PDA

View Full Version : Michael Moore is spanking Wolf Blitzer


memyselfI
07-09-2007, 04:51 PM
Pretty funny spanking going on at this moment...

Wolf is flustered. ROFL

Logical
07-09-2007, 05:40 PM
This will be moved to DC in 5.4.3.2..........

Brock
07-09-2007, 05:52 PM
awesome thread.

Adept Havelock
07-09-2007, 05:59 PM
This thread title conjured a mental image I really didn't need.

:cuss:

go bowe
07-09-2007, 06:19 PM
shit, i always miss the good part...

Hydrae
07-09-2007, 06:21 PM
shit, i always miss the good part...


You need to stop hanging out in the cess pool then. :)

wazu
07-09-2007, 09:43 PM
Is this what you are referring to? He was sputtering out sentence fragments, and sounded like he was about to cry! I especially love how he bashed CNN for having advertisers. Those filthy, right-wing money grubbers!

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2823.html

Mr. Kotter
07-09-2007, 10:50 PM
Are you friggin' INSANE, now, on top of being totally bat-shit crazy??? :spock:

Moore looked like the completely moronic bafoon Moonbat idiot that he is....unless, of course, you SHARE his moonbat bloodlines, in which case you wouldn't see it. :rolleyes:

LMAO LMAO LMAO

Cochise
07-09-2007, 11:17 PM
Who would have thought meme would see it that way :rolleyes:

recxjake
07-09-2007, 11:36 PM
I want someone to tell me with a straight face that they believe that the quality of healthcare will go up with the goverment running it.

Mr. Kotter
07-09-2007, 11:38 PM
Who would have thought meme would see it that way :rolleyes:

Seriously, for any sane/rational/reasonable person to IMAGINE that Moore got the best of that exchange....:spock:

you'd have to be GD batshit Moonbat crazy. I'm serious.... LMAO

dirk digler
07-09-2007, 11:41 PM
I want someone to tell me with a straight face that they believe that the quality of healthcare will go up with the goverment running it.

I don't know about going up but I think Moore does make a good point in that Medicare\Medicaid does pretty well. I have several older people in my family and I never hear them complain about it and they get to the doctor when they want and the government writes the check.

recxjake
07-09-2007, 11:49 PM
I don't know about going up but I think Moore does make a good point in that Medicare\Medicaid does pretty well. I have several older people in my family and I never hear them complain about it and they get to the doctor when they want and the government writes the check.

I think where Michael needs to change his delivery is when he says free healthcare.... it will be the largest tax increase in american history

dirk digler
07-09-2007, 11:52 PM
I think where Michael needs to change his delivery is when he says free healthcare.... it will be the largest tax increase in american history

I agree because nothing is ever free. We will pay for it one way or another that's for sure.

But we need to fix the system because it is clearly broken and corrupt.

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:00 AM
I think where Michael needs to change his delivery is when he says free healthcare.... it will be the largest tax increase in american history

Would it be larger than the FOUR HUNDRED F#CKING DOLLARS A MONTH I'M ALREADY PAYING?????

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:02 AM
I prefer Rudy's plan of making health insurance like car insurance.... more competition will bring down costs.... get away from employee based health care

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:04 AM
I prefer Rudy's plan of making health insurance like car insurance.... more competition will bring down costs.... get away from employee based health care

Horseshit. It's not like there's only two or three of them now. More companies = more collusion.

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:04 AM
Would it be larger than the FOUR HUNDRED F#CKING DOLLARS A MONTH I'M ALREADY PAYING?????

Universal Health care would cost less than 1 month of what we are spending in cluster **** Iraq. I can't believe we are spending $12 billion dollars a month in that shit hole when we can take care of every American's healthcare for less than half of that.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:06 AM
Universal Health care would cost less than 1 month of what we are spending in cluster **** Iraq. I can't believe we are spending $12 billion dollars a month in that shit hole when we can take care of every American's healthcare for less than half of that.

I'd love to know they made that figure up.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:07 AM
Horseshit. It's not like there's only two or three of them now. More companies = more collusion.


So the govt is the solution?.... ROFL

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:07 AM
Would it be larger than the FOUR HUNDRED F#CKING DOLLARS A MONTH I'M ALREADY PAYING?????

YES.

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:09 AM
Universal Health care would cost less than 1 month of what we are spending in cluster **** Iraq. I can't believe we are spending $12 billion dollars a month in that shit hole when we can take care of every American's healthcare for less than half of that.

If you believe in those numbers, you must still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too. :shake:

Brock
07-10-2007, 12:09 AM
Would it be larger than the FOUR HUNDRED F#CKING DOLLARS A MONTH I'M ALREADY PAYING?????

No, it will be FREE!

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:10 AM
I'd love to know they made that figure up.

Unfortuntely they didn't.

Report: Wars Costing $12 Billion a Month
Jul 9 02:33 PM US/Eastern
By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press Writer



View larger image

WASHINGTON (AP) - The boost in troop levels in Iraq has increased the cost of war there and in Afghanistan to $12 billion a month, and the total for Iraq alone is nearing a half-trillion dollars, congressional analysts say.

All told, Congress has appropriated $610 billion in war-related money since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror assaults, roughly the same as the war in Vietnam. Iraq alone has cost $450 billion.

