Regular News-Please Read


#1

I know many people had an issue with the late breaking news section since not all news warrants such a title. Here you can post anything that is news worthy.

Please remember when citing a story do not post the entire article, the way to do it is to post one or two paragraphs and link to the rest of the article’s source.


#2

Even though I think I understand the distinction, I think have two news forums could prove confusing. I’ve always felt that a little thought was all it took to find the right forum from the choices available for a lesser news or news-related story.


#3

I always start a thread that would be considered late breaking news. I have noticed that people are complaining about the subject.

I think it’s very fair to allow news worthy threads to be posted. Having another topic adds to this forum. Thanks, T.O.

I like the new thread you created for “Tea Parties”. I think this may attract some new people that are interested in organizing or participating:)


#4

Hmm what do I post here?!!


#5

Come on NewC. Start a thread. Use your imagination:biggrin:


#6

It’s too early for NewC wittiness. Give it a few hours. Women and their demands. :no:


#7

That’s what she said.


#8

Advice noted ! I’ve been thinking it appropriate to post a segment of an article when just adding a post … but that posting an entire article was the best thing to do if or when adding a new thread. I shall now rethink that one.


#9

I think this is a great idea.

Gives news junkies like myself a place to hang out.


#10

As a Curosity Drummond can I ask if you are British?

I see the Union jack but guns firing at socialism, this confuses me because the topic of Socialism in the USA is currently targeted at our health care system. In the UK you have socialized medicine and most people in or from the UK, like that system better then ours. Why does it work there and not here (I sound like Michael Moore scary)


#11

I’m betting Drummond will tell you it doesn’t.


#12

:yes:

.


#13

But it does work there, which is in which the paradox is.

We may not like the Canadian system but Canadians seem to like it,

Canadians may not like our system, but unfortunately we don’t like our system either.

Feel free to change the reference of Canada to Britain, Ireland, or Cuba for that matter. You may find the overall scary veiw of Socialized medicine in THE US, is not if it would work, but how to pay for it.

You will find that at least in Britain and Ireland they also have the VAT which would in my opinion be the perfect trade off as far as the politics of Left and Right are concerned here in the US.


#14

Then why is it that they come down here to get procedures they can’t get up there. I do know a bunch that get their prescriptions up there, but there are more that come this way. Under the Canadian plan, things like dialysis
have a term limit. After you run out of time, your out of time! This is regardless if you have a new Kidney or not. Those that like the socialized systems are those that are healthy. You get sick your screwed.


#15

EV is Canadian. According to him, it works reasonably well in his small town area. This is especially true with things that can be regularly treated–like his diabetes. He also mentioned a surgery that his daughter needed where things went well.

If I remember correctly, where his concerns were heightened was if anyone in his family had to go to a specialist. This is where things can start looking bad. However, this is from memory and I encourage EV to come here and correct me where I am wrong.

We now some people that live in Toronto–a large congested city. They were telling me that more an more people are moving into the Canadians cities and choking the health care system. Many of these are immigrants taking advanage of Canada’s LEGAL immigration policies that are more lax than that of the US. A side benefit is free health care on the backs o the Canadian tax payer.

So, in all fairness, one could say that the Canadian system works well for those that live in less congested areas that don’t grow in population as fast as urban areas provided that they don’t need some of the more rare medical specialists.


#16

I am not sure how anybody could come here for a procedure as the temp insurance Canadians get will not cover existing conditions, it only covers emergency issue that come up when they travel here.

Out of pocket a simple 1 hour procedure with an orthopedist costs about 30k. Thank goodness my ex-wife had a good insurance policy, she only has to pay 5k out of pocket. Unfortunately most Americans do not have an excess 5k to spend on elbow pain and insted turn to illegal drugs.
I do not see how this is a good system we have here when only 1/3 of US citizens are insured, 1/3 get it for free or just don’t pay (illegal immigrants and welfare folk) and the other 1/3 just (who actualy have jobs but cannot afford insurance) just pray they never get hurt or die because they are not poor enough to get it for free.

I used to listen to Rush, but he once said “if you want healthcare get a better job that offers it”. Its sounds real easy, but that there will always be another who is not covered even if you got a better job.
I have thought that it should also become part of the minimum wage standard, but that will not work with the excessive cost of health care in the US. I hate to say it but until the “profit” is taken out of health care we are stuck. The only real issue with socialized medicine will be preventing abuse and also finding a way of innovation in medicine when its not driven by profit.


#17

Why not take the profit out of everything? If it’s good for one thing, ain’t it good for another? And another? What about taking the profit out of healthcare will make it affordable and useful? Why won’t the principal apply equally to all exchanges?


#18

abuse is the main failure of the communist and socialist systems. Those who work harder and not rewarded for such. We see this in unions here, and to a degree I agree with you (considering your being sarcastic or just questioning).

All I am saying is that our current system isn’t working as well. The argument over health care reform has been tossed around since Bush the Sr. and things are just getting worse. How is our quasi-private system going to work is the question?

