious because the actual life expectancy of the average American differs very little from that of the average European. At birth, average life expectancy in the European Union is 78.7. For the average American it is 78. And this doesn’t adjust for factors that can affect the averages which are unrelated to health care, such as lifestyle choices, accident rates, crime rates, and immigration. Health isn’t entirely about longevity but it certainly is a major component.

In 2000, when the report was issued, WHO was run by Gro Harlem Brundtland, a former prime minister of Norway and a socialist. She doesn’t think the results of a health system alone are important. Rather, she wants to know if the system is “fair.” In introducing the WHO report she wrote that while the goal of a health system “is to improve and protect health,” it also has “other intrinsic goals [that] are concerned with fairness in the way people pay for health care.” She is clear about the ideological factors she thinks are important: “Where health and responsiveness are concerned, achieving a high average level is not good enough: the goals of a health system must also include reducing inequalities, in ways that improve the situation of the worst-off. In this report attainment in relation to these goals provides the basis for measuring the performance of health systems.”

True to her ideological roots, Brundtland prefers socialized medicine over private care. Drawing her first conclusion about what makes a good medical system, she declares: “Ultimate responsibility for the performance of a country’s health system lies with government. The careful and responsible management of the well-being of the population—stewardship—is the very essence of good government. The health of people is always a national priority: government responsibility for it is continuous and permanent.”

www.fee.org...

I would menetion that this pro socialized medicine person uses the term "stewardship", which is a typical buzzword right out of UN Agenda 21, as are the terms "Sustainable development", "public-private partnerships", and "stakeholder".
www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com...

Incidentally, your HealthWorks Collective site uses some of those UN Agenda 21 buzzwords too.


ALso, interestingly, the author of that particular post you submitted as evidence of lousy US healthcare and longevitty compared to others says this in reply to someone who takes him to task.
healthworkscollective.com...

I clearly state in my text prior to the infographic "this average life expectancy vs. cost of healthcare infographic gives you a visual demonstration of how far outside worldwide averages that the USA costs lie".

And he also says this:

I also clearly state, "If you believe that life expectancy has any connection at all with the quality of a nation’s healthcare system … you have to question whether we are getting our money’s worth.

So you see, even he says the graph is just a measure of cost, and that does not represent "better" care.
You can lower costs by rationing care, and that is exactly what socialist countries do to control costs, and exactly what Obamacare will likewise do.

And I'm not sure what you thought you were proving with that, unless you believe that lower cost equals better care.

reply to post by hangedman13


I would mention also the lawyers do not want tort reform because they make lots of money off these lawsuits.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

It looks like your links are the exact same blogger. So, one blogger who has some kind of axe to grind vs all the statistical information out there regarding the success of universal healthcare. Sorry, not convincing me.

Also, if you really think that all the other developed nations in the world are communist, or one step away from communist, your paranoia is sad.

I said that socialism is a bridge to communism. So did Lenin and Marx. There are many more soicalist countries than communist. Socialism is just communism lite. I know you don't want to believe it but Marx and Lenin both said it in their writing.

Originally posted by brice
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Thank you for your sources, but again, all the Democrats did was open the door for universal healthcare. Neither party was happy with the end result because its a pile of compromises. Give it time, wrongs can be righted and it can be improved. The important thing, the hard thing was to get it passed, the foundation is in and now construction of better, more civilized system can begin.
Your complaints are the same ones Canada had 50 years ago when Kiefer Sutherland's (Actor) grandfather Tommy Douglas introduced single payer universal healthcare to Canada.
Fifty years later Canadians are still working the kinks out, no matter what the media tells you the system is really good. All our best Doctors mostly attend one or more the the great USA medical schools but still come home to make 1/10th the wages of a U.S. Dr., Even when offered jobs there.
Give your infant system a chance to grow up and improve, don't let it die eary like you do now with your citizens.
brice

edit on 23-11-2012 by brice because: spelling

No they opened the door to bankrupt the country. You did not respond to any of my points. Wrong will never be righted until the fiscal bailout is so large it is nearly insurmountable. When do we fix a levy? After the storm comes. The same will happen here, it was completely irresponsible.

Doctors in Canada make on average over $200,000, not 1/10th of US Doctors. Maybe 40% less. Do they repay their student loans at all? None of your stats or points match reality.

Originally posted by brice
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

As posted above, Americans spend way too much on healthcare and end up dying way too soon. Your longevity is like a 3rd world nation. Everybody here is freaking out about it but spend a minute to think about it. How are the rest of the industrial world spending 1/3 the dollars America is on healthcare and they are living longer? Employers are not laying off or firing their staff. These were all concerns Canada had 50 years ago.
Companies will adapt. and very soon it will business as usual, just another cost of doing business.

That was my point. Obamacare REINFORCES this. We needed cost cutting, instead we had Obama PROMISING that medical expenses would stay high. Everything that needed to be done to save healthcare was purposefully excluded.

Can you use a more biased source than Freeman, but good try you present a good but twisted argument!
The free market cure is total nonsense, obviously written by the heath insurance industry. Are you in the health insurance industry?

And I'm not sure what you thought you were proving with that, unless you believe that lower cost equals better care.

That is exactly what I mean. If a person is sick in the USA who can afford to go to the Dr. to get better?

quote]Originally posted by murphy22
reply to post by brice


Unions are for women, commies and men whose B**ls ain't dropped. Unions are UnAmerican and very european. Unions are driving business out if business. Hostess Inc. for one. Plus driving wages down in this country by supporting these stupid "laws", forcing companies to cut hours worked.

