[dzp111]

Hi. I don't want to cause a raucous here but I'm just trying to get my head around this. Obama wants every US citizen to have a fair share at health care, but all I'm hearing and seeing is turmoil. In fact it's virtually become a national chaos.

Here in Canada, government-run health care has existed for many decades. While our system is far from perfect (mainly shortage of doctors and wait times), everyone is treated equally. Sure we have private insurance companies that will benefit us with a private room in the hospital and cheap meds, but the majority of everything else such as surgeries, scans, x-rays, blood works, etc. cost nothing to all us Canadians (except for a little of our taxes). But it's worth it as far as I'm concerned.

I'm thinking that it's all about the mega-funded insurance companies that are poisoning your people's frame of mind.

BTW, if you don't have any private insurance here in Canada, the medications cost very, very much. Go figure. There's our loop-hole -pharmaceutical companies.

This is not an argument, just confusion.

The big guy just wants to help 50 million people. No biggy? Stick with your insurance plan, but at least let those 50 million get medically approved and treated without debt or rejection, else they perish.

Just an observation.

[Wiskedjak]

The reason you're confused is because you probably didn't live in the US during the Cold War.

government run health care = socialism = communism = evil

[dzp111]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

The reason you're confused is because you probably didn't live in the US during the Cold War.

government run health care = socialism = communism = evil

That is confusing. What does the Cold War and everything else you referred to have anything to do with wanting to help your own?

[dzp111]

BTW, Do you know about bad cholesterol and good cholesterol? Same goes with socialism and communism. And democracy.

Socialism=society
Communism=community

Some jerks just took it too far (ie. Hitler). There's a balance that no one's been able to figure out yet, unless you belong in a tribal community. Oh, did I say Communism?

Research, don't pounce on a caring idea.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

The big guy just wants to help 50 million people. No biggy? Stick with your insurance plan, but at least let those 50 million get medically approved and treated without debt or rejection, else they perish.

Hey, you're the one in favor of this. Why don't you pay for all their healthcare?

Somebody's going to have to pay for it, and it's sounding like that somebody is going to be me. I'm fine with a $70/mo plan — why am I expected to pay for other people's sex changes?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

HHere in Canada, government-run health care has existed for many decades. While our system is far from perfect (mainly shortage of doctors and wait times), everyone is treated equally.

Your system seems to be in a crisis according to your own courts and top medical practitioners, your citizens go south to my country when they can't obtain the treatment they need in your country, and your system poorly covers a fraction of the population of the United States. You also don't understand or fail to appreciate the fact that America has already tried Socialized medicine in the forms of Medicare and Medicaid, and those programs are bankrupting us. We don't trust the federal government to deliver on its claims anymore.

It seems to me that too many Canadians ignorantly assume that they have all the answers to American health care problems when in truth they have no clue about that which they speak.

[dzp111]

Somebody's going to have to pay for it, and it's sounding like that somebody is going to be me. I'm fine with my $70/mo plan — why am I expected to pay for other people's sex changes?

That's pure ignorance. I do pay extra taxes for health care, but f*ck, not for sex changes nor any kind of cosmetic changes (unless purely necessary, ie. burn victims). These types of procedures are not covered under gov. health plan, as they shouldn't be.

Good for you, you can afford the $70/mo plan.

Have you no care for those who need MRI's for diagnosis but can't pay? Would you not pay $80/mo to provide all the necessary care?

[Buckaroo]

The biggest issue that I have concerning fairness is that the proposed plan does not include the members of Congress and the Senate. In order to make absolutely certain that it is fair, they must have to deal with the exact same BS plan that they create.

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Hi. I don't want to cause a raucous here but I'm just trying to get my head around this. Obama wants every US citizen to have a fair share at health care, but all I'm hearing and seeing is turmoil. In fact it's virtually become a national chaos.

Here in Canada, government-run health care has existed for many decades. While our system is far from perfect (mainly shortage of doctors and wait times), everyone is treated equally. Sure we have private insurance companies that will benefit us with a private room in the hospital and cheap meds, but the majority of everything else such as surgeries, scans, x-rays, blood works, etc. cost nothing to all us Canadians (except for a little of our taxes). But it's worth it as far as I'm concerned.

I'm thinking that it's all about the mega-funded insurance companies that are poisoning your people's frame of mind.

BTW, if you don't have any private insurance here in Canada, the medications cost very, very much. Go figure. There's our loop-hole -pharmaceutical companies.

