Lol at USA

[zwhit]

Bill Gates would still get the heart in Australia

 

[trex74]

it depends

just becoz someone has a high paying job while the other moves grocery bags does not nessecarily mean one should have priorty over health,

we can use a more drastic and exagerated example to demonstarte my point, lets say you and bill gates require a heart transplant, and theres only 1 heart, who should be entitled the right to live?

u might think this is a over drastic example, but ill show you how it applies to the overall

remeber that the health care system has only limited resources (the one heart in previous example), that is there are only so many doctors, organ donners etc.

About the heart transplant, there is (in Ontario, Canada at least) a specific rating system to determine who gets the heart first. I suspect it is the same even in the U.S. Bill Gates might be out of luck
This rating, from 1-4 (4 being highest) is determined by how sick you are, how many IV medications you are on, and whether or not you have had recent surgery (for example for a bridge heart/LVAD, ICD or pacemaker). Then other factors come into play like bodyweight and size, age, and other medical conditions.
I don't know why Canadians bash Americans, it's kind of a waste of time really.

 

[mrplunkey]

just becoz someone has a high paying job while the other moves grocery bags does not nessecarily mean one should have priorty over health

They already do.

Higher income earners can afford to live in a safer area.
... and eat healthier food.
... and drive a safer car.
... and receive training in diet and exercise.
... and a whole host of other features beneficial to health

This notion that somehow health care should be carved out and special is absurd. If people really believe health care is a matter of fairness, then they should be for nationalizing every other aspect of health and safety as well.

 

[trex74]

They already do.

Higher income earners can afford to live in a safer area.
... and eat healthier food.
... and drive a safer car.
... and receive training in diet and exercise.
... and a whole host of other features beneficial to health

This notion that somehow health care should be carved out and special is absurd. If people really believe health care is a matter of fairness, then they should be for nationalizing every other aspect of health and safety as well.

By this logic health care should only be for the genetically superior. Money can buy you a lot of things, but if your ancestors had some kind of inheritable cancer, maybe you don't deserve health care because your genes are inferior and expensive to treat.
This too would save government money, lots of it! Eugenics could definitely help out here too. lol

 

[bakemeacookie]

Fixing healthcare is easy. Expand the resources.

More medical school graduates, more medical colleges, more scholarships, more hosptials, more beds, more equipment, more weight loss resources, more foreign docs, more outpatient resources, more nurses, etc.

Thank you all. Remember me next november when Cookie for President comes into your town.

c

 

[mrplunkey]

By this logic health care should only be for the genetically superior. Money can buy you a lot of things, but if your ancestors had some kind of inheritable cancer, maybe you don't deserve health care because your genes are inferior and expensive to treat.
This too would save government money, lots of it! Eugenics could definitely help out here too. lol

How could you ever possibly make that leap? Please do me a favor here: Start with my post you quoted and walk me through how you'd ever get to your comment I bolded above.

 

[digimon7068]

They already do.

Higher income earners can afford to live in a safer area.
... and eat healthier food.
... and drive a safer car.
... and receive training in diet and exercise.
... and a whole host of other features beneficial to health

This notion that somehow health care should be carved out and special is absurd. If people really believe health care is a matter of fairness, then they should be for nationalizing every other aspect of health and safety as well.

i'm with the plunkster...the more hand outs you have, the less the incentive to get ahead...entitlement breeds laziness...and, if we truly are falling behind the rest of the world, from an educational standpoint, then entitlements will simply exacerbate that slide.

and, once again, i will reiterate my argument that the u.s. doesn't have any truly poor people...one trait that almost every "poor" person (in the u.s.) i know shares is obesity...now, compare our poor people to their poor counterparts in the rest of the world and you'll notice a great disparity in that one characteristic...the po' folks outside of the u.s. ain't fat...in fact, a lot of them look like they're fucking starving to death, 'cuz they are.

 

[billfred]

They already do.

Higher income earners can afford to live in a safer area.
... and eat healthier food.
... and drive a safer car.
... and receive training in diet and exercise.
... and a whole host of other features beneficial to health

This notion that somehow health care should be carved out and special is absurd. If people really believe health care is a matter of fairness, then they should be for nationalizing every other aspect of health and safety as well.

Also, look at it on pure economics. Who is going to provide more income back to the state after a heart transplant? Bill Gates or the dude sacking groceries?

 

[trex74]

The fact that richer people can afford these things more easily than poor people does not make them more deserving of good health. Just because poor people are more of a drain on government resources does not mean they deserve to die/be sick/suffer.
Health care is a basic human right no matter where you come from, where you live, or how much money you make.
Discriminating against somebody based on their income is as ludicrous as discriminating against somebody because they are genetically inferior. Or a commoner. Or black. Or white.
In some cases it can't be helped. Does not the young child of a laid-off worker deserve medical treatment?
Does not the deaf and dumb person unable to get a job deserve a specialist?
Does not a schizophrenic deserve free medication?

 

[mrplunkey]

The fact that richer people can afford these things more easily than poor people does not make them more deserving of good health. Just because poor people are more of a drain on government resources does not mean they deserve to die/be sick/suffer.
Health care is a basic human right no matter where you come from, where you live, or how much money you make.
Discriminating against somebody based on their income is as ludicrous as discriminating against somebody because they are genetically inferior. Or a commoner. Or black. Or white.
In some cases it can't be helped. Does not the young child of a laid-off worker deserve medical treatment?
Does not the deaf and dumb person unable to get a job deserve a specialist?
Does not a schizophrenic deserve free medication?

Your leap of logic still didn't work, but I'll run with your premise:

Does not the laid off worker deserve a safe house in a good community?

Does not the deaf and dumb person deserve a safe automobile?

Does not a schizophrenic deserve access to all-organic, locally-grown food prepared for them at least three meals a day?

It's odd how you would give someone health services but be unwilling to pay for the prevention necessary to keep those services from being unnecessary. What a typical American attitude!

Know the best way to treat a gunshot wound? Put someone in a nice gated community so they never get shot.

Know the best way to treat a heart condition? Insure someone has access to state-of-the art training and conditioning as well as a pristine diet for their entire lives.

Know the best way to treat a polytrauma pelvic fracture? Put them in a big, nice BMW car that will protect them in the first place.

This half-hearted approach to rights is disconcerting. If you're gonna be a bear, be a grizzly.