|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Jan 31st, 2008 03:17 PM | |
| Dr. Boogie | Yes, surely private insurance will be more inclined to insure people with major health problems. |
| Jan 31st, 2008 02:24 PM | |
| Sleazeappeal | Which is why private health-care and physical-modification services should exist ALONGSIDE a government-funded health-care program. |
| Jan 30th, 2008 09:38 AM | |
| AChimp | I see nothing wrong with taking money from stupid people and using it to benefit everyone else. |
| Jan 30th, 2008 05:57 AM | |
| Pub Lover |
I didn't say anything when you were talking about the system in Turkey, what with not ever having been in Turkey, but in this case let me assure you that you are talking out of your ass. It was a survey from 'Doctors' but seeing as the British Medical Association is the the place through which UK doctors make comment on the system & the BMA called it "outrageous" and "disgraceful", well it looks like maybe this survey may have had a biased base. Also the Telegraph is hardly a 'fair & balanced' news source and despite them & those like them the NHS has operated for 60 years. It even survived the crazy shit Thatcher pulled. |
| Jan 29th, 2008 11:32 PM | |
| AlliSabbah | If you show me an honest man I will show you someone willing to exploit him. |
| Jan 29th, 2008 10:45 PM | |
| Kulturkampf |
Your Selective British Health Care This is what happens when you socialize medicine... You need to have a triage which discriminates against people: Smokers, heavy drinkers, the obese and the elderly should be barred from receiving some operations, according to doctors, with most saying the health service cannot afford to provide free care to everyone.Telegraph It reminds me of Turkey's system. Outrageous and disgraceful it may be, but to an extent it seems logical: the government cannot afford to give services to everybody, and, if we have to prioritize we ought to not discriminate against people who have taken care of themselves. It is going to look like decent proposals in the beginning: no free livers for alcoholics who wont stop drinking; no free lungs for smokers who wont stop smoking. But when have we known a government to retain reasonable standards? A government is a slippery slope that people try to climb up. Politicians plant infant trees of promises on it that the people grasp to and pull out. When we depend on government promises we depend on So now it will be the unhealthy rich alone that will seemingly get any treatments they need. The rest of us are kind of stuck for choices we made and it looks like we'll literally having people paying into a system that refuses to help them. You know how free services end up being worth every penny you pay for them... This is a great example of that! Money dries up quickly especially when you are strangling the entire economy with taxation to support a system like this. It creates, inevitably, a flawed bureaucracy that must prioritize. One of the great historic paradoxes: The People's Government invariably becomes the enemy of the people. The simple principle a man must live by is working hard and living by his own dollar, going forward and never asking for more than what he has earned. When we let the government decide for us we are handing away our own merit and putting it in the hands of a bureaucracy of men. Don't sell your freedom to a bureaucracy. More than that: don't ever vote to sell all of our freedom to a bureaucracy because then we all become weaklings cowering before a force that though well intentioned does not have the power to serve or to help us. Live by the sweat of your brow and help those around you. What system could be better than honest men helping honest men of their own volition? |