This is not an argument, just confusion.

The big guy just wants to help 50 million people. No biggy? Stick with your insurance plan, but at least let those 50 million get medically approved and treated without debt or rejection, else they perish.

Just an observation.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Your system seems to be in a crisis according to your own courts and top medical practitioners, your citizens go south to my country when they can't obtain the treatment they need in your country, and your system poorly covers a fraction of the population of the United States. It seems to me that too many Canadians ignorantly assume that they have all the answers to American health care problems when in truth they have no clue about that which they speak.

Seriously. For anybody drawing comparisons to Canada, just consider the difference in scale: You could double the population of Canada, double it again and then double it yet again and it would still be less than the population of the United States. To say that something should be brought to the US because it worked in Canada is like saying that because you successfully beat a kid up and took his tricycle, you're going to go pick a fight in a biker bar.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Hey, you're the one in favor of this. Why don't you pay for all their healthcare?

Somebody's going to have to pay for it, and it's sounding like that somebody is going to be me. I'm fine with a $70/mo plan — why am I expected to pay for other people's sex changes?

Why would you assume that there would not be elective surgeries are not covered? There are many ways in which you could gain, as have been discussed at length in another thread. Do you mean this literally or just rhetorically?

Original poster: this is nothing terribly new. The same sort of backlash and FUD about how we are now officially entering into the realm of socialism were cried immediately prior to Medicare and Social Security too. While the insolvency of Medicare is clearly a problem now, I don't think you'll find too many old people that would want to do without it at this point.

[dzp111]

Your system seems to be in a crisis according to your own courts and top medical practitioners, your citizens go south to my country when they can't obtain the treatment they need in your country, and your system poorly covers a fraction of the population of the United States. It seems to me that too many Canadians ignorantly assume that they have all the answers to American health care problems when in truth they have no clue about that which they speak.

As I've said, our system is far from perfect. Some do go south for better medical service. Why? Because it's there but it costs a whole bunch of bucks. My original point is that without any insurance here, it costs nothing for any type of treatment when needed.

Many Canadian doctors move south for the buck.

Sad.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Seriously. For anybody drawing comparisons to Canada, just consider the difference in scale: You could double the population of Canada, double it again and then double it yet again and it would still be less than the population of the United States. To say that something should be brought to the US because it worked in Canada is like saying that because you successfully beat a kid up and took his tricycle, you're going to go pick a fight in a biker bar.

The other reason why the comparisons are not just is because what we would be adopting would be more like what Switzerland has, not what Canada has. I use Canada and it probably comes up most frequently as an example simply because they are our closest first world country neighbors.

[besson3c]

The way I look at it is that there are certain medical procedures that have a pretty low risk factor, they are procedures that we have been doing forever and have mastered, and a good doctor could probably do them on auto-pilot. For example: delivering babies, putting casts on broken bones, getting tonsils removed, routine screenings for stuff, colonoscopies, removing crazy glue from your penis, etc.

It would be nice if we could somehow separate some of this stuff out so that if you don't really feel strongly about paying top dollar for one of these sorts of things that you could have these sorts of things done very cheaply, and if you wanted a little more or the risk was much greater, that you'd have options to buy something you really felt good about, paying extra for this sort of thing.

Just thinking outloud.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It seems to me that too many Canadians ignorantly assume that they have all the answers to American health care problems when in truth they have no clue about that which they speak.

*applauds*
Thank you.
I'm so sick and tired of people from other countries constantly up on a friggen soap box blathering on like know-it-alls about MY country. Quite frankly, especially Canada which seems to be the global world capital of insecurity.

STFU and enjoy whatever it is about Canada you like so much. Your entire country has few people than the STATE I live in. Get off the soapbox for two seconds and realize this: you don't have any answers for providing healthcare for 300+ million people in THIS country.

[dzp111]

I use Canada and it probably comes up most frequently as an example simply because they are our closest first world country neighbors.

Canadian health care system is but a pilot system which works in some ways and doesn't in others. Learn from our mistakes and teach us, you are powerful and richer. But God, you seem to keep forgetting and/or not caring about the 50 million because of...well..what?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The other reason why the comparisons are not just is because what we would be adopting would be more like what Switzerland has, not what Canada has. I use Canada and it probably comes up most frequently as an example simply because they are our closest first world country neighbors.