I think that our current system doesn’t work because those that control it are so greedy that they would deny an issured person the care they are entitled (entitled being that they HAVE issurance) for the sake of profit. How do you make our system work (covering everyone fairly) with out becoming socialized?

I find our healthcare system hardly acceptable. If you really want it private then the government should end all funding to hospitals, medical research, grants, scholarships ect to medical schools too, and end government subsidised loans to medical students. This may be extreame, but why should one pay for services they cannot get


#19

[quote=“americanangry, post:18, topic:19189”]
abuse is the main failure of the communist and socialist systems. Those who work harder and not rewarded for such. We see this in unions here, and to a degree I agree with you (considering your being sarcastic or just questioning).

All I am saying is that our current system isn’t working as well. The argument over health care reform has been tossed around since Bush the Sr. and things are just getting worse. How is our quasi-private system going to work is the question?

I think that our current system doesn’t work because those that control it are so greedy that they would deny an issured person the care they are entitled (entitled being that they HAVE issurance) for the sake of profit. How do you make our system work (covering everyone fairly) with out becoming socialized?

I find our healthcare system hardly acceptable.
[/quote]My questions are questions one should answer before engaging a socialist system. We exchange the most basic of life’s necessities in a free market with little to no problem. The main interventions in that market are deliberately designed to prop up prices, while the other primary intervention is to provide it free to some. It’s food. The interventions are significantly less than in healthcare, yet it works pretty well. Profiteers get rich at our expense, taking advantage of our needs to make a profit. Wouldn’t it be wise to eliminate the profit motive there too, make it fair?

You seem most concerned with what little remains of a free market in healthcare and the profit motive. Perhaps it’s actual government regulation that helps drive up the price. Perhaps it’s actual government intervening on behalf of corporations that helps sustain profits. Perhaps it’s free healthcare provided to some large portion of our population that distorts the supply-demand curves, creating overpriced healthcare for hangnails. Perhaps it’s Democrat taxes on a voluntary exchange (and I am not rich – most folks would laugh at me if they saw my paycheck) that increase the cost of my insurance (on individuals and small business that purchase their own insurance policies) in an effort to increase the base of uninsured citizens and bolster an argument that we “need” healthcare. Oddly, on my miserly paycheck, I have been able to purchase health insurance even with today’s costs.

But most important of all, who are you or the Messiah or any other person to require me to make a purchase I don’t want to make. If I don’t want to buy health insurance or healthcare, what can possibly justify you forcing me to do so? My questions are not sarcastic, but they are questions you should consider before coercing me (and other citizens) into purchases I may or may not wish to make.

Furthermore, it is anything but a given that socialized healthcare actually “works better” than healthcare provided under a free enterprise model. I find our healthcare system entirely unacceptable as it stands today, but the answer is not more of the same thing that created the economic distortions and high costs – Government regulations.

As for your opening statement, abuse is not the failure to socialism or communism. The failure of socialism and communism is that it holds as a goal treating all folks precisely the same way. Individual success is discouraged. Talents are not properly rewarded. The value of one person’s labor is not recognized properly when we recognize those values inherently in our own willingness or unwillingness to do a task or pay another. It subjects individual lives and wills to the “common good” or the “good of the whole.” It requires a man sacrifice his own life to another man’s needs through coercion. Socialism and communism look as bad on paper as they do in the real world.

[quote=“americanangry, post:18, topic:19189”]
If you really want it private then the government should end all funding to hospitals, medical research, grants, scholarships ect to medical schools too, and end government subsidised loans to medical students. This may be extreame, but why should one pay for services they cannot get
[/quote]Indeed. Good goal.


#20

I’ve only just seen this … otherwise I’d have leaped in here earlier with my reply.

To answer you … YES, I am British. I post from London, England … and my registered location here of ‘Blighty’ should’ve perhaps tipped you off as to my origin !

The Union Jack, but guns firing at Socialism … that’s all part of my signature when I post. You’ll find all of my posts bear the same effect, regardless of what I’m posting to, on whatever thread. Personally … I consider it a highly appropriate answer to give to the whole subject of Socialism.

My hope, goal, prayer … call it what you will … is that one day Socialism in all its guises will be swept clear off the face of this planet, to be universally regarded with the same disgust as Hitler’s NATIONAL SOCIALISM is today. It shouldn’t be forgotten, EVER … but it should be seen as the enslaving social cancer to the human spirit that it truly is.

I hope I’ve expressed myself clearly enough.

… As to the British NHS system. Well, I might surprise a few people by confirming that it DOES work. I can’t reasonably claim otherwise. But, here’s what I can also say about the British experience of socialised healthcare … it works just barely adequately. It is a second-rate system, where most citizens are dependent upon it for their healthcare needs … coming close to a ‘putting all your eggs in one basket’ solution.

Private healthcare does exist here, but has only a small share of the total healthcare burden. Those paying for it for themselves and their families are still obligated to pay for the State system regardless, via taxation.

