"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ps.com...
KMAN, I was pleased with the effort Tink took to get a handle
on this
situation. And, from my own perspective, I've done some reading
about
various systems and have at least a passing acquaintance with a
variety
of European models (I now know the difference between the
Beveridge and
the Bismark approaches to healthcare funding). In that sense,
all of
this has been useful for me.

It's too bad rick could never see the value in such discourse.
====================
LOL I tried, fool. All I got was a bunch of jingoistic
chest-thumping lies. I provided sites that showed the problem,
and all I got from the very start were lies. Try having a
reasonable discourse with yourself.



frtzw906

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
Tink says:
==============
FOCUS! He only said that some have died while waiting for a Medical
Test or Procedure.
==============

Tink, thanks for what you've done here; you've provided a conciliatory
tone. Look, I don't know KMAN, but from his posts, I can well imagine
where he was coming from (insofar as I felt the same way but was
disinclined to carry on a discussion with one as one-tracked as rick).
Over here, in the Great White North, inundated as we are with American
media, we constantly hear the ignorant bleatings of the American
right-wing. And this nonsense about people "dying while on a waiting
list" is one of those bits of nonsense.

So let's step back a bit. Do people die on waiting lists? Of course
they do. We're talking about illnesses and medicine. How could people
NOT die on waiting lists. And that applies to waiting lists in Canada,
Sweden, Germany, and the United States. People die on waiting lists
PERIOD. OK, we've gotten that out of the way.

I'll not speak for KMAN, but from where I'm looking at the discussion,
I suspect KMAN is smart enough to realise this as well. I react (I
suppose KMAN does) to the nonsense we hear from south of the 49th -- it
is exactly as the one article you recommended says; exceedingly long
waiting lists are very rare and talk about them is just media hype.

For us (and for citizens of all nations) the public debate about
medicine is part economic, part ethical, and part philosophical. As you
pointed out, after doing extensive reading about our system, you've
learned that our system is quite good at early intervention (nobody has
to ask whether or not they can afford it), it is good at providing for
the poor and the indigent. And, as you so eloquently put it, good at
raising the general level of health care in the populace. On principle,
we believe that need, not money, should determine where you are in the
waiting list.

As with most systems, there is an economic component. Emphasis on one
element of healthcare generally means that another aspect gets fewer
resources. So, given the emphasis and benefits listed above, there are
likely to be waiting lists in some other parts of the system. The
question that we, as a society, have to answer is, "Are we willing to
tolerate a 3 month waiting time for joint replacement surgery if it
means that we'll have generally higher health standards or greater
accessability for the entire populace?" We've answered "Yes". Americans
continue to answer "No".

To sum up: I think KMAN's responses are less "jingoistic chest
thumping" as rick likes to call it, and more frustrated responses to
right-wing nonsense fed by a media machine.

Tink, I hope you brought this ping-ponging to and end. Thanks.

frtzw906

What would make things easier in the future is if I could send you my
posts and you could edit them for me before posting!

You've captured it perfectly. I got so frustrated with rick's spew that I
tried to pin him down and make him focus more on his wild claims about
Canadian health care, and all that happened instead is he took the
dishonest tactic of picking on the wording of my attempts to make him
focus.
=====================
No, there was no misleading by me of your lies, er wording, liarman. You
made direct declarative statements that you cannot back up. I focused
entirely on your lies that no 1) no one is waiting for treatment in
Canada,

Scumbag. You know very well what I declared was that the people in
Newfoundland were not waiting for 2 1/2 years for treatment - the lie YOU
were telling. But you are too big of a coward to admit it.

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ps.com...
KMAN, I was pleased with the effort Tink took to get a handle on this
situation. And, from my own perspective, I've done some reading about
various systems and have at least a passing acquaintance with a variety
of European models (I now know the difference between the Beveridge and
the Bismark approaches to healthcare funding). In that sense, all of
this has been useful for me.

It's too bad rick could never see the value in such discourse.
====================
LOL I tried, fool. All I got was a bunch of jingoistic chest-thumping
lies.

Perhaps you should stop telling them, then.

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well done, Tink!

KMAN, on Mar 1, 9:46 pm, in responding to you, thanked you for
your
conciliatory and well-reasoned post. In his`response, KMAN
reiterates
what I said to rick quite some time back: this could be a
useful
discussion on healthcare systems that we could all learn from.
rick was
unwilling to broaden the scope of the discussion,
=======================
LOL No one, especially you and liarman, wanted to 'widen' the
scope of the discussion. All you wanted to do is shut it down!
Never once did either of you present anything that represented
the 'other side' of the debate. All you had was this site's too
right-wing, this site's too union... All you had was the notion
that somehow all I wanted to do was praise some other system.
that was your projection, not reality.


and that's when I
opted out for a bit. I wasn't interested in being a part of his
incessant name-calling.
====================
liars are just that, liars. And when they insist on their lies,
despite the evidence, they are fools, or worse. It is you and
liarm,an that have from the beginning unwilling to look at the
information and accept it.