Switzerland fails even harder as a basis for comparison. Switzerland is more comparable to Los Angeles (LA actually has millions more people, but it's closer).

[dzp111]

STFU and enjoy whatever it is about Canada you like so much. Your entire country has few people than the STATE I live in. Get off the soapbox for two seconds and realize this: you don't have any answers for providing healthcare for 300+ million people in THIS country.

Holy crap! Didn't know I'd be dealing with such immaturity. Oh, your population's so much bigger. Oh...
Numbers? Of population?

SO?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Holy crap! Didn't know I'd be dealing with such immaturity. Oh, your population's so much bigger. Oh...
Numbers? Of population?

SO?

I already explained the "so." SO, Canada's situation is not remotely comparable. Scaling is hard. Like I said, beating up a kid on a tricycle is quite different from taking on everyone in a biker bar. You're trying to make it out to be a similar problem because the fundamental elements of violence and a person with a bike are still there, but the practical difference is just ridiculous.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

That's pure ignorance. I do pay extra taxes for health care, but f*ck, not for sex changes nor any kind of cosmetic changes (unless purely necessary, ie. burn victims). These types of procedures are not covered under gov. health plan, as they shouldn't be.

"Necessary" is such an interesting word. Sex changes are deemed medically necessary in some places in the US and thus would have to be covered under a health plan. I really don't mind people wanting to mutilate their genitals, but it's friggin' expensive and I should not have to pay for that.

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Good for you, you can afford the $70/mo plan.

That's less than a day's work even at fast-food wages. The only people who can't afford that are the truly destitute, and for them, whatever, make some crappy little healthcare plan to give them something. It doesn't take any great, sweeping reform. We already have a welfare system for this sort of thing. By your logic, we should start nationalized grocery stores for people who have trouble affording food.

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Have you no care for those who need MRI's for diagnosis but can't pay? Would you not pay $80/mo to provide all the necessary care?

For people who could afford it but would rather continue getting cable TV? No! I would not pay them any amount of money to continue being worthless leeches. These kinds of "something for everyone" policies will always be abused. In Argentina there's a whole class of people who happily live off the government teat and never do anything but upgrade their home theater equipment. I do not want to fund that here.

[dzp111]

You're trying to make it out to be a similar problem because the fundamental elements of violence and a person with a bike are still there, but the practical difference is just ridiculous.

Two things:

1. You're the one that differentiated issues

2. You're nor not making any sense.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Holy crap! Didn't know I'd be dealing with such immaturity.

But I did know I'd be dealing with such insecurity.

What is it about Canada that seems to breed it? Seriously. What?

It's like, so many people from there seem on some kick to constantly have to prove something, like deep inside you're affraid there's something terribly wrong with your country, so you constantly have to defend it as the GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS!!!

Can't you just enjoy your own healthcare system and be happy about it? If it works for you, then great.

But no, it becomes:

WHY OH WHY WOULD ANY AMERICAN RESIST WANTING OUR SYSTEM SHOVED DOWN THEIR THROAT?!! IT'S THE GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS!!!

So someone points out the flaws, and shows, no, actually it's not THE GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS, and frankly I don't want it. Maybe it works for you (somewhat) in your country that's less populated than one of our states, but we don't particularly want it here. Okay? Does that work for you? Is it okay that we go back to doing what we do, and you do what you do? Glad you enjoy it. I don't want it, but glad you like it. Okay?

WHAT!!!!!!!??!! HOW DARE YOU IMPLY CANADA ISN'T THE GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS!!!!! WAHHHHH!!!!!!! INSECURE RANT!!! POST PAGES OF DATA ABOUT HOW BAD AMERICA IS!!! WAHHHHHH!!! INSECURE RANT! INSECURE RANT!! I'LL LIVE LONGER THAN YOU!!! CANADA IS THE BEST!!!! IT'S THE GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS!! HOW CAN YOU DENY SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO GIVE YOU THE GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS!!! HOW IMMATURE!! WAHHH!!! MORE DATA ABOUT HOW BAAAAD AMERICA IS!! INSECURE RANT! GREATEST THING THAT EVER WAS.....!!!!

[dzp111]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

"Necessary" is such an interesting word. Sex changes are deemed medically necessary in some places in the US and thus would have to be covered under a health plan. I really don't mind people wanting to mutilate their genitals, but it's friggin' expensive and I should not have to pay for that.