The figures come from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, which provides research and analysis to lawmakers.

For the 2007 budget year, CRS says, the $166 billion appropriated to the Pentagon represents a 40 percent increase over 2006.

The Vietnam War, after accounting for inflation, cost taxpayers $650 billion, according to separate CRS estimates.

The $12 billion a month "burn rate" includes $10 billion for Iraq and almost $2 billion for Afghanistan, plus other minor costs. That's higher than Pentagon estimates earlier this year of $10 billion a month for both operations. Two years ago, the average monthly cost was about $8 billion.

Among the reasons for the higher costs is the cost of repairing and replacing equipment worn out in harsh conditions or destroyed in combat.

But the estimates call into question the Pentagon's estimate that the increase in troop strength and intensifying pace of operations in Baghdad and Anbar province would cost only $5.6 billion through the end of September.

If Congress approves President Bush's pending request for another $147 billion for the budget year starting Oct. 1, the total bill for the war on terror since Sept. 11 would reach more than three-fourths of a trillion dollars, with appropriations for Iraq reaching $567 billion.

Also, if the increase in war tempo continues beyond September, the Pentagon's request "would presumably be inadequate," CRS said.

The latest estimates come as support for the war in Iraq among Bush's GOP allies in Congress is beginning to erode. Senior Republicans such as Pete Domenici of New Mexico and Richard Lugar of Indiana have called for a shift in strategy in Iraq and a battle over funding the war will resume in September, when Democrats in Congress begin work on a funding bill for the war.

Congress approved $99 billion in war funding in May after a protracted battle and a Bush veto of an earlier measure over Democrats' attempt to set a timeline for withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq.

The report faults the Pentagon for using the Iraq war as a pretext for boosting the Pentagon's non-war budget by costs such as procurement, increasing the size of the military and procurement of replacement aircraft as war-related items.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:10 AM
Not those numbers, the health care numbers

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:12 AM
If you believe in those numbers, you must still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too. :shake:

My bad I should have said wars not just Iraq. Still that is a shit load of money and this is coming for a nonpartisan group.

Iraq alone is costing us almost a half-trillion dollars. What a ****ing waste.

Logical
07-10-2007, 12:12 AM
I prefer Rudy's plan of making health insurance like car insurance.... more competition will bring down costs.... get away from employee based health care

Oh yes because Car insurance is such a bargain, when are you going to grow up and become part of the real world?:rolleyes:

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:12 AM
Unfortuntely they didn't.

AP figures/estimates = REALITY??? You are being serious, here... :spock:

Not even "adjusted for inflation" mattered--I mean, THAT didn't even faze you???? Come on, David....help me out here. ROFL

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:13 AM
Not those numbers, the health care numbers

Ok I don't know those numbers but I would think it would be a couple of billion at least wouldn't you?

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:13 AM
So the govt is the solution?.... ROFL

Well, my personal solution would be to round up the directors and senior officers of every health insurance company and feed them all feet first through a f#cking woodchipper, one after the other, on national television. Then tell the next bunch of souless cocksuckers that rise up to replace them that health insurance needs to be affordable, and if it isn't, we can always fire up the woodchipper again.

But since that idea probably won't fly, yes, I think government must be the solution. Specifically, healthcare should NOT be a for profit enterprise.

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:14 AM
AP figures/estimates = REALITY??? You are being serious, here... :spock:

Not even "adjusted for inflation" mattered--I mean, THAT didn't even faze you???? Come on, David....help me out here. ROFL

the figures come from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, which provides research and analysis to lawmakers.

:shrug:

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:14 AM
Oh yes because Car insurance is such a bargain, when are you going to grow up and become part of the real world?:rolleyes:

esurance.com very very affordable

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:16 AM
So-called Universal Healthcare amplifies all problems because it:

1) Destroys patient incentives to find the best possible prices for the best possible services/products available.
I have worked in the health care field in various capacities for the past ten years and I see a majority of patients who currently receive "free" (read: taxpayer-funded) healthcare continually seek care for the most minor afflictions. Why wouldn't they? It's "free" to them so they visit the doctor's office several times a month. "Free" prescriptions for over-the-counter medication such as Tylenol are very common. Patients who refuse to wait for an appointment make their way to the ER for things such as headaches. If you were ever an ER nurse, I know you can verify this.

The current U.S. mostly statist healthcare system also decreases incentives to "shop around" for people who are not receiving direct taxpayer-funded care. If you are paying a set amount per month and your copay is ten dollars per office visit no matter where you go, why bother to look for a better price? Government imposed wage controls during the 1940's carry a large part of the blame for this current state of affairs. Unable to offer competitive salaries, companies started to offer healthcare benefits as a way to lure prospective employees into jobs.

2) Destroys physician incentives to provide competitive care and destroys drug companies' incentives to provide new drugs and treatments.
With no incentive to provide quality care, physicians and nurses leave the government-monopolized area for better opportunities in a freer country. Shortages result. Drug companies are hindered by price controls and regulations and soon cease research and development of new medication. In the U.S., start-up drug companies cannot afford to run the FDA gauntlet, so the market is dominated by a few established corporations.