Anyway, thanks again, Tink,
frtzw906

"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tinkerntom" wrote in message
ups.com...

KMAN wrote:

snip...


rick, I would encourage you to allow KMAN to modify and
clarify his
previous statement inasmuch as he has acknowledged that it is
not what
he meant to say, and then if desired, discuss that as a new
issue.
=====================
He has already modified his ststement. After he was caught in
his lie. the ststement was not out of context. It sauid
exactly as I claimed. If you are waiting 2 years for a test
ot proceedure that your doctor has already determined you
need, then you are waiting for treatment. That is not what he
said. He made the direct statement that no one waits for
treatment.

I said that in your specific example, no one is waiting for
treatment. They are waiting for a specific test, while under
the continuing care of the physician, and receiving the
specific test sooner if it becomes essential to that care.
==================
Nope. What you said is that no one is waiting for treatment.
Your next sentence indeed seperates treatment from tests,
which makes you statement that no one is waiting for trewatment
even more a lie.


You are being deliberately dishonest and you know it. You are a
scumbag.
===============
No, you are a liar that just can't help himself.

besides, the proof has been presented that Canadians even die
waiting for the treatment that you said they don't wait for.

"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..

"Tinkerntom" wrote in message
ups.com...

KMAN wrote:
in article
t, rick
at
wrote on 3/1/05 10:58 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick
at
wrote on 3/1/05 5:18 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..

"rick" wrote in message
k.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
,
rick at
wrote on 2/28/05 7:06 PM:


"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message


snippage...

Or are you going to be consistent and be a liar
and a
coward
on
this issue
as well?
====================
Anything you open your mouth about, like Canadians
never
waiting
for treatment.

I never said that. Every health care system
requires
that
people wait.
==========================
Yes, you did liar. Do try to keep up with your own
spews,
dolt.


What part of your claim:
"...No one is waiting for treatment..." don't you
undersatnd?
You said it fool, 2/20/2005


Big lie there fool...

Never said it. Prove that I did.
================
See above fool. You made the claim, liar.

Why none of your pithy spews here, fool? Finally
realixed
how
stupid you really are, and how much you lie?

Post the entire quote, and reference it, weasel.
============================
"...No one is waiting for treatment..."

That's is a quote by you fool. feb 20, 2005. That you
are
still too stupid to fully use your computer is no
surprise,
liar.

Post the entire quote.
==================
What I posted stands by itself. You lied.
"...No one is waiting for treatment..."

Still afraid to look things up for yourself, eh liar?

Only a scumbag posts the middle of a quote with no context
or
reference.
==========================
It wasn't from the middle, liar, it was'nt out of context,
liar.
I provided the the reference by date and time you said it,
liar.
Thanks for proving yet again that lies are all you have,
since
the facts are not on your side.

You could have easily pasted the entire context, including
headers.
Instead
you posted a piece of a statement without the information
that
preceded it
or came after.

A scumbag tactic.

KMAN, I went back and reviewed the exact post in context, and
I agree
with you both on this one. You did say that "No one is waiting
for
treatment." And as I copied it to this post, I took it
completely out
of context in order for it to say what rick wanted it to say.
Obviously
the power of cut and paste is being abused!

Right. He was deliberately dishonest. He knew I was responding
specifically to the story about Newfoundland, where the people
are not waiting for treatment, they are waiting for a specific
type of test while continuing to receive care.

However I also realize that in the heat of battle, you may
again have
spoken (written) to quickly, and left yourself vulnerable to
rick to
make this assertion. At the same time I have seen you attempt
to
clarify your statement, which rick should be willing to
accept, since
we all have made similar missteps. Lord knows I have!

rick, I would encourage you to allow KMAN to modify and
clarify his
previous statement inasmuch as he has acknowledged that it is
not what
he meant to say, and then if desired, discuss that as a new
issue.

As someone said earlier, Geesus! You guys must have been on a
real
bender on 2/20, since both of these misunderstandings started
at the
approx. same time. Hopefully we can now put this behind us,
having
learned the power of misspeak and misstep. TnT

I've moved on from the statement about "wait lines" and dying,
Tinkerntom.

But rick owes me an apology for being deliberately dishonest in
stating that I claimed no one in Canada has to wait.
========================
ROTFLMAO Yet you still want to claim that no one is dying in
these wait lines that you now admite to!
You are the dishonset liar here, liarman.

"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..



snip...


===

So, coward, why are you being a scumbag and refusing to name
those valid and
valuable purposes of assault weapons?
======================
Because, liarman, unlike you, I don't purport to be the
arbiter of what is useful, valuable, or necessary. That is
the perogative of eack person, liarman.

Why did you say weapons also have valid and valuable purposes
if you were not prepared to name them?

What a coward!
==================
Nope. Because, unlike you, I don't pretend to be the arbiter of
what is and is not a valuable use for 'any' product.
I leave the socialist dictattorship to you, liarman.

And, why do you continue to be the dishonest poster that you are
known to be by deleteing responses, and then replying like they
weren't there, eh liarman? Just can't help yourself, can you?