That's less than a day's work even at fast-food wages. The only people who can't afford that are the truly destitute, and for them, whatever, make some crappy little healthcare plan to give them something. It doesn't take any great, sweeping reform. We already have a welfare system for this sort of thing. By your logic, we should start nationalized grocery stores for people who have trouble affording food.


For people who could afford it but would rather continue getting cable TV? No! I would not pay them any amount of money to continue being worthless leeches. These kinds of "something for everyone" policies will always be abused. In Argentina there's a whole class of people who happily live off the government teat and never do anything but upgrade their home theater equipment. I do not want to fund that here.

Chuckit, I hope you're joking. If not, my respect for you is diminishing at an non-wanting level.

[dzp111]

Let's keep Canada out of this for a sec. Can you do that?

If it's not broken, don't fix it (US health care). Seems like the general frame of mind...

You're fawked.

The guy wants to help! (50 million of you)

It seems like most of you don't want to!

WTF?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Chuckit, I hope you're joking. If not, my respect for you is diminishing at an non-wanting level.

Don't get all tut-tutty at me, young man. I'm writing long posts involving copious use of facts, logic and hard numbers. You've yet to formulate a single logical argument or even clearly explain what it is that you're saying except that you don't respect my right to the money I've made.

Let me frame this a different way: Has it occurred to you that my funds are also tight and I might not be able to afford to be pay for everybody else's healthcare?

[dzp111]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Don't get all tut-tutty at me, young man. I'm writing long posts involving copious use of facts, logic and hard numbers. You've yet to formulate a single logical argument or even clearly explain what it is that you're saying except that you don't respect my right to the money I've made.

Let me frame this a different way: Has it occurred to you that my funds are also tight and I might not be able to afford to be pay for everybody else's healthcare?

Hah! I'm literally living on a disability pension while paying for my neighbor's MRI and my neighbor's cancer treatment and my neighbor's physiology treatments, etc. And can I afford it? I've no choice but it's not hurting 'cause when it's my turn to hurt I know the care for me will be there.

Didn't mean to disrespect you. Truly.

p.s. I'm not a "young man". I only wish..

p.s.s. It's not about money, it's about 50 million people whom are not cared for when needed.

: )

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

p.s. I'm not a "young man". I only wish..

Oh, I was just kidding around there. I don't normally use the word "tut-tutty" or call people "young man."

Originally Posted by dzp111 

p.s.s. It's not about money, it's about 50 million people whom are not cared for when needed.

I wish that were true. If you have some way to care for them without requiring any money, that would be awesome and I would totally support it. But all the ideas I've seen have been about either robbing me or bankrupting the country — or possibly even both.

Also, that is not a real number. There are estimated to be 45 million uninsured, but that doesn't mean there are 45 million who need Obama's help to get healthcare. It includes many millions who are eligible for government aid right now but don't claim it. Millions wouldn't be eligible under Obama's plan either. And a lot of those people can afford insurance, but choose not to get it. I was one of them for quite some time. This bill would be a disservice to those people. The numbers are also skewed to give false negatives — people with insurance get counted as uninsured.

Like I said, I'm not against helping out people who really need it. I just think this unfathomably expensive socialized healthcare is a really bad plan being drawn up to solve an overinflated problem. If somebody is truly needy, we already have programs meant to help them. If those programs are not doing their jobs, we need to examine that.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by dzp111 

Let's keep Canada out of this for a sec. Can you do that?

Unfortunately, you brought Canada into it.

If it's not broken, don't fix it (US health care). Seems like the general frame of mind...

Then you're not listening to the debate. Particularly where I outline the insolvency of the Canadian system, some provinces in surplus of funds, others starved of funds and calling on a lame Parliament to do something about it. * i.e. if you want good soup, don't go to a soup line. This is all covered in a different thread you chose not to contribute to.

Problems;
- You're comparing apples to baseball bats
- The Canadian Healthcare system is insolvent regardless
- There aren't 50 million uninsured. This number is useful for spreading FUD
- The average household in the US spends more on entertainment and eating out than they do on healthcare. The problem is they're not paying for their own healthcare. We don't have a healthcare crisis, we have a "keep up with the Jones'" crisis.

The guy wants to help! (50 million of you)

"The guy" could do a bunch of things while not increasing the deficit by another $1.3 trillion dollars to cover a third of the uninsured and move countless millions onto a monstrosity of a healthcare system you all are trying to find a way out of.