3) Steals from your wallet to pay for my health care.
Yes, you do have a right to health care, just as you have a right to food, shelter and property. However, you have no "right" to force others to provide these things for you - All "free" medical care is paid for through taxes stolen from other people.

I know of one seemingly healthy individual who went to his physician's office 51 times in 26 months. He receives "free" health care from the State, so his trips did not cost him a dime. Who pays for his medications? Who pays for the physicians', nurses' and office staff wages during his visits? If you work within the health care industry, I would bet you could recount similar stories. In my experience, this type of abuse is the rule, not the exception.

4) The quality of "free" health care will deteriorate and the average citizen will get sicker.
As the poor and middle-class wait in agony for simple procedures, those with resources can travel to other countries for treatment. But hey, your moral arrogance and justification of coercion makes you feel good, doesn't it?

5) Destroys your privacy.
Suddenly your problems are mine and mine are yours. If you are eating unhealthy foods or driving a motorcycle without a helmet, I have a direct interest in your business - you are going to see a doctor on my tax dollars. Your neighbors might support government bans on smoking, "unsafe" sex or other "risky" behaviors to reduce costs. Politicians will use the federal bureaucracy to force you and your family to comply with programs such as the "New Freedom Commission on Mental Health".

6) Destroys your liberty.
When you blindly support a system that gives politicians and bureaucrats the power to force others to follow a plan, those politicians and bureaucrats will receive their orders from those with the most money - and you can guarantee this will not be you, your friends or your family. The power of government will be used against you as you are forced to use medicines or accept treatments from well-connected health care companies.

A quick search shows that the pharmaceutical companies gave $29,370,351 to political campaigns in 2002. Who do you think has the ear of those elected politicians? You?

On the other hand, if government power is eliminated (e.g., abolish the FDA - whose restrictions benefit the most powerful companies by eliminating most competition), those same companies would have to use their funds and resources to sell their drugs to the most people in the least expensive, most reliable and safest way. They would need to outperform their competitors to get your money - otherwise they lose business.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#intro

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:18 AM
:shrug:

Doesn't the phrase "adjusted for inflation" dollars ever seem RELEVENT in this discussion? :shrug:

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:21 AM
Didn't the phrase "adjusted for inflation" dollars ever seem RELEVENT in this discussion? :shrug:

Yeah but Congress has already appropriated $610 billion dollars. Simple math says that is almost 8.5 billion dollars a month.

Are you telling me we couldn't fund universal health care for less than 8.5 billion dollars?

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:22 AM
Ok I don't know those numbers but I would think it would be a couple of billion at least wouldn't you?

No, I think it would be around a trillion or so.

Brock
07-10-2007, 12:22 AM
Yeah but Congress has already appropriated $610 billion dollars. Simple math says that is almost 8.5 billion dollars a month.

Are you telling me we couldn't fund universal health care for less than 8.5 billion dollars?

You must be joking.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:22 AM
Yeah but Congress has already appropriated $610 billion dollars. Simple math says that is almost 8.5 billion dollars a month.

Are you telling me we couldn't fund universal health care for less than 8.5 billion dollars?

8.5 billion... ROFL..... NOOOOOOOOO

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:26 AM
You must be joking.

You think that universal health care would cost us more than $8.5 billion dollars a month?

I am curious what Medicare\Medicaid costs us each month

Brock
07-10-2007, 12:27 AM
They're projecting medicare alone will be at 4 trillion dollars per year by 2016. 20 percent of the entire budget. Now you're talking about providing health care for every person in the US, and you think it's going to come in at 8 billion per month?

Ugly Duck
07-10-2007, 12:28 AM
More companies = more collusion.

Hey.... its the Republican way!

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:28 AM
You think that universal health care would cost us more than $8.5 billion dollars a month?

I am curious what Medicare\Medicaid costs us each month


I honestly can't tell if you are joking, or just don't pay attention to this stuff.

Logical
07-10-2007, 12:29 AM
Yeah but Congress has already appropriated $610 billion dollars. Simple math says that is almost 8.5 billion dollars a month.

Are you telling me we couldn't fund universal health care for less than 8.5 billion dollars?I am afraid that is not very realistic, especially given the age of the baby boom generation.

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:32 AM
They're projecting medicare alone will be at 4 trillion dollars per year by 2016. 20 percent of the entire budget. Now you're talking about providing health care for every person in the US, and you think it's going to come in at 8 billion per month?

I realize the Medicare was going to increase because Congress passed that stupid law I forgot about that.

I looked it up yep it is going to cost alot more than I thought. California alone is proposing universal healthcare and they are estimating 12-15 billion \yr.

I would be curious if they passed universal health care if they would still keep medicare\medicaid? Wouldn't that be double coverage?

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:33 AM
I honestly can't tell if you are joking, or just don't pay attention to this stuff.

Yep I totally underestimated the cost of it all by a long shot.

So on a yearly basis we are thinking a trillion dollars?

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:34 AM
I realize the Medicare was going to increase because Congress passed that stupid law I forgot about that.

I looked it up yep it is going to cost alot more than I thought. California alone is proposing universal healthcare and they are estimating 12-15 billion \yr.

I would be curious if they passed universal health care if they would still keep medicare\medicaid? Wouldn't that be double coverage?