"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick at
wrote on 3/1/05 11:04 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick
at
wrote on 3/1/05 5:21 PM:


snip...


You did not quote me.
======================
Yes, I did. see other posts for today... Here,
want to
see
it again?
"...No one is waiting for treatment..."

You need to quote without the "... and ..." and you
also
need
to provide a
link to the message so it can be verified. What a
scumbag
you
are!
================
There was no "and" fool. You made that statemnet.
Too
abd
you're a proven liar, eh?
YOU made the statement. Now you're claiming you can't
find
it?
You really are a loser, aren't you, liar?
restore end

Post the entire quote. Why did you need to delete the
beginning and end?
Weasel.
======================
"...No one is waiting for treatment..."
Why are you concerned about whole quotes while you
dishonestly
delete whole ones, fool?

Provide the entire quote. Scum.
====================
What I posted says it all. You lied.

It says nothing because you have engaged in the ultimate
scumbag tactic of
posting a partial quote with no context and no reference.
========================
Then post the entire thing if you think it will change the
statement, liarman. As it is, it stands alone as the
statement
you made

It isnt' a statement. It's only six words that may or may not
be part of an
entire statement that you say I made.

Post the whole thing, including headers. What are you afriad
of?
====================
Nothing liarman, I posted your statement. Your lie. Too bad
for you.

I didn't lie. The people in your example are not waiting for
treatment as the FULL quote fully shows.
=================
No, the full quote backs up that you lied even more. You
seperate treatment from tests, and then claim that 'no one' is
waiting for treatment.


You are a supreme scumbag.
===============
And you're still the dishonest liarman. Keep up the good work,
fool. You make it too easy.

"KMAN" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
et, rick at
wrote on 3/1/05 11:32 PM:

Still claiming no one waits for treatment in Canada?

I never said that.
====================
Yes, you did liarman.
"...No one is waiting for treatment..."

Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete
statement.
==================
Yes, it does fool. Your next sentence even emphsised what you
said in this one, liarman.



Example:

What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true.
He's got to be
the biggest idiot on the planet!

To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't
think rick is
an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been
doing with my
sentence about waiting.

Here is more of the context:

======

As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits
for
the
high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of
diagnostic imaging
at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the
wait is
"less than
ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated
and
followed by
other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency
scan
gets one.
======================
LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency
treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the
list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered
more
than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond
treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment.


You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in
isolated or slum
areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their
convenience? Get
real.
====================
Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their
'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the
medical
systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical
facility in
need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2
years
for treatment.

No one is waiting for treatment. It's about a specific type
of scan in a
specific geographic area and the waiting is for
non-emergencies.
============================
LOL You just made my point for me, liarman. Your first
statement is declarative. 'No one is waiting for treatment.'

NO ONE IS WAITING FOR TREATMENT - IN THE EXAMPLE YOU WERE
TALKING ABOUT.
======================
That wasn't the statement you amde at that time, now was it,
liarman.

Now that you've gotten on board with people DO wait for
treatment, and sometimes for excessive time. (or do you agree
with that yet) How is your refutation that no one dies waiting
for their treatment coming along? Readly to present it yet, or
have you finally seen enogh of the real facst to sgree about that
too?




Stop being such a scumbag.
=================
Stop being such a liar, liarman...

"KMAN" wrote in message
...

"rick" wrote in message
ink.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
. ..


snip...


rick, I believe that you owe KMAN an apology for being so
quick to beat
him up when he misspoke. You were correct to recognize his
untenable
position intitially, and confront him with it, but he has
since
modified and clarified that statement, and you owe him the
civility of
his response when he recognized that he had misspoke. If he
did not
initially recognize his misspeak, he definitly has at this
time. I
would recommend that you allow his retraction, so that you
can get on
with a meaningful discussion, unless you appear intransient
and bring
disrepute on your obviously defendable position. TnT

Tinkerntom, you are mixing up two different situations.

There was the situation where I was challenging rick to prove
that Canadians are dying in waiting lines for health care.
===============
Which has now been proven over and over.



What is happening above is an entirely different scenario.
Rick accused me of stating that there is no one in Canada
waiting for treatment. That is an absurd statement and I
never made it.
=======================
LOL Even after Tnt tried to give you a way out, you still
insist on lying. You just can'r help yourself, can you,
liarman?


Being the sneaky scum that he is, he
posted one sentence out of a long conversation without the
relevant context to try and make him look like less of a
liar.
=================
LOL The context made the statement even more declarative you
ignorant liar.

It was declarative that you were misrepresenting the
information in the story about the people in Newfoundland. All
of those people were under care, as it states in the article.
=====================
Not waht you said at the time.



Stop being a scumbag. You owe me an apology. But you are too
big of a coward to admit it.
=====================
No liar, I don't owe you anything. Liars get everything they
deserve, liarman.


But as you can see from the
context, all I was telling him was that in the case of
Newfoundland that he was talking about, the people concerned
were in fact under the constant care of a doctor and
therefore were not waiting for treatment.