Maybe you want to read the quotes I posted earlier by people way smarter than you about unions.
I am very pro union, though I would never work in one and do not now. Companies that are unionized are there cause the employer treated their staff so bad organizing was the only choice. They get what they deserve. Pay your staff fair, keep them safe and take responsibility for them most will chose to avoid the union.
Also you really, really need to do more reading cause if you had, you would have discovered what all "us socialist" have been telling you over and over and over.....Vulture capitalist destryed the company. The "lazy union workers" came in to work even for no pay. get you facts straight little boy.

"The labor movement means just this: It is the last noble protest of the American people against the power of incorporated wealth." Wendall Philips

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by brice
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Thank you for your sources, but again, all the Democrats did was open the door for universal healthcare. Neither party was happy with the end result because its a pile of compromises. Give it time, wrongs can be righted and it can be improved. The important thing, the hard thing was to get it passed, the foundation is in and now construction of better, more civilized system can begin.
Your complaints are the same ones Canada had 50 years ago when Kiefer Sutherland's (Actor) grandfather Tommy Douglas introduced single payer universal healthcare to Canada.
Fifty years later Canadians are still working the kinks out, no matter what the media tells you the system is really good. All our best Doctors mostly attend one or more the the great USA medical schools but still come home to make 1/10th the wages of a U.S. Dr., Even when offered jobs there.
Give your infant system a chance to grow up and improve, don't let it die eary like you do now with your citizens.
brice

edit on 23-11-2012 by brice because: spelling

No they opened the door to bankrupt the country. You did not respond to any of my points. Wrong will never be righted until the fiscal bailout is so large it is nearly insurmountable. When do we fix a levy? After the storm comes. The same will happen here, it was completely irresponsible.

Doctors in Canada make on average over $200,000, not 1/10th of US Doctors. Maybe 40% less. Do they repay their student loans at all? None of your stats or points match reality.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

When Moore or others refer to the WHO index as proof that private health care doesn’t work, they aren’t being totally honest because they fail to disclose that the index lowers the scores of systems that don’t satisfy socialist presumptions.

reply to post by brice

 

I am familiar with Layla and her stance on things. I do not think we have ever agreed on anything.

For every pro soicalist healthcare blog or site I can find one that sandblasts all the pro socialist hype.

www.freemarketcure.com...

Al Gore was able to promote his faulty climate change ideas based on a faulty hockey stick graph.
LIkewise people can give faulty or misleading informationabout healthcare and longevity based on the same kind of faulty or biased agenda.

It is curious that the United States ranked below Europe in the World Health Organization’s 2000 World Health Report, which rated 191 countries’ medical systems. In his documentary Sicko, socialist Michael Moore makes hay out of the fact that the United States placed 37th, behind even Morocco, Cyprus, and Costa Rica. This ranking is used to “prove” that state-controlled health care is superior to the “free market.”

This ranking is curious because the actual life expectancy of the average American differs very little from that of the average European. At birth, average life expectancy in the European Union is 78.7. For the average American it is 78. And this doesn’t adjust for factors that can affect the averages which are unrelated to health care, such as lifestyle choices, accident rates, crime rates, and immigration. Health isn’t entirely about longevity but it certainly is a major component.

In 2000, when the report was issued, WHO was run by Gro Harlem Brundtland, a former prime minister of Norway and a socialist. She doesn’t think the results of a health system alone are important. Rather, she wants to know if the system is “fair.” In introducing the WHO report she wrote that while the goal of a health system “is to improve and protect health,” it also has “other intrinsic goals [that] are concerned with fairness in the way people pay for health care.” She is clear about the ideological factors she thinks are important: “Where health and responsiveness are concerned, achieving a high average level is not good enough: the goals of a health system must also include reducing inequalities, in ways that improve the situation of the worst-off. In this report attainment in relation to these goals provides the basis for measuring the performance of health systems.”

True to her ideological roots, Brundtland prefers socialized medicine over private care. Drawing her first conclusion about what makes a good medical system, she declares: “Ultimate responsibility for the performance of a country’s health system lies with government. The careful and responsible management of the well-being of the population—stewardship—is the very essence of good government. The health of people is always a national priority: government responsibility for it is continuous and permanent.”

www.fee.org...

I would menetion that this pro socialized medicine person uses the term "stewardship", which is a typical buzzword right out of UN Agenda 21, as are the terms "Sustainable development", "public-private partnerships", and "stakeholder".
www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com...

Incidentally, your HealthWorks Collective site uses some of those UN Agenda 21 buzzwords too.


ALso, interestingly, the author of that particular post you submitted as evidence of lousy US healthcare and longevitty compared to others says this in reply to someone who takes him to task.
healthworkscollective.com...

I clearly state in my text prior to the infographic "this average life expectancy vs. cost of healthcare infographic gives you a visual demonstration of how far outside worldwide averages that the USA costs lie".

And he also says this:

I also clearly state, "If you believe that life expectancy has any connection at all with the quality of a nation’s healthcare system … you have to question whether we are getting our money’s worth.

So you see, even he says the graph is just a measure of cost, and that does not represent "better" care.
You can lower costs by rationing care, and that is exactly what socialist countries do to control costs, and exactly what Obamacare will likewise do.

And I'm not sure what you thought you were proving with that, unless you believe that lower cost equals better care.

edit on 25-11-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)