All the (D) candidates have different plans on who they would cover.... but they all have one major problem.... they can't pay for them.

Only Kucinich has a true universal health care plan... but still cant pay for it.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:35 AM
Yep I totally underestimated the cost of it all by a long shot.

So on a yearly basis we are thinking a trillion dollars?

I don't think anyone has the real number... but it would be substantial.

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:36 AM
....Are you telling me we couldn't fund universal health care for less than 8.5 billion dollars?

Yes. A WHOLE LOT, WHOLE LOT, WHOLE LOT....more.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 12:37 AM
http://kucinich.us/issues/universalhealth.php

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:38 AM
And how much lower would expenses be if medical costs DIDN'T include a piece of the pie for endless corporate investors, overpaid doctors, unnecessary administrators or palacial medical facilities?

It doesn't HAVE to cost a couple of thousand dollars just to walk through the door of hospital. But thanks to our system, it does.

Brock
07-10-2007, 12:39 AM
I realize the Medicare was going to increase because Congress passed that stupid law I forgot about that.

I looked it up yep it is going to cost alot more than I thought. California alone is proposing universal healthcare and they are estimating 12-15 billion \yr.

I would be curious if they passed universal health care if they would still keep medicare\medicaid? Wouldn't that be double coverage?

Point being, if the minimum, lousiest possible health care is going to cost 4 trillion dollars per year in a few years, that might indicate a small problem with Mr. Moore's math. And frankly, I've seen enough of what the government considers viable health care through the tragedy cases at VA hospitals nationwide to know that I'm not buying it.

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:40 AM
And how much lower would expenses be if medical costs DIDN'T include a piece of the pie for endless corporate investors, overpaid doctors, unnecessary administrators or palacial medical facilities?

It doesn't HAVE to cost a couple of thousand dollars just to walk through the door of hospital. But thanks to our system, it does.

So, what is your plan for all those who will become "unemployed"....if your plan is adopted. :shrug:

Fugg 'em? Right? :hmmm:

(I'm not being a smartass; I'm being serious....)

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:40 AM
Massachusetts is going to cost $1.2 billion over three years which seems fairly cheap.

Hawaii also has some sort of universal health care.

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:42 AM
Point being, if the minimum, lousiest possible health care is going to cost 4 trillion dollars per year in a few years, that might indicate a small problem with Mr. Moore's math. And frankly, I've seen enough of what the government considers viable health care through the tragedy cases at VA hospitals nationwide to know that I'm not buying it.

I definitely understand your concern.

I don't know what the best solution is I just know that he needs to get fixed and make it affordable for everyone.

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:43 AM
So, what is your plan for all those who will become "unemployed"....if your plan is adopted. :shrug:

Fugg 'em? Right? :hmmm:

(I'm not being a smartass; I'm being serious....)

You mean those dirtbags who have unjustly enriched themselves by sliming off the public good? Absolutely, f#ck 'em. 4321

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:46 AM
You mean those dirtbags who have unjustly enriched themselves by sliming off the public good? Absolutely, f#ck 'em. 4321

Wow.

Out of curriosity then; what do you think of my pet project....tort reform?

You know, ending the careers of frivilous, ambulance chasing, and blood-sucking and scum-sucking leeches (who FTR are a BIG part of medical cost increases) who consider themselves attorneys? And their supporting "staffs?" :hmmm:

Perspective is a beautiful thing, ain't it? :hmmm:

:p

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:54 AM
Wow.

Out of curriosity then; what do you think of my pet project....tort reform?

You know, ending the careers of frivilous, ambulance chasing, and blood-sucking and scum-sucking leeches (who FTR are a BIG part of medical cost increases) who consider themselves attorneys? And their supporting "staffs?" :hmmm:

Perspective is a beautiful thing, ain't it? :hmmm:

:p

Not all lawyers chase ambulances, Rob. The guys I work for do real estate.

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 12:58 AM
Not all lawyers chase ambulances, Rob. The guys I work for do real estate.

Then, it won't affect you, directly. Good.

The question remains though: tort reform? Good idea or not?

I'm looking for some consistency of thought here, Tim. :hmmm:

Frazod
07-10-2007, 12:59 AM
Then, it won't affect you, directly. Good.

The question remains though: tort reform? Good idea or not?

I'm looking for some consistency of thought here, Tim. :hmmm:
Do you think I don't know our legal system is a sick f#cking joke? Reform away, dude. But if you think lawyers are the only ones with their boot at your throat, think again.

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 01:02 AM
Do you think I don't know our legal system is a sick f#cking joke? Reform away, dude. But if you think lawyers are the only ones with their boot at your throat, think again.

I appreciate your honesty and candor. Good for you. :clap:

(heh, I guess I shouldn't have expected any different....don't know why I did, really.... :p )

Logical
07-10-2007, 01:06 AM
Wow.

Out of curriosity then; what do you think of my pet project....tort reform?

You know, ending the careers of frivilous, ambulance chasing, and blood-sucking and scum-sucking leeches (who FTR are a BIG part of medical cost increases) who consider themselves attorneys? And their supporting "staffs?" :hmmm:

Perspective is a beautiful thing, ain't it? :hmmm:

:p

Tort reform will certainly help but it is not even close to the complete answer. Medical costs themselves are through the roof.