NHS care is free at point of delivery … but it’s NOT free as such. Whether ill or well, whatever your circumstances, the burden to pay still exists for every taxpayer.

Some facts for you to digest …

The British NHS was the first in the world - it’s existed ever since 1948. The massive set-up burden of it was VERY costly … I believe it fair to say that it nearly bankrupted our economy back then.

Since then, it’s limped along. Occasionally brilliant … more usually mediocre … and sometimes it fails so badly that people die because of it.

Note that our NHS relies heavily for its functioning on labour, medical expertised, imported from various parts of the world. Without that influx of assistance from foreign health workers (doctors, nurses and the like) the NHS would fall apart.

From the Guardian, a LEFTIE newspaper …

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jun/18/nhs60.nhs2

Quote …

The history of the NHS is also a history of economic migration. Practically from its conception, the health service suffered acute shortages of staff, and that shortfall was met then, as it is now, by “importing” nurses, doctors and auxiliary staff from overseas.

Archive pictures of the birth of the health service show an almost uniformly white-skinned workforce, although many of those nurses would be Irish-born. Within a few years, the ethnic mix of the NHS was radically more diverse, especially in cities, and in the so-called “Cinderella” specialities such as mental health and geriatric care.

The Caribbean was a primary source of nurses …

I can give you one personal experience of NHS care that I’d term ‘horrific’. My mother contracted meningitis … and spent the last five days of her life in hospital. The hospital in question was a TEACHING hospital, where standards should - theoretically - be especially high. But my mother was admitted to hospital (after waiting several hours in a hospital corridor for an available bed !!) - she spent her five days there - and died.

Her illness was NEVER diagnosed during that five day period. A post mortem (autopsy) ‘had’ to be performed to determine what she had died from !!

Could she have been saved, had medical standards there been even slightly competent during those FIVE days ??? I will never know.

This is a personal account … make of it what you will.

As for other stories showing how ‘wonderful’ our NHS is … would you care to check these links out ?

http://www.expressandstar.com/2008/07/03/sad-tales-of-nhs-failure/

Quote …

My father is retired and is therefore able to go to the doctors whenever he needs to. He never has a problem getting an appointment. He had a heart attack some years ago and received excellent care from his local surgery and hospital.

My husband has always received faultless service whenever he has been hospitalised, so have my stepsons.

My mother and myself have had nothing but a complete catalogue of errors because it seems very much to me that unless you go to the doctors/hospital with something obvious and are a man, no one takes you very seriously.

I went back and forth from doctors and various hospitals between the ages of 5 to 24 with a painful urinary complaint which I had suffered with from birth. The mistreatment, misdiagnoses, horribly rude consultants and errors experienced during those years would fill several blogs!

From the Health Service Journal …

http://www.hsj.co.uk/mental-health/distressing-failures-in-nhs-care-for-people-with-learning-disabilities/2007502.article

Quote …

A report into the deaths of six people with learning disabilities has uncovered “significant and distressing” failures in services across health and social care.

The joint report by the health service ombudsman and the local government ombudsman found one person died as a consequence of public service failure.

It is likely the death of another person could have been avoided, had the care and treatment provided not fallen so far below standard, it said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/nhs-failures-blamed-for-superbug-rise-in-hospitals-553113.html

Quote …

Rates of potentially fatal hospital superbug infections are continuing to rise because of chronic failures by the NHS to deal with the problem, a report published today shows.

The study by the National Audit Office (NAO) found that dirty wards, poor hygiene among medical staff and financial pressures on NHS trusts meant hundreds of people a year were dying unnecessarily from bugs they contract in hospital.

Four years after it published its first, damning report on the extent of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) in the NHS, a follow-up study by the NAO has found that many of its original recommendations have still not been implemented.

Sir John Bourn, comptroller and auditor general of the NAO, said: "I am concerned that, four years on from my original report, the NHS still does not have a proper grasp of the extent and cost of hospital-acquired infection in trusts.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-102821347.html

Quote …

***MINISTERS were today accused of using “spin” and “distortion” to cover up NHS failures in an extraordinary attack by a senior spending watchdog. ***

***James Strachan, new chairman of the Audit Commission, claimed that health service chiefs were cutting spending in key areas and diverting the money into efforts to shorten waiting lists in time for elections. ***

***He spoke out as he published a report claiming that too many “piecemeal targets” were diverting doctors’ priorities away from treating patients most in need. ***

Note that last one. State-run healthcare means you put your health largely under the control of politicians who may wish to tinker with what they are ‘pleased’ to supply, in order to gain a selfish political advantage for themselves.

I ask: should healthcare become a political football, or actually a SERVICE provided for the sake of MEDICAL NEED ??

Folks … after SIXTY years of running the UK’s State system, you’d imagine that by now it would’ve been perfected to be something ‘superb’ … yes ?

… SO HOW COME THAT OUR NHS, AFTER SIX DECADES IN EXISTENCE, IS STILL STRUGGLING WITH HORRIFIC FAILURES ??