It seems like most of you don't want to!

WTF?

Again, you're not listening to the debate.
- Opening interstate commerce
- HSAs and HSA-compatible plans
- tax reform to end facilitating failed employer-based healthcare system and break up the State-by-State monopolies.
- higher copays and deductibles (because you are the only one who should be rationing your care)
- mandatory coverage and subsidies for those who can't pay

For example: Opening State-to-State competition by reforming a flawed tax policy and slapping silly State requirements (such as Oriental therapies, hair transplants, midwives, etc...) will allow smaller insurers to compete opening the market even more with studies suggesting at least 11 million newly insured (at least a fourth) as a result. Cost? $0.

The debate has moved from healthcare reform to insurance reform and the only thing transparent about this Administration (i.e. "the guy") has been the FUD and BS they're using to sell the program. (whichever one works best for your angle) This is why they're losing the debate.

Don't get with part of the debate dzp111, get with the whole debate. This is all covered ad nauseam in the How health reform will help our economy thread.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

*applauds*
Thank you.
I'm so sick and tired of people from other countries constantly up on a friggen soap box blathering on like know-it-alls about MY country. Quite frankly, especially Canada which seems to be the global world capital of insecurity.

STFU and enjoy whatever it is about Canada you like so much. Your entire country has few people than the STATE I live in. Get off the soapbox for two seconds and realize this: you don't have any answers for providing healthcare for 300+ million people in THIS country.

Then it's a good thing that people from American aren't constantly up on friggen soap boxes blathering on like know-it-alls about *every other country*.

oh ... wait ...

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Then it's a good thing that people from American aren't constantly up on friggen soap boxes blathering on like know-it-alls about *every other country*.

oh ... wait ...

Logic doesn't work that way, dude. They can't tell us our business because they have so many fewer people than we do. We can't tell them because…we have so many fewer people than they do? Is this some sort of weird recursive joke? Your argument only works for two countries in the world — and in fact we don't have a lot of good ideas for them.

[ort888]

I don't know if the current bill being proposed is a dud or not, and I don't really know if we can afford it or not. That's not my job to know either. That's why we elect these clowns in the first place. They need to figure this crap out.

What I do know, is that I believe, deep down in my heart of hearts, that health care should be a universal right and that we as a civilized country should be taking care of our citizens.

Every person has a guarantee to an education in this country... isn't that the same sort of thing? How is it different? Why doesn't every person also have access to health care? It just seems barbaric to me.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Seriously. For anybody drawing comparisons to Canada, just consider the difference in scale: You could double the population of Canada, double it again and then double it yet again and it would still be less than the population of the United States. To say that something should be brought to the US because it worked in Canada is like saying that because you successfully beat a kid up and took his tricycle, you're going to go pick a fight in a biker bar.

Wouldn't every aspect of the system would scale up also? Our GDP is larger, our pool of doctors is larger. We have more people, but we also have more of everything else.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

*applauds*
Thank you.
I'm so sick and tired of people from other countries constantly up on a friggen soap box blathering on like know-it-alls about MY country. Quite frankly, especially Canada which seems to be the global world capital of insecurity.

STFU and enjoy whatever it is about Canada you like so much. Your entire country has few people than the STATE I live in. Get off the soapbox for two seconds and realize this: you don't have any answers for providing healthcare for 300+ million people in THIS country.

But the inverse of this is also true. I'm constantly hearing people trash the systems in other countries as a way to argue against universal care. If people can use foreign systems as a tool for their side, they should also expect to see it coming back.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Wouldn't every aspect of the system would scale up also? Our GDP is larger, our pool of doctors is larger. We have more people, but we also have more of everything else.

That isn't how scaling complex systems usually works.

[ort888]

So make it work in an unusual way.

I don't know. We manage to scale other things up just fine. Like the military.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Logic doesn't work that way, dude. They can't tell us our business because they have so many fewer people than we do. We can't tell them because…we have so many fewer people than they do? Is this some sort of weird recursive joke? Your argument only works for two countries in the world — and in fact we don't have a lot of good ideas for them.

So, your saying that the US can tell other countries what to do because the US has more people? (note: I'm not talking about just healthcare here. I'm talking about countries getting into, or staying out of, other country's business)

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by ort888 

I don't know. We manage to scale other things up just fine. Like the military.

The socialization of things that go boom is acceptable.