Mr. Kotter
07-10-2007, 01:11 AM
Tort reform will certainly help but it is not even close to the complete answer. Medical costs themselves are through the roof.

I agree, that Medical reform....is necessary, and inevitable.

But the notion that anything approaching "socialized" medicine....which IS what one-payer/government run/nationalized-guaranteed healthcare WILL BE (no matter what euphemisms are used to dress it up)....that, socialized medicine is the ANSWER....to the problem, is a complete joke.

Well, it's an answer alright; but it's a damn POOR answer. Ask Britain, ask Canada...and not the nitwits and morons that Moore interviewed. But the rest of the people living under those systems.

THEIR answers would provide important insight, Duhnise. :)

patteeu
07-10-2007, 06:26 AM
Well, my personal solution would be to round up the directors and senior officers of every health insurance company and feed them all feet first through a f#cking woodchipper, one after the other, on national television. Then tell the next bunch of souless cocksuckers that rise up to replace them that health insurance needs to be affordable, and if it isn't, we can always fire up the woodchipper again.

But since that idea probably won't fly, yes, I think government must be the solution. Specifically, healthcare should NOT be a for profit enterprise.

How much confidence will you have in the healthcare system when doctors are payed like teachers and we have to import them from third world countries because our best and brightest decide to go to business school or law school instead of medical school?

BucEyedPea
07-10-2007, 06:44 AM
Massachusetts is going to cost $1.2 billion over three years which seems fairly cheap.

Hawaii also has some sort of universal health care.
I think what you fail to realize is that all cost projections for any govt endeavor, are sold on the basis of only costing a certain amount....that's the part everyone wants to hear.

The fact of the matter is that these costs usually skyrocket. For one thing, once it appears to be costless or cheap, the demand will increase. No one can predict what the demand will be exactly but it's bound to increase and that's an unknown. Just go an look at the promised costs fo medicaid, medicare and education. It's ALWAYS going to be more.

Govt can't calculate.

And if it's too expensive for individuals right now, then just think of what it's going to be collectively if you want to pay for everyone else besides yourself. I think if one were to add up their costs for seeing a doctor, even in Canada and Europe, they'd find once they factor in tax rates that they're actually paying more. Especially for young people since people use most of their healthcare when they're older. Factor in that their economies recover more slowly than the US after a recessions due to money gone from the private sector. So there's the seen versus the unseen.

Also, our system is far more high tech than other countries, as we lead in that area. However, the means the liklihood is that it will cost far more than in places like Europe where they use more low tech remedies.

Insurers and doctors are simply wrong targets. They wind up responding to bad govt policy and then get the blame. It's blowback for years of govt intervention and meddling in the healthcare markets. There was once a time in this country when doctors and patients made their own direct pay arrangements and when insurance was affordable. Then it was not as costly as it is today, adjusting for tech advances which have made many procedures cheaper with less damage and more lives saved.

What'cha all complainin' about is the end results of govt trying to make it affordable. Demanding more of the same is insane.

Frazod
07-10-2007, 09:18 AM
How much confidence will you have in the healthcare system when doctors are payed like teachers and we have to import them from third world countries because our best and brightest decide to go to business school or law school instead of medical school?

Oh yeah, that will absolutely happen, won't it? Because throughout history, nobody ever wanted to be a doctor unless they could get filthy rich in the process.

:whackit:

So how much do you pay for healthcare? Perhaps you're filthy rich enough that you don't give a shit, but the rest of us who are getting creamed would like a break.

Simply Red
07-10-2007, 09:28 AM
This is one of those times my mother told me about, something to the tune of; "If you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all."

-I'll be leaving now. :)

Brock
07-10-2007, 09:41 AM
Oh yeah, that will absolutely happen, won't it? Because throughout history, nobody ever wanted to be a doctor unless they could get filthy rich in the process.

No, they just rack up a half million in medical school tuition because they like being in debt for the rest of their lives.

Cochise
07-10-2007, 09:49 AM
I recently had occasion to be in a public health facility for several days where anyone could come and get free government health care. The best way I can summarize it is "have a seat for a couple of hours". No thanks.

But I guess I'm in the 85% of us, the winner's of life's lottery, who have insurance.

chagrin
07-10-2007, 09:53 AM
Oh yeah, that will absolutely happen, won't it? Because throughout history, nobody ever wanted to be a doctor unless they could get filthy rich in the process.

:whackit:

So how much do you pay for healthcare? Perhaps you're filthy rich enough that you don't give a shit, but the rest of us who are getting creamed would like a break.


No offense dude, but you do realize this is already happening, right? I don't know Kansas, Missouri - but I know Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan and Florida and I have an extremely hard time finding a plain ole American Doctor who doesn't have trouble speaking the language.

I believe it's very realistic...just my opinion

BucEyedPea
07-10-2007, 09:54 AM
The income of doctors varies for different types of doctors with some variation by regions too. I checked this once and I was surprised at what their general salaries were in relation to their training costs and the fact that they study until age 30.

