BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
struckpx said:i backed my idea up w/ governmental agencies, all which have flopped. you haven't mentioned those.
And it's your theory that these "failures" were due to the size of population?
struckpx said:i backed my idea up w/ governmental agencies, all which have flopped. you haven't mentioned those.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
And it's your theory that these "failures" were due to the size of population?
struckpx said:
mismanagement, which is what i have been stating all along.
struckpx said:
i am not saying the healthcare system there is bad, but canada also has a lot less people than the US.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
No, your original argument was:
You were basing it on size.
Your correlations to the post office and Amtrack aren't quite fair. Technology changed those things, making them obsolete in many cases. Technology changed the medical field, but won't ever make it obsolete.
struckpx said:but the companies run this country
anitram said:
Do you consider that to be a good thing?
Now, this is closer to a real argument. But tell me something, how much of pharma is making us suffer now? And why does it not effect countries that do have social medicine?struckpx said:
universalizing health care will make many private companies go out of business b/c the prices of medicine will go down. the competitiveness for new drugs will dive and ultimately we will suffer.
struckpx said:
we are just going to debate this on and on. i have stated my voice, you don't agree. universal health care won't happen anytime soon here. the democrats can lobby all they want, but the companies run this country, and it would be political suicide for them to do that. so, really think about what the potential candidates say regarding health care. if they say, "i am going to change the whole system," not likely.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Now, this is closer to a real argument. But tell me something, how much of pharma is making us suffer now? And why does it not effect countries that do have social medicine?
struckpx said:
Although, maybe I am out of the loop.
struckpx said:i am against social medicine b/c i don't want a large percentage of my "hard-earned" going towards health care. I would much rather have my future employer pay for it.
anitram said:
You are.
I already posted about this on this thread.
The 2nd most sold pharmaceutical drug in the world was developed by the French in France. And it's not the only one, either.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I thought it was because it wouldn't work?
Do you even know how socialized medicine works?
struckpx said:
proof?
from my personal readings, I don't read about breaking technology and cures coming from Europe that much. Mainly it is from here and Asia. Although, maybe I am out of the loop.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Uninformed...
struckpx said:
How does this help us? Well, ultimately, we can live longer.
struckpx said:
do you?
anitram said:
Except for the part where you live shorter than Canadians, Japanese and many Western European nationals.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Have you seen me change my stance every post and post misinformation?
struckpx said:
hahaa. what are you talking about? Where have I ever changed my stance? I have three core concepts towards universal health care: costs, management, and population. Those three factors in the US make it not applicable.
struckpx said:i have given ample evidence that you are unwilling to comment on and rebuke. if you are that anti-america, go ahead and truck it up to canada.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Do you even know where I live?
How am I anti-American?
I'm going to reiterate this one more time:
Mismanagement: You compared it to organizations that technology made almost obsolete, how is that a fair comparison?
Population: You didn't even come close to backing this one up, and asked you several questions regarding this, which you ignored.
Cost: I can understand this argument somewhat, but if you look at the overall picture there is a lot of argument that it can even itself out.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Do you even know where I live?
struckpx said:
Mismanagement: Post-office. Wasn't due to technology. They flat out had to many employees.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
You don't think email has changed the post office? Come on!!!
struckpx said:
Also, it isn't a God given right that everyone should have free health care. At least that is what I believe. If you have a job and are helping out society, you can get healthcare. But if you aren't doing anything and being lazy, why should I spend my hard-earned for you to get treatment to lose weight?
I do live in America, but it isn't smart to make assumptions. There are people who have lived here once and don't anymore. Or who just have done the research.struckpx said:
If you aren't American, how can you know the ins and outs of our health care system personally? That lowers the level of argument.
I don't know what god you believe in.struckpx said:
Also, it isn't a God given right that everyone should have free health care. At least that is what I believe.
struckpx said:
If you have a job and are helping out society, you can get healthcare.
struckpx said:
i am not debating that. but, its government. they don't care about that stuff. for the government to lay off people it has to be in severely bad conditions.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
But it was still due to technology, why are you denying that?
Face it, it was a bad analogy.