[ort888]

Or the socialization of schools.

Can you picture an alternate universe where the government doesn't pay for schooling and 40 million kids don't have a school to go to? Would people would be at these town halls yelling about socialized schooling?

[pooka]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

The socialization of things that go boom is acceptable.

Well, we give them money, they blow **** up. We give them more money, they blow MORE **** up. We're ALL about results, down here.

[besson3c]

Chuckit: I think you need to think a little more about this stuff. Simply making an insurance program that costs $50/month or something doesn't help people avoid bankruptcies due to health care related expenses (a $50/month plan would probably have a deductible over $10,000, which can be enough to bankrupt or virtually bankrupt some people in a single hospital visit having to pay this and more). It doesn't fix the whole in-network loophole, and It doesn't fix being denied or the whole preexisting condition loophole that is being discussed as far as consumer protections go. It doesn't break up the monopolies or do anything about the rising costs of Medicare. In short, this is far more complicated because it needs to be.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

So, your saying that the US can tell other countries what to do because the US has more people? (note: I'm not talking about just healthcare here. I'm talking about countries getting into, or staying out of, other country's business)

I'm saying the US can speak with greater experience on matters of scale than, say, Switzerland.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Again, you're not listening to the debate.
- Opening interstate commerce
- HSAs and HSA-compatible plans
- tax reform to end facilitating failed employer-based healthcare system and break up the State-by-State monopolies.
- higher copays and deductibles (because you are the only one who should be rationing your care)
- mandatory coverage and subsidies for those who can't pay

For example: Opening State-to-State competition by reforming a flawed tax policy and slapping silly State requirements (such as Oriental therapies, hair transplants, midwives, etc...) will allow smaller insurers to compete opening the market even more with studies suggesting at least 11 million newly insured (at least a fourth) as a result. Cost? $0.

The debate has moved from healthcare reform to insurance reform and the only thing transparent about this Administration (i.e. "the guy") has been the FUD and BS they're using to sell the program. (whichever one works best for your angle) This is why they're losing the debate.

Opening interstate commerce... What would you do about the care facilities that only work with insurance provider x or y because they are in network? Do you think that tax cuts are all that is needed to break up state by state monopolies? Do you buy into the argument that the insurance company monopolies have more leveraging power over health care providers? What should be the penalty for non-coverage be? What happens if you can't afford your own cancer treatments?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I'm saying the US can speak with greater experience on matters of scale than, say, Switzerland.

For the record I was comparing the US to Switzerland based on operational details and design, not scale. Scaling is incredibly hard, this government seems to be betting on a diverse range of options bettering one thing trying to be something for everybody. What I don't know is what Joe Sixpack will do and how that will affect me.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I'm saying the US can speak with greater experience on matters of scale than, say, Switzerland.

Then, by extension, China can speak with greater experience on matters of scale than, say, the US?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Then, by extension, China can speak with greater experience on matters of scale than, say, the US?

To some degree, yes. The US is closer to China's scale than it is to Canada's, though. (America has 10 times the population of Canada and 50 times the population of Switzerland, but China only has four times the population of the US.)

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Then, by extension, China can speak with greater experience on matters of scale than, say, the US?

Because US is the best country in the world and knows best. We can tell every country in the world what to do.

Damn those commies. Communism doesn't work.

Hey China, can we borrow another $500 billion? We need to turn Iraq into a democracy.

[hyteckit]

Who keeps bring up sex changes anyway?

How about breast implant or hair transplants?

Or death panels?

It has nothing to do with the public option being discussed, but it's fun to talk about.

[besson3c]

Death panels I think were brought up by Betsy McCaughey and parroted by Sarah Palin:

Betsy McCaughey's Ideas Called "Hyperbolic... Dangerous" By Jon Stewart (VIDEO)

Have you guys watched this interview yet?

[hyteckit]

Sarah Palin needs to STFU then, cause my city is 6 times the population of the state of Alaska, so WTF does she know.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Who keeps bring up sex changes anyway?

How about breast implant or hair transplants?

Or death panels?

It has nothing to do with the public option being discussed, but it's fun to talk about.

Yes it does, and I already explained how. Stop trolling.

[besson3c]

So Chuckit: do you really think that a public option would cover a sex change, or were you just being flippant?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So Chuckit: do you really think that a public option would cover a sex change, or were you just being flippant?

Do you really think the public option would not cover medically necessary operations?