Total compensation of Physicians by Specialty 2002
Probably rising along with inflation though since.
Anesthesiology $306,964
Surgery, general $255,438
Obstetrics/Gynecology $233,061
Internal medicine $155,530
Pediatrics/Adolescent medicine $152,690
Psychiatry $163,144
Family Practice $150,267

$150,267 - $306,964
That's an average of $229,000
Still hard to generalize as thereare specialists who make more, but who also have to do even more training which costs money and takes time. A plastic surgeon who lives in NY may only accept cash and charges what he pleases.

Now lets's compare to another profession:
Creative Director or Senior Art Director can get $120-150,000 in the Boston area ( circa 2001 even) and more in other areas; if a Graphic Designer in the LA area can make $190,000 seems to me the doctor's pay is reasonable or in fact low compared to his time and expense training. Sales is the top paying job in the US ( if your good).

Now lets's compare to another country:
France: They make about $55,000 per year :huh:

Frnce reimburses its doctors at a far lower rate than U.S. physicians would accept. However, French doctors don't have to pay back their crushing student loans because medical school is paid for by the state, and malpractice insurance premiums are a tiny fraction of the $55,000 a year and up that many U.S. doctors pay. That $55,000 equals the average yearly net income for French doctors, a third of what their American counterparts earn. Then again, the French government pays two-thirds of the social security tax for most French physicians—a tax that's typically 40% of income . . .

. . . Many French doctors, in fact, earn more by increasing their patient load, or by prescribing more diagnostic tests and procedures—a technique, also popular in the U.S., that inflates health-care costs.


http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/06/physician-salaries-would-french-model.html

Cochise
07-10-2007, 09:56 AM
How much confidence will you have in the healthcare system when doctors are payed like teachers and we have to import them from third world countries because our best and brightest decide to go to business school or law school instead of medical school?

No kidding. The government has done so well with public education, why not let them do surgery on us too?

But I guess these are a lot of the same people who think communism really is the best way, it just got bogged down in debt trying to protect itself from the mean ol' United States

Frazod
07-10-2007, 09:58 AM
No offense dude, but you do realize this is already happening, right? I don't know Kansas, Missouri - but I know Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan and Florida and I have an extremely hard time finding a plain ole American Doctor who doesn't have trouble speaking the language.

I believe it's very realistic...just my opinion
And how much of this is because of the ridiculous costs associated with malpractice insurance? Again, we're back to the lawyers.

Plus, you know the AMA limits the amount of new medical students every year, right?

Shortage of doctors = higher pay for the few.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 10:05 AM
The income of doctors varies for different types of doctors with some variation by regions too. I checked this once and I was surprised at what their general salaries were in relation to their training costs and the fact that they study until age 30.

Total compensation of Physicians by Specialty 2002
Probably rising along with inflation though since.
Anesthesiology $306,964
Surgery, general $255,438
Obstetrics/Gynecology $233,061
Internal medicine $155,530
Pediatrics/Adolescent medicine $152,690
Psychiatry $163,144
Family Practice $150,267

$150,267 - $306,964
That's an average of $229,000
Still hard to generalize as thereare specialists who make more, but who also have to do even more training which costs money and takes time. A plastic surgeon who lives in NY may only accept cash and charges what he pleases.

Now lets's compare to another profession:
Creative Director or Senior Art Director can get $120-150,000 in the Boston area ( circa 2001 even) and more in other areas; if a Graphic Designer in the LA area can make $190,000 seems to me the doctor's pay is reasonable or in fact low compared to his time and expense training. Sales is the top paying job in the US ( if your good).

Now lets's compare to another country:
France: They make about $55,000 per year :huh:




http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/06/physician-salaries-would-french-model.html


Thanks for posting this.... I really like looking at the numbers when it comes to issues like this.

My thought is that it would be much easier to fix the current system, rather then starting all over with the goverment running things. I don't disagree that something must be done. However I think taking market based approaches like competion would be much better.

recxjake
07-10-2007, 10:08 AM
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M5UV8ej4uAI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M5UV8ej4uAI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Hate em or love em.... This is a great answer.... and a much more realistic approach

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 10:12 AM
I recently had occasion to be in a public health facility for several days where anyone could come and get free government health care. The best way I can summarize it is "have a seat for a couple of hours". No thanks.

But I guess I'm in the 85% of us, the winner's of life's lottery, who have insurance.

How is that different than in any emergency room in the US? Shit I know people who have waited up to 8-10 hrs just to get into the emergency room.

Cochise
07-10-2007, 10:29 AM
How is that different than in any emergency room in the US? Shit I know people who have waited up to 8-10 hrs just to get into the emergency room.

I've never had to wait even 10 minutes. So what? The statement is useless without the context of where they went, what the injury was, and a census of who else was there with what injuries.

It doesn't really matter though, I could say that I go into a private one and see generally a pretty efficient and high-quality operation and the public ones are dirty, overcrowded, and horribly slow but people would still cry for public care because it's "free".

There's nothing wrong with this system for 85% of us, it's one of if not the best system in the world. But politicians who need an issue to drive turnout in the next election cycle have invented in the minds of many voters that communist health care is just what the world needs, it's an emergency and we can't survive another 4 years without it.

