On 20-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Wow! Forty-eight percent of income for health care that you can't get when
you need it. What a bargain!

Bull**** from weiser once again. He obviously can't read or think.

...and you can't buy supplemental insurance to protect yourself even if you
want to. Talk about your socialistic, egalitarian "share the pain"
bedfellows...Canada and North Korea don't care a fig if you, the individual,
suffers, they only care that everyone suffers together in comradely
communistic solidarity, while paying 48% of income for the privilege. Bleah.

More bull****. You can buy supplemental health insurance. It's sold by
many insurance companies. Maritime Life is one of the bigger players in
supplemental health insurance.

Go back under your rock, weiser, we don't need any more of your
lies and BS on this newsgroup.

Mike

Michael says:
============
Wow! Forty-eight percent of income for health care that you can't get
when
you need it. What a bargain!

Bull**** from weiser once again. He obviously can't read or think.
==============

Further, Weiser has difficulty with math... even using his figures, I
reckon that's 40% of 48%.... but, hey, that wouldn't sound as dramatic.
What a twit!

But I just don't get the point of his post. He's living in paradise and
happy about it. And we're living with a system that we clearly like so
much that we voted (well, I didn't, but apparently many Canadians did)
Tommy Douglas the most important Canadian personage (living or dead),
on a TV poll. [Info for Scott: Tommy Douglas = father of Canadian
universal medicine]

Why does Scott worry about how much tax we pay? As far as I can tell,
Americans pay between 35% to 40% in taxes, depending on the state.
First, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it cost
much more money to govern 30+ million spread out over a huge country as
opposed to 300+ million spread over a merely big country. So likely our
tax bills ought to be somewhat higher. And look, on top of everything,
our guys throw in healthcare. What do the Yanks get thrown in?

frtzw906

BCITORGB wrote:
Michael says:
============
Wow! Forty-eight percent of income for health care that you can't
get
when
you need it. What a bargain!

Bull**** from weiser once again. He obviously can't read or think.
==============

Further, Weiser has difficulty with math... even using his figures, I
reckon that's 40% of 48%.... but, hey, that wouldn't sound as
dramatic.
What a twit!

But I just don't get the point of his post. He's living in paradise
and
happy about it. And we're living with a system that we clearly like
so
much that we voted (well, I didn't, but apparently many Canadians
did)
Tommy Douglas the most important Canadian personage (living or dead),
on a TV poll. [Info for Scott: Tommy Douglas = father of Canadian
universal medicine]

Why does Scott worry about how much tax we pay? As far as I can tell,
Americans pay between 35% to 40% in taxes, depending on the state.
First, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it cost
much more money to govern 30+ million spread out over a huge country
as
opposed to 300+ million spread over a merely big country. So likely
our
tax bills ought to be somewhat higher. And look, on top of
everything,
our guys throw in healthcare. What do the Yanks get thrown in?

frtzw906


Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch. I
am glad that you are so much better with number than I am! I still
maintain you are not an ENTP. Maybe an ESFJ, they like numbers and
everything in order, not very good inventors though, or working with
power tools. How's that rack coming along! But I don't want to
interfere here with this dance, so I will step aside! TnT

Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to discredit an
entire system. And you know what, if the critique were coming from
someone in Australia, or Germany, or France or whereever we could lean
something about how to do things better, I wouldn't mind so much. But
what can we learn from the American system?

First, let's be clear: we tried the American system and rejected it.
it's not like Canada doesn't have experience with privatized medicine.
that's what we had before we went universal.

As to what we can learn; that's simple. America is good at providing
excellent care, quickly, if (and this is a huge IF), you can pay for
it.

I don't need to know much more about the American system than what
Frederick has outlined. That's enough to convince me that it needs
fixing in a bad way. There's no way a decent, hard-working, family
should have to live with such stress. What a stupid way to treat the
people who make your system work and make your country great. It's
dehumanizing. It's STUPID!

What about your personal case, Tink? How much of your monthly income
goes to medical premiums? Are you concerned about losing your coverage?

frtzw906

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and
someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to
watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous
of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to
discredit an
entire system.
==================
And just where was that done? Reporting on the fact that people
die while waiting must be news for you and kman. Think of it as
a public service. Knowledge is a good thing, putting your head
in the sand and pretending otherwise is dangerous in this case.




And you know what, if the critique were coming from
someone in Australia, or Germany, or France or whereever we
could lean
something about how to do things better, I wouldn't mind so
much. But
what can we learn from the American system?

First, let's be clear: we tried the American system and
rejected it.
it's not like Canada doesn't have experience with privatized
medicine.
that's what we had before we went universal.

As to what we can learn; that's simple. America is good at
providing
excellent care, quickly, if (and this is a huge IF), you can
pay for
it.

I don't need to know much more about the American system than
what
Frederick has outlined. That's enough to convince me that it
needs
fixing in a bad way. There's no way a decent, hard-working,
family
should have to live with such stress. What a stupid way to
treat the
people who make your system work and make your country great.
It's
dehumanizing. It's STUPID!

What about your personal case, Tink? How much of your monthly
income
goes to medical premiums? Are you concerned about losing your
coverage?

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to discredit an
entire system.

It's hardly "one-off." It's pervasive and ubiquitous in every socialized
medicine system in existence because by its nature, socialized medicine
cannot provide effective on-demand health care to everyone.

And you know what, if the critique were coming from
someone in Australia, or Germany, or France or whereever we could lean
something about how to do things better, I wouldn't mind so much. But
what can we learn from the American system?

First, let's be clear: we tried the American system and rejected it.

Yeah, freedom and liberty are SO unnecessary...

it's not like Canada doesn't have experience with privatized medicine.
that's what we had before we went universal.