As usual, we see the solution of liberalism to a perceived social problem. Just a little more government. That's always the answer, isn't it? There's a problem? Oh, it's simple, we just need a little more government. Come on, this isn't a big change - we just need a little more goverment. Give them a little more power, let the government control this too, if we become a little more dependent on the government teat everything will finally be perfect. Until the next election cycle. Then there will be another dire need for government annexation.

BucEyedPea
07-10-2007, 10:31 AM
Medical expenses ARE rising faster than the cost of any other service—
faster than inflation and dollar depreciation.

• 40 years go medical spending was 5% of national income
• today it is 16.5 % and rising continually

In the meantime the number of Americans with health insurance IS declining with more employees cutting benefits too. At the present, some 47 million Americans are bereft of any coverage.

Let’s take a look at some causes:
1965 Social Security amendment
• Medicare for those over 65
• Medicaid for the needy

Results:
Then
• 4 million patients sought treatment immediately
•18 million Americans registered to have 80 percent of doctor and surgeon bills paid by the new system

Also consider we didn't have govt pay for number of other things as we do today that we're taxed on either...so more money is in the private sector I'd imagine.

Today
•Medicare - 41 million elderly and disabled persons are on it
•Medicaid, a joint federal-state program- 50 million poor beneficiaries ; is the fastest-growing item in most state budgets accounting for some 20 percent of total state spending.
( Illegals? I know one,here, that got her baby delivered for free. BabyBoomers aging?)

It may improve the standard of living and save lives for some
but it is done at the expense of others like those of us complaining about costs today, myself included.

Numbers from this article:
Why is Medical Care so Expensive? (http://www.mises.org/story/2285)

BucEyedPea
07-10-2007, 10:37 AM
How is that different than in any emergency room in the US? Shit I know people who have waited up to 8-10 hrs just to get into the emergency room.
I would say this also has to do with the govt as well such as mandating that no one be turned down due to lack of money or insurance. Throw the illegals in and you have an overdemand making longer lines. Again, the seen and the unseen.

Cochise
07-10-2007, 10:41 AM
I would say this also has to do with the govt as well such as mandating that no one be turned down due to lack of money or insurance. Throw the illegals in and you have an overdemand making longer lines. Again, the seen and the unseen.

Go to an emergency room in a place with a high illegal population, and guess what you will see.

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 11:39 AM
I've never had to wait even 10 minutes. So what? The statement is useless without the context of where they went, what the injury was, and a census of who else was there with what injuries.

It doesn't really matter though, I could say that I go into a private one and see generally a pretty efficient and high-quality operation and the public ones are dirty, overcrowded, and horribly slow but people would still cry for public care because it's "free".

There's nothing wrong with this system for 85% of us, it's one of if not the best system in the world. But politicians who need an issue to drive turnout in the next election cycle have invented in the minds of many voters that communist health care is just what the world needs, it's an emergency and we can't survive another 4 years without it.

As usual, we see the solution of liberalism to a perceived social problem. Just a little more government. That's always the answer, isn't it? There's a problem? Oh, it's simple, we just need a little more government. Come on, this isn't a big change - we just need a little more goverment. Give them a little more power, let the government control this too, if we become a little more dependent on the government teat everything will finally be perfect. Until the next election cycle. Then there will be another dire need for government annexation.

Well you are one of the lucky ones. I had 3rd degree burns on my hand and I had to wait 4 hrs and I know alot of people that wait hrs to get in to the emergency room. I realize that an emergency room is alot different then just going into a doctor's office but if you don't have an appointment you wait regardless. Hell even if you have an appointment you have to wait.

Your statement that the system works for 85% is a joke. It is probably reversed. I don't have the solutions but It does need fixing. When people have take out small loans to pay for insurance then there is a problem.

As far as the illegals go I totally agree. IMHO they should be denied any care except if they are about to die. If they want care go back to Mexico but quit wasting American hard-earned money by paying for non-citizens healthcare. That includes Gitmo.

penchief
07-10-2007, 11:45 AM
Are you friggin' INSANE, now, on top of being totally bat-shit crazy??? :spock:

Moore looked like the completely moronic bafoon Moonbat idiot that he is....unless, of course, you SHARE his moonbat bloodlines, in which case you wouldn't see it. :rolleyes:

LMAO LMAO LMAO

The corporate media, including CNN, did facilitate the 'March to War' with the enthusiasm of a 16 year-old cheerleader and without regard for the purpose of their existence.

Generally, the corporate media (including CNN) is not doing it's job. On that point I agree completely with Moore.

StcChief
07-10-2007, 11:53 AM
More like deflecting to respond to a Doctor critizing Sicko by going off topic.

Radar Chief
07-10-2007, 11:54 AM
Well you are one of the lucky ones. I had 3rd degree burns on my hand and I had to wait 4 hrs and I know alot of people that wait hrs to get in to the emergency room.

Wow dirk, you should probably take it easy on the porn from now on. ;)

Frazod
07-10-2007, 11:58 AM
The corporate media, including CNN, did facilitate the 'March to War' with the enthusiasm of a 16 year-old cheerleader and without regard for the purpose of their existence.

Generally, the corporate media (including CNN) is not doing it's job. On that point I agree completely with Moore.

Oh, they're doing their jobs perfectly. It's just that the job description has changed from challenge and inform to terrify and distract.

"And tonight on Fox, Britt Hume discusses in detail exactly how easy it would be for terrorists to attack every nuclear power plant in the country. But first, tonight's top story - Rosie O'Donnell accidently eats a papparazzi photographer!"

:shake:

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 12:31 PM
Wow dirk, you should probably take it easy on the porn from now on. ;)

LMAO

You're probably right. :banghead:

ROFL

patteeu
07-10-2007, 12:52 PM
Oh yeah, that will absolutely happen, won't it? Because throughout history, nobody ever wanted to be a doctor unless they could get filthy rich in the process.

:whackit:

So how much do you pay for healthcare? Perhaps you're filthy rich enough that you don't give a shit, but the rest of us who are getting creamed would like a break.

It's absolutely already happening in some places that have nationalized healthcare. England is importing doctors from the 3rd world. That's, at least in part, how the recent terror threat developed.

go bowe
07-10-2007, 01:02 PM
we import doctors too...

mainly because american medical schools aren't fillng / can't fill the needs of our health systems...

gblowfish
07-10-2007, 01:04 PM
For the amount we pay every year for the Iraq war, we could have affordable universal health care.

Brock
07-10-2007, 01:11 PM
For the amount we pay every year for the Iraq war, we could have affordable universal health care.

Like that point hasn't already been disproved.

go bowe
07-10-2007, 01:15 PM
For the amount we pay every year for the Iraq war, we could have affordable universal health care.and rebuild cities struck by disaster, and increase the number of scholarships for college, and on and on...

but, hey, none of these things is important to those who have set the priorities for our government (dick cheney)...

no, paying back saddammit and attempting to establish a democratic ally in the region are far more important than anything our own people might need...

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 01:30 PM
It's absolutely already happening in some places that have nationalized healthcare. England is importing doctors from the 3rd world. That's, at least in part, how the recent terror threat developed.

I work for a mental health company and 98% of our doctors are all Arabs.

go bowe
07-10-2007, 01:41 PM
I work for a mental health company and 98% of our doctors are all Arabs.mental health?

btw, if you can learn arabic by working there, you could get a really interesting and well paid job as an interpreter for the american army...

or, if you would rather stay in america, there's the fbi, cia, nsa, all need arabic speakers...

patteeu
07-10-2007, 01:43 PM
I work for a mental health company and 98% of our doctors are all Arabs.

It's a new undercover al Qaeda operation to turn our mentally unstable citizens against us!!

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 01:47 PM
mental health?

btw, if you can learn arabic by working there, you could get a really interesting and well paid job as an interpreter for the american army...

or, if you would rather stay in america, there's the fbi, cia, nsa, all need arabic speakers...

I am in the IT department I have nothing to do with the clients or the doctors.

I wish I would have learned Arabic it would be cool to be an interpreter.

dirk digler
07-10-2007, 01:48 PM
It's a new undercover al Qaeda operation to turn our mentally unstable citizens against us!!

It could work too. Seriously some these doctors go to some weird web sites in Arabic I probably need to investigate some more.

BucEyedPea
07-10-2007, 02:08 PM
Well you are one of the lucky ones. I had 3rd degree burns on my hand and I had to wait 4 hrs and I know alot of people that wait hrs to get in to the emergency room. I realize that an emergency room is alot different then just going into a doctor's office but if you don't have an appointment you wait regardless. I wonder how many people overuse emergency rooms?
I not being rhetorical here, nor am I saying you did this with your burns. I just really wonder. I thought I heard something regarding this at one time that some don't use it for the right reason.

Hell even if you have an appointment you have to wait.

If you think it's bad now. I could get worse as we make a gauranteed market for doctors.

go bowe
07-10-2007, 02:20 PM
It's a new undercover al Qaeda operation to turn our mentally unstable citizens against us!!wow, good thing you blew their cover, mr. cheney ... :Poke:

Baby Lee
07-10-2007, 02:27 PM
I work for a mental health company and 98% of our doctors are all Arabs.
It's called Sex Panther by Odeon, . . They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time.

Taco John
07-10-2007, 03:05 PM
Seriously, for any sane/rational/reasonable person to IMAGINE that Moore got the best of that exchange....:spock:

you'd have to be GD batshit Moonbat crazy. I'm serious.... LMAO



I was listening to John Gibson's radio show last night, and he thought that Michael Moore got the best of that exchange. Listening to it, I tended to agree with him. Blitzer sounded flustered and confused.

Baby Lee
07-10-2007, 03:12 PM
I was listening to John Gibson's radio show last night, and he thought that Michael Moore got the best of that exchange. Listening to it, I tended to agree with him. Blitzer sounded flustered and confused.
My take is, the viewers got the worst of the exchange.
All it needed was Jon Stewart calling one or the other of them a dick.

Taco John
07-10-2007, 04:08 PM
All it needed was Jon Stewart calling one or the other of them a dick.


I'm pretty sure that's coming tonight... ;)

memyselfI
07-10-2007, 04:24 PM
Apparently BOTH Michael Moore and Sanjay Gupta are going to be on Larry King Live this evening. They did not say whether they'd be on at the same time but if they are then I think that would be a good debate...unlike with Wolf who basically choked.