And that's what you'll have shortly, after your socialized system fails
completely. As it is, many Canadians are coming to the US to get immediate
medical care they can't get in Canada. I'll take expensive medical care I
can get on demand to cheap medical care I can't get when I need it. I'll
figure out how to pay for it later.


As to what we can learn; that's simple. America is good at providing
excellent care, quickly, if (and this is a huge IF), you can pay for
it.

Which makes it a good idea to stay healthy or save a lot of money against
future medical problems. Why should anyone else have to bail you out if you
don't use good judgment?


I don't need to know much more about the American system than what
Frederick has outlined. That's enough to convince me that it needs
fixing in a bad way. There's no way a decent, hard-working, family
should have to live with such stress.

Why not? Why should their health problems cause a financial burden for me?
Why should I have to pay for heart surgery for people who eat McDonalds till
they weigh 450 pounds and clog up their arteries with plaque? Isn't that
THEIR problem? Shouldn't THEY be responsible for their own health, and for
paying for fixing what's wrong with them? What justifies imposing that
financial burden on other people?

What a stupid way to treat the
people who make your system work and make your country great. It's
dehumanizing. It's STUPID!

It's life. Sometimes you die. So what? Big deal. There'll be another one
just like you along in a few years. Death comes to us all, eventually. Get
used to it.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Weiser on caring for others:
==============
Why not? Why should their health problems cause a financial burden for
me? Why should I have to pay for heart surgery for people who eat
McDonalds till they weigh 450 pounds and clog up their arteries with
plaque? Isn't that THEIR problem? Shouldn't THEY be responsible for
their own health, and for paying for fixing what's wrong with them?
What justifies imposing that financial burden on other people?
===============

Hmmm.... where to begin? Let's start by throwing out the term socialism
and using community instead. I think caring for your neighbors is a
part of what it means to be a member of a community.

My elderly neighbor occasionally needs a ride to the hospital. I offer
to drive her. I don't ask her whether she might not have avoided her
maladies if she'd taken better care of her health in earlier years! I
just drive her. Another elderly neighbor has difficulty getting her
trash can to the street on collection day. My kids or I take on this
task. This is what it means to be a member of a community.

Universal medical insurance is also about community. It's about giving
a damn about your fellow human.

Spit out the bile, Scott.

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Weiser on caring for others:
==============
Why not? Why should their health problems cause a financial burden for
me? Why should I have to pay for heart surgery for people who eat
McDonalds till they weigh 450 pounds and clog up their arteries with
plaque? Isn't that THEIR problem? Shouldn't THEY be responsible for
their own health, and for paying for fixing what's wrong with them?
What justifies imposing that financial burden on other people?
===============

Hmmm.... where to begin? Let's start by throwing out the term socialism
and using community instead.

Let's not. Let's call socialism exactly what it is.

I think caring for your neighbors is a
part of what it means to be a member of a community.

I agree. The difference is that I believe that it's up to YOU whether you
choose to do so out of altruism, guilt or whatever emotion you choose. What
I don't agree with is the idea that unwilling partners can be required to
"care for" their neighbors by having the government forcibly take money from
them to give to someone who is most likely not a neighbor at all, but is
more likely to be some alcoholic with a damaged liver who got that way not
because he was concerned about the "community" but because he was interested
in going to hell in his own way while expecting other people to pay for it.


My elderly neighbor occasionally needs a ride to the hospital. I offer
to drive her. I don't ask her whether she might not have avoided her
maladies if she'd taken better care of her health in earlier years! I
just drive her. Another elderly neighbor has difficulty getting her
trash can to the street on collection day. My kids or I take on this
task. This is what it means to be a member of a community.

Good for you. That's very charitable and altruistic of you. Nothing whatever
wrong with your doing so. You are free to spend as much of your time and
money as you wish doing so. You are even free to get together with
like-minded neighbors and pool money through some organization to hire
people do do it.

What's wrong, however, is to use the Mace of State to force someone who
doesn't freely choose to participate in that altruism, to pay for what you
think "community" ought to be.

Universal medical insurance is also about community. It's about giving
a damn about your fellow human.

No, it's about coercive force, sometimes at the point of a gun.

Down here in the USA, we have a little right we call the right to "freedom
of association." Under that right, we have the right to freely gather
together with whomever we please, whenever we please, in a peaceable manner.
Inherent in that right is the equally protected right of *dis*association.
Just as we are free to associate with others, we are free NOT to associate
with them, and that includes the right to NOT be required to subsidize or
support their particular lifestyle.

For example, I have no interest in paying for the medical expenses of those
who contract AIDS as a result of engaging in unprotected sex. I should not
be forced to do so by the government, whether directly or through socialized
medicine. They did the deed, they get to suffer the consequences. That may
result in unfortunate circumstances for them, but I didn't do the deed, so
why should I be made financially liable for their bad behavior?

Spit out the bile, Scott.

Altruism coming from the barrel of the taxman's gun is not altruism, it's
slavery and oppression.

I'll be altruistic and charitable to those whom *I* deem worthy of my
charity and altruism, not who some government flack thinks is worthy, thank
you very much.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to discredit an
entire system.

It's hardly "one-off." It's pervasive and ubiquitous in every socialized
medicine system in existence because by its nature, socialized medicine
cannot provide effective on-demand health care to everyone.

Why do you have socialized education?

A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:


"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to discredit an
entire system.

It's hardly "one-off." It's pervasive and ubiquitous in every socialized
medicine system in existence because by its nature, socialized medicine
cannot provide effective on-demand health care to everyone.

Why do you have socialized education?

Because there's a lot of socialist swine down here too. We have to fight
them all the time.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser