 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / November 2007The Democrat's Candidate
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019 The moonbats don't care. They are too busy screaming and stomping their feet to see the obvious truth. The Clintons are criminals, period. As the election grows closer, more will come out. Personally, I aint worried, there is no way she is going to get back into the White House. > Personally, I aint worried, there is no way she is going to get back into > the White House. Perhaps if she were to take some lessons from Monica, she could get back in as an aide. Like you, I don't think she stands much of a chance. On the other hand, I think the consequences, should she succeed, will be so catastrophic that even the slightest chance that she'll be elected, is difficult to accept. I'm very worried. I live in hope that one of the many criminal, or even nearly criminal acts she has committed over the years will eliminate her from the race. I don't feel much better about Obama. Lee > > Personally, I aint worried, there is no way she is going to get back into > > the White House. > Perhaps if she were to take some lessons from Monica, she could get back in > as an aide. I dont care if she was the last female in the known universe, I wouldnt allow my wobbly bits anywhere near her. > Like you, I don't think she stands much of a chance. On the other hand, I > think the consequences, should she succeed, will be so catastrophic that > even the slightest chance that she'll be elected, is difficult to accept. I concur. I am just trying to keep positive and remember all the BS that flew last time, the polls, the lefties celebrating a win before the election, all of it. It's deja vu all over again. And as usual, they have no platform, except to bitch, talk sh.t and undermine the war effort, provide comfort and support to the greatest enemy of freedom ever known. > I'm very worried. I live in hope that one of the many criminal, or even > nearly criminal acts she has committed over the years will eliminate her > from the race. Those acts should have kept her from the Senate, but it seems the lefties only care about corrupt and criminal politicians when said politician is a Republican. > I don't feel much better about Obama. He has less than no experience. Actually, no one the Democrats are running is worth voting for. Rudy is a gun grabber, but has the most experience and the best reputation and background. Romney is out, McCain maybe. Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. > He has less than no experience. Actually, no one the Democrats are running > is worth voting for. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. Dont totally count out Fred Thompson. I think he may be somewhat of a dark horse on the Republican side but he is still hanging in there. > Dont totally count out Fred Thompson. I think he may be somewhat of a > dark horse on the Republican side but he is still hanging in there. There are things I like about Fred and nothing I dislike. So far, he's my first choice. Lee >> He has less than no experience. Actually, no one the Democrats are running >> is worth voting for. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Dont totally count out Fred Thompson. I think he may be somewhat of a >dark horse on the Republican side but he is still hanging in there. What do you call a "dark horse idiot" ? loser > Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. That would be most excellent. Running a corrupt thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican is the surest way to lose the social-conservative religious base and guarantee a win for Hillary. I'm just curious why you want a corrupt thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican in the White House. > > Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Hillary. I'm just curious why you want a corrupt thrice-married > adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican in the White House. I'm curious what makes you think that Scott "wants" it to be the "corrupt thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." > I'm curious what makes you think that Scott "wants" it to be the "corrupt > thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." Because he's not voting for Hillary. > > I'm curious what makes you think that Scott "wants" it to be the "corrupt > > thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." > > Because he's not voting for Hillary. I'm not voting for HIllary and I don't want it to be the "corrupt thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." > I'm not voting for HIllary and I don't want it to be the "corrupt > thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." Yeah, if we have a choice between those two fuckin' leftists, I would definitely be tempted to throw my vote away with some 3rd party candidate that has no chance of winning just so I can complain about whoever wins (and hope for a meteor striking DC)...  Signature"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." >> I'm not voting for HIllary and I don't want it to be the "corrupt >> thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >candidate that has no chance of winning just so I can complain about >whoever wins (and hope for a meteor striking DC)... LOL is this going to be the year the Demo-clowns pay Nadir to run against Rudy ? > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 17:30:22 -0500, Grumman-581 > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > LOL is this going to be the year the Demo-clowns pay Nadir to run > against Rudy ? I don't think it would be Democrats paying Ralphie. We need all the votes we can get. >> > Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I'm curious what makes you think that Scott "wants" it to be the "corrupt >thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." I assume this means you cannot read English. > >> > Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. > >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > > I assume this means you cannot read English. Oh, the irony. > I'm curious what makes you think that Scott "wants" it to be the "corrupt > thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." I never indicated I would vote for him, it's just Mossman doing what he does best. Projecting, lying and allowing his bigotry to show his a.s. On Oct 23, 6:29 am, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote: > > I'm curious what makes you think that Scott "wants" it to be the "corrupt > > thrice-married adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican." [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Projecting, lying and allowing his bigotry to show his a.s. I asked who you would vote for, but you were too stupid to figure out how to answer. Now I have my answer. You're throwing away your vote like usual. Is that why you bothered to serve your country? > On Oct 23, 6:29 am, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > how to answer. Now I have my answer. You're throwing away your vote > like usual. Is that why you bothered to serve your country? It's my opinion that the ballots should have a box marked "None of the above" and if said candidate wins, we start the process over with new candidates. > It's my opinion that the ballots should have a box marked "None of the > above" and if said candidate wins, we start the process over with new > candidates. Only if we kill off the two losers first... Signature"Some people are only alive because it is illegal to kill them." > > It's my opinion that the ballots should have a box marked "None of the > > above" and if said candidate wins, we start the process over with new > > candidates. > > Only if we kill off the two losers first... What's the point? Just make a law so that they aren't allowed to run again... ever. > On Oct 23, 6:29 am, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > how to answer. Now I have my answer. You're throwing away your vote > like usual. Is that why you bothered to serve your country? 1st off, it is none of your business who I vote for. Got it? Everyone here already knows who you will vote for, and why. And you have the effrontery to call anyone else stupid. Unlike you, I am waiting until I hear from all the candidates and see who is left before I make up my mind who gets my vote. I am not a partisan bigot like you. As far as serving the country goes, that is an discussion parasites like you should shy away from. Even if I explained why I volunteered, you don't have the ability to understand. On Oct 24, 4:41 am, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Oct 23, 6:29 am, pugetsounddi...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > here already knows who you will vote for, and why. And you have the > effrontery to call anyone else stupid. If you're embarrassed to say, that's your right. Me, I'm not embarrassed to be promoting Hillary. It's about time we had a woman president. The Clintons did a great time the first time in the White House and we need a great president to clean up all the messes that Bush is leaving behind. > Unlike you, I am waiting until I hear from all the candidates and see > who is left before I make up my mind who gets my vote. I am not a > partisan bigot like you. So you've been looking at the Democrat candidates too? Sure you have. > As far as serving the country goes, that is an discussion parasites > like you should shy away from. Even if I explained why I volunteered, > you don't have the ability to understand. I understand fully. No need to embarrass yourself here yet again. Your secret is safe with me. > So you've been looking at the Democrat candidates too? Sure you have. Of course, but there isnt one I would waste a vote on. > > As far as serving the country goes, that is an discussion parasites > > like you should shy away from. Even if I explained why I volunteered, > > you don't have the ability to understand. > > I understand fully. No need to embarrass yourself here yet again. > Your secret is safe with me. No embarrassment at all, at least I served. >> Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Hillary. I'm just curious why you want a corrupt thrice-married > adulterous pro-gay pro-choice anti-gun Republican in the White House. Because he's the less morally bankrupt of the two? On Oct 24, 2:20 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > >> Taken all together, it's going be Rudy. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Because he's the less morally bankrupt of the two? Yeah, trying to make sure that all Americans have adequate health care is such an evil deed. > Yeah, trying to make sure that all Americans have adequate health care > is such an evil deed. <cough> > On Oct 24, 2:20 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Yeah, trying to make sure that all Americans have adequate health care > is such an evil deed. Trying to make sure that all Americans have adequate health care is a very noble goal. Making the taxpayers cover the bill, not so much. Besides, would you trust the government to get you the best deal on health care? I know that I don't. >> On Oct 24, 2:20 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" >> <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Besides, would you trust the government to get you the best deal on health >care? I know that I don't. You don't need the government to choose your healthcare provider but simply to act as the payor. See Medicare. And, if you're concerned about government provided healthcare, look at the VA. That's exactly what it is and it has higher quality measures than private healthcare > You don't need the government to choose your healthcare provider but > simply to act as the payor. Sounds good to me. I work for a living and pay into the program. I pay much more than my share, to fund insurance for all those people that can't or won't work for a good enough living to pay for their own. The recipients I help pay for include millions of people that are here illegally, that pay nothing into the system, but get full benefits out. Because I'm such a nice guy, I also give them full social security benefits, even though they didn't pay a dime into that program either. Never mind that Social Security is darned near bankrupt, it's the right thing to do. > See Medicare. And, if you're concerned about government provided > healthcare, look at the VA. That's exactly > what it is and it has higher quality measures than private healthcare We've seen Medicare. That's why we're concerned. We've seen the VA, too. Remember Agent Orange? Perhaps you think the VA has higher quality measures than private health care. Some of us don't share your opinion. Health care by the lowest bidder has about as much chance as being better than private options as other failed government programs do, none at all. Lee > > You don't need the government to choose your healthcare provider but > > simply to act as the payor. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Lee The really telling thing is that even though the government is gettting "the lowest bidder", they'll probably still end up paying more for it than if it were on the open market. For instance, I work for a police department and we purchase our computers from Dell. We don't purchase through the State contracts though because it costs more to do so than if we purchase using their standard small business pricing. You gotta love government "discounts". >> > You don't need the government to choose your healthcare provider >> > but simply to act as the payor. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > gettting "the lowest bidder", they'll probably still end up paying > more for it than if it were on the open market. Then how come we have very good health care over here in Belgium (and everyone's covered), but still our per capita health expenditures are much lower than the US? >> The really telling thing is that even though the government is >> gettting "the lowest bidder", they'll probably still end up paying >> more for it than if it were on the open market. > Then how come we have very good health care over here in Belgium (and > everyone's covered), but still our per capita health expenditures are > much lower than the US? Because the US Government didn't control the bidding process? "Lee Bell" <pleebell@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:QJ5Ui.18692$N7.3017 @bignews7.bellsouth.net: >>> The really telling thing is that even though the government is >>> gettting "the lowest bidder", they'll probably still end up paying [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Because the US Government didn't control the bidding process? We don't have a bidding process, but guess who's paying almost all of those high per capita expenditures in the US... >"Lee Bell" <pleebell@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:QJ5Ui.18692$N7.3017 >@bignews7.bellsouth.net: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >We don't have a bidding process, but guess who's paying almost all of those >high per capita expenditures in the US... Baloney. All the drugs at least are done on a bidding basis by the government. How do you think you get lower drug prices than us? Because Belgium is a bigger buyer? >>"Lee Bell" <pleebell@bellsouth.net> wrote in news:QJ5Ui.18692$N7.3017 >>@bignews7.bellsouth.net: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > government. How do you think you get lower drug prices than us? > Because Belgium is a bigger buyer? Nope, you're wrong there. There's no bidding system for drugs at all. You're referring to the Kiwi system, where the government in New Zealand is indeed buying through a bidding process. >> Baloney. All the drugs at least are done on a bidding basis by the >> government. How do you think you get lower drug prices than us? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >You're referring to the Kiwi system, where the government in New Zealand is >indeed buying through a bidding process. So drug companies just give Belgium low drug prices out of the goodness of their hearts? Right. Same as they do here. >>> Baloney. All the drugs at least are done on a bidding basis by the >>> government. How do you think you get lower drug prices than us? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > So drug companies just give Belgium low drug prices out of the > goodness of their hearts? Right. Same as they do here. Nope, in Belgium (and the rest of Europe) import of drugs is allowed, which isn't the case in the US. So, prices are lower. Just imagine what would happen with the price of drugs of there were no restrictions on the import of those drugs from Canada... >>>> Baloney. All the drugs at least are done on a bidding basis by the >>>> government. How do you think you get lower drug prices than us? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Nope, in Belgium (and the rest of Europe) import of drugs is allowed, which >isn't the case in the US. So, prices are lower. Oh I see. You just benefit from the lower negotiated prices of others. That's not the exact same thing as benefiting directly from negotiated prices is it? Right. >Just imagine what would happen with the price of drugs of there were no >restrictions on the import of those drugs from Canada... Not much, since Canada is much smaller than the US and doesn't have enough supply to affect prices to any extent, >>>>> Baloney. All the drugs at least are done on a bidding basis by >>>>> the government. How do you think you get lower drug prices than [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > others. That's not the exact same thing as benefiting directly from > negotiated prices is it? Right. Which isn't the case as there is no bidding in Europe... Oh, and how come prices in Canada are lower? >>Just imagine what would happen with the price of drugs of there were >>no restrictions on the import of those drugs from Canada... > > Not much, since Canada is much smaller than the US and doesn't have > enough supply to affect prices to any extent, That's why you have all these internet sites selling cheap(er) drugs... >>>Nope, in Belgium (and the rest of Europe) import of drugs is allowed, >>>which isn't the case in the US. So, prices are lower. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Which isn't the case as there is no bidding in Europe... Complete bullshit for which, as usual, you just do hand waving and show no proof. On one hand, you argue that drug prices here are due to profit taking but on the other Europe gets its lower prices through benovelent charity from the same companies apparently. What a load of crap from someone who is completely ignorant. >Oh, and how come prices in Canada are lower? Because the government controls the prices there just like I said. >>>Just imagine what would happen with the price of drugs of there were >>>no restrictions on the import of those drugs from Canada... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >That's why you have all these internet sites selling cheap(er) drugs... Because it's done on a small basis that can't come close to providing what the entire country needs that's why. If it worked the way you claim for Belgium, which is ridiculous, the prices would equalize and be low here wouldn't they? Duhhh. The drug companies are basically tolerating what is happening from Canada as a result because they more than offset it here from higher prices. >> The really telling thing is that even though the government is >> gettting "the lowest bidder", they'll probably still end up paying [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >everyone's covered), but still our per capita health expenditures are >much lower than the US? Because: A. if Belgium is anything like almost all of the rest of Europe, the coverage is theoretical and costs are cut by rationing B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs C. preventive care is practically nonexistent D. much more R and D is done here, even by European firms than in Europe john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote in news:472131e3.79781780 @news20.forteinc.com: >>> The really telling thing is that even though the government is >>> gettting "the lowest bidder", they'll probably still end up paying [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > A. if Belgium is anything like almost all of the rest of Europe, the > coverage is theoretical and costs are cut by rationing The coverage is anything but theoretical and there's no rationing. Europe is more than the UK. Looks like you don't know Europe that well. > B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs No you aren't. I do know that drugs in the US are so expensive that Canadians can sell them cheaper to you over the internet > C. preventive care is practically nonexistent Shall I tell you about free vaccinations of children (from 3 months on), free flu vaccinations for the elderly. free preventive dental care for children, yearly free medical examinations through school, free preventive breast cancer examinations,...? > D. much more R and D is done here, even by European firms than in > Europe Hmm, look up for instance Janssens Farmaceutica or Glaxo Smith Kline once... oh, and R & D isn't the biggest cost for the pharmaceutical industry, it's marketing and publicity. >john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote in news:472131e3.79781780 >@news20.forteinc.com: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Europe is more than the UK. Looks like you don't know Europe that well. Funny, I am only married to an European, travel there about 10 times a year or so, have a son studying in Rotterdam. Right, I know nothing about Europe. But apparently you don't, as Denmark and Sweden both fit the profile I described above. Are they part of the UK as well? Also, explain this about your great healthcare system in Belgium: Euthanasia and Health Care Rationing in Europe This thoughtful commentary, published in the Brussels Journal, worries that Europeans, which have a form of health care rationing already in place to keep public health programs afloat, may turn to euthanasia as a form of controlling costs. Here is the key quote: "In Europe there are medical treatments, operations or drugs which are not available to persons above a certain age, or to persons who are considered too sick, or to anyone at all. Political authorities, claiming to be the guardians of solidarity in society, decide who is allowed to get what kind of treatment, operation or drug. Soon euthanasia might be the price the solidarity principle of the welfare state imposes on those people whose health care is costing society the most. Politicians in Belgium and the Netherlands have already granted their citizens a "right to die" by means of a lethal (and cheap) euthanasia injection. Is this a new "freedom" that the state, which is constantly restricting every other aspect of our lives, generously bestows on us? Or does it boil down to "economic euthanasia," which enables governments to save money by eliminating those that cost the welfare state too much?" (My emphasis.) Such predictions do not warrant our becoming smug. We are experiencing some of the same problems with managed care. The Bioethics Movement is hot to impose health care rationing. If assisted suicide/euthanasia is ever legalized widely here in the U.S., it too could quickly become about money. Think about it: The drugs for killing cost less than $100. It might cost $100,000 to give patients proper care so they don't want euthanasia. As I noted in Forced Exit, if the same percentage of Americans die by euthanasia,as are (under) reported in the Netherlands, it would amount to about 175,000 euthanasia deaths each year. Many of these would be the most expensive patients to care for. This is one reason I have often asserted that I that if assisted suicide/euthanasia is ever legalized here, Wall Street investors in for-profit HMOs will be dancing in the streets. >> B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs > >No you aren't. I do know that drugs in the US are so expensive that >Canadians can sell them cheaper to you over the internet You don't know what you are talking about. The reason that our costs for the same drugs here are higher than in Europe is because large price discounts are given to European countries because they negotiate as countries and the drug companies make up the difference by overcharging us here. That's a plain subsidy ace. What do you think--that drug transportation costs here are huge? >> C. preventive care is practically nonexistent > >Shall I tell you about free vaccinations of children (from 3 months on), >free flu vaccinations for the elderly. free preventive dental care for >children, yearly free medical examinations through school, free >preventive breast cancer examinations,...? Feel free. I get all the same here. Funny, my son also has a great deal of trouble getting appointments for his daughter to see a so-called house doctor (read non-pediatrician) in The Netherlands and hasn't been able to get her a flu shot yet for this year isn't it? And only an European paying outrageous taxes on income, purchases, cars, etc. etc. would believe what you outline is free. >> D. much more R and D is done here, even by European firms than in >> Europe > >Hmm, look up for instance Janssens Farmaceutica or Glaxo Smith Kline >once... I have looked at many of these European companies. Go look at their facilities in the US where they do huge amounts of research just like I said. >oh, and R & D isn't the biggest cost for the pharmaceutical industry, >it's marketing and publicity. So what? I never said that it was the largest cost, just a huge expense that needs to be paid for and is offloaded here. >>>B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > as countries and the drug companies make up the difference by > overcharging us here. That's a plain subsidy ace. Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, all these coutries. Matthias >>>>B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? I have no idea what you're talking about, >How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, >SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, >all these coutries. ANY government has buying power compared to individuals. Second, other countries are priced to market, meaning if they can't pay more the drug companies can't charge more and, if they want to sell anything at all, they have to price lower and shift costs elsewhere. Like to the US as I said. Third, a number of these type countries (Thailand for starters and India) just ignore valid patents and steal the drugs. All that is how. >>>>>B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > (Thailand for starters and India) just ignore valid patents and steal > the drugs. All that is how. a. It's not the governments that are buying those drugs b. It's not about shifting costs, but maximizing profits...ever looked at the profits in the pharna industry? >>>Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? >> >> I have no idea what you're talking about, I can see you don't know what you're talking about either. >>>How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, >>>SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >a. It's not the governments that are buying those drugs Bullshit. It's done routinely and apparently all Belgium is doing is letting others do it for them, which changes nothing. >b. It's not about shifting costs, but maximizing profits...ever looked >at the profits in the pharna industry? It's both and have you seen how much their stock prices have dropped? >>>>Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? >>> >>> I have no idea what you're talking about, > > I can see you don't know what you're talking about either. You're now replying to your own replies, I see >>>>How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, >>>>SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Bullshit. It's done routinely and apparently all Belgium is doing is > letting others do it for them, which changes nothing. You may call it bullshit as much as you want, but it's still not done. >>b. It's not about shifting costs, but maximizing profits...ever looked >>at the profits in the pharna industry? > > It's both and have you seen how much their stock prices have dropped? When one of their top drugs doesn't sell well enough... >>>>>Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >You're now replying to your own replies, I see Blah, blah, blah. No proof and no sense. john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote in news:47222b47.143626443 @news20.forteinc.com: >>>>>>Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Blah, blah, blah. No proof and no sense. In your case I would say: nonsense... >>>>Don't you have apprenticeship of trade? >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Bullshit. It's done routinely and apparently all Belgium is doing is > letting others do it for them, which changes nothing. Don't move. The Ambulance is coming. Matthias >>>a. It's not the governments that are buying those drugs >> >> Bullshit. It's done routinely and apparently all Belgium is doing is >> letting others do it for them, which changes nothing. > >Don't move. The Ambulance is coming. Not in The Netherlands it's not juvenile. Now go play with your toys and cry in the corner. >>>>a. It's not the governments that are buying those drugs >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Not in The Netherlands it's not juvenile. Now go play with your toys > and cry in the corner. To spacey those corners. All infected by your multiple universes. String theories, you know. Puppets, and all that. Matthias >>>You don't know what you are talking about. The reason that our costs >>>for the same drugs here are higher than in Europe is because large [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I have no idea what you're talking about, About milkmaids with some knowledge about economy would laugh at you. apprenticeship is the first step of professional education after school, unless you go tohigh school. Bakers, mechanics, grocerist, sorcerers, for instance apply for aprrenticeship. >>How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, >>SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, >>all these coutries. > > ANY government has buying power compared to individuals. Ah, Nigeria' government is buying drugs for it's people. Wonderful ;-)) > Second, > other countries are priced to market, meaning if they can't pay more > the drug companies can't charge more and, if they want to sell > anything at all, they have to price lower and shift costs elsewhere. You imply they sell at a loss. That's ridiculous. They would let them die, and have your government buy the drugs. If.. Matthias >>>>You don't know what you are talking about. The reason that our costs >>>>for the same drugs here are higher than in Europe is because large [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >school. Bakers, mechanics, grocerist, sorcerers, for >instance apply for aprrenticeship. Of course, they would. They're as completely ignorant as you. >>>How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, >>>SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Ah, Nigeria' government is buying drugs for it's people. >Wonderful ;-)) No they're among the ones stealing them of course, >> Second, >> other countries are priced to market, meaning if they can't pay more [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >They would let them die, and have your government buy the >drugs. If.. Of course not. If you knew anything, you would look at generics and see what they cost to manufacture after the warrantypatent runs out. Cipro, for example, cost a fortune before, something like $10 a pill if I remember right, which came out with the anthrax scare after 911. Now, you can get a month's supply of 30 of them for $4 at Walmart now that it has. None of which has anything to do with the discussion, which was that Europeans get far lower prices than they should because Americans are paying far more. Which is the case. >>>>>You don't know what you are talking about. The reason that our >>>>>costs for the same drugs here are higher than in Europe is because [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > which was that Europeans get far lower prices than they should because > Americans are paying far more. Which is the case. Perhaps you should use more generic drugs...like Europeans do...it forces companies to lower prices \ >>>>>How come drugs are cheaper in Switzerland, Niger, Nigeria, >>>>>SA, Zimbabwe, Egypt? Must have a phenonemous market power, [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >Perhaps you should use more generic drugs...like Europeans do...it >forces companies to lower prices That is exactly what is happening, of course, which is why you can get a month's supply at Walmart and other places for $4. Has nothing to do with having to pay ridiculous amounts for the newer drugs under patent though. john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote in news:472140ce.83600721 @news20.forteinc.com: >>john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote in news:472131e3.79781780 >>@news20.forteinc.com: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > about Europe. But apparently you don't, as Denmark and Sweden both > fit the profile I described above. Are they part of the UK as well? No, they don't > Also, explain this about your great healthcare system in Belgium: > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > suicide/euthanasia is ever legalized here, Wall Street investors in > for-profit HMOs will be dancing in the streets. You might want to do some reserach on the euthanasia laws in Belgium and The Netherlands and certainly on the looney that produced the nonsens above. >>> B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > overcharging us here. That's a plain subsidy ace. What do you > think--that drug transportation costs here are huge? No, that import isn't allowed in the US, thus giving the money grabbers within the pharma industry every opportunity to ask as much as they want. Why shouldn't they? You anyway have no means to get the drugs cheaper, whereas we do. The simplest of free market mechanisms there is. >>> C. preventive care is practically nonexistent >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Feel free. I get all the same here. The point isn't what you get, but that contrary to what you write/think, we also get them. Funny, my son also has a great > deal of trouble getting appointments for his daughter to see a > so-called house doctor (read non-pediatrician) in The Netherlands and > hasn't been able to get her a flu shot yet for this year isn't it? Then he has a very busy house doctor.... > And only an European paying outrageous taxes on income, purchases, > cars, etc. etc. would believe what you outline is free. And still we don't have to worry about the high cost of drugs or hospitalisation... >>> D. much more R and D is done here, even by European firms than in >>> Europe [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > So what? I never said that it was the largest cost, just a huge > expense that needs to be paid for and is offloaded here. Simply because they can... >> Funny, I am only married to an European, travel there about 10 times a >> year or so, have a son studying in Rotterdam. Right, I know nothing >> about Europe. But apparently you don't, as Denmark and Sweden both >> fit the profile I described above. Are they part of the UK as well? > >No, they don't You just throw up complete nonsense as if it were fact. My wife is Swedish and I go to both these countries about 10 times a year. Neither do any amount of preventive care for adults and Swedes and Danes routinely complain about it. I know many that don't even know what doctor they would go to. So you have no idea what you're talking about. >> Think about it: The drugs for killing cost less than $100. It might >> cost $100,000 to give patients proper care so they don't want [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >The Netherlands and certainly on the looney that produced the nonsens >above. I already have. The Netherlands has been doing this for years know and its completely legal. Which it obviously is in Belgium as well or you would put up proof that it wasn't. Though hand waving is obviously your specialty rather than proof. Prove Belgium doesn't allow euthanasia. The Scandanavians, by the way, think the practice is disgusting. >>>> B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >want. Why shouldn't they? You anyway have no means to get the drugs >cheaper, whereas we do. The simplest of free market mechanisms there is. Complete bullshit as I said before. All you are doing is importing drugs from countries who have negotiated the discounts for you. You know nothing either about how business works do you? >>>> C. preventive care is practically nonexistent >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Then he has a very busy house doctor.... Right. And the female student who almost died lying on her floor while talking to the Dutch emergency services who didn't want to pay for an ambulance for her and wanted her to take a taxi instead when she couldn't even move from her pain and ended up with a major operation and two weeks in the hospital. They were too busy too? What a load of crap. They do evertthing they can in these countries to keep you from getting the medical care you are supposed to be getting provided to control costs. >> And only an European paying outrageous taxes on income, purchases, >> cars, etc. etc. would believe what you outline is free. > >And still we don't have to worry about the high cost of drugs or >hospitalisation... Neither would we if we were willing to pay outrageous prices for them otherwise and put up with government imposed rationing. Or euthanasia. No thanks. >>> Funny, I am only married to an European, travel there about 10 times >>> a year or so, have a son studying in Rotterdam. Right, I know [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > what doctor they would go to. So you have no idea what you're talking > about. You should google once preventive care and Sweden and Denmark... >>> Think about it: The drugs for killing cost less than $100. It might >>> cost $100,000 to give patients proper care so they don't want [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > allow euthanasia. The Scandanavians, by the way, think the practice is > disgusting. Did I say we don't allow it? I just told you that you should do some research on what's in those laws (the who, when, how etc) before declaring them as cost-saving measure as the idiot in the article does. I know some Scandinavians who don't. >>>>> B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > drugs from countries who have negotiated the discounts for you. You > know nothing either about how business works do you? Apparently you know nothing of the pharma industry and those countr\ies that supposedly negotiate discounts...New Zealand and British Columbia are far away from Europe... >>>>> C. preventive care is practically nonexistent >>>> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > to keep you from getting the medical care you are supposed to be > getting provided to control costs. I'll tell that to my dad who just had heart surgery and my neighbour who broke her ankle (the ambulance was there in 5 min., as it's supposed to be). You're proving more and more that you don't have a clue. >>> And only an European paying outrageous taxes on income, purchases, >>> cars, etc. etc. would believe what you outline is free. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > otherwise and put up with government imposed rationing. Or > euthanasia. No thanks. But you are paying outrageous prices for them and the rationing is imposed by your insurance companies or the simple fact that you don't have coverage as do to many... And thank God I can decide to put an end to my suffering in the final stages of my decease if ever I would get cancer ( you know when the morphien only still works in such a high dose that you'r in fat unconscious)... And now I'm off to the South of France for week of serious diving. >>>> Funny, I am only married to an European, travel there about 10 times >>>> a year or so, have a son studying in Rotterdam. Right, I know [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >You should google once preventive care and Sweden and Denmark... I have long since done so and have talked numerous times with doctors in both countries. Why don't you try following you own advice so you don't make so many patently false statements? >> I already have. The Netherlands has been doing this for years know >> and its completely legal. Which it obviously is in Belgium as well or [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >research on what's in those laws (the who, when, how etc) before >declaring them as cost-saving measure as the idiot in the article does. I long since have. And am totally unimpressed with all the reasons (see Nazis) for the rationale. And killing someone you would otherwise have to pay medical care for is a cost saving measure whether you like it or not. >I know some Scandinavians who don't. they still have some Nazis there like they did during WWII. >>>>>> B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>>drugs cheaper, whereas we do. The simplest of free market mechanisms >>>there is. Bullshit. The law you are talking about is routinely ignored and imports occur all the time. And, as usual, you have no clue what you're talking about. Importing is done all the time but is completely insufficient to affect prices. >> Complete bullshit as I said before. All you are doing is importing >> drugs from countries who have negotiated the discounts for you. You [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >that supposedly negotiate discounts...New Zealand and British Columbia >are far away from Europe... Blah, blah, blah. Why don't you read the link I gave before continuing to make a fool out of yourself? >>>>>> C. preventive care is practically nonexistent >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >broke her ankle (the ambulance was there in 5 min., as it's supposed to >be). Feel free. I never said these situations were prevalent in Belgium in the first place because I don't know the situation there, unlike you who continually posts nonsense about those you don't know about. I do know the situation in The Netherlands because my son and his family has experienced it there and in Sweden and Denmark where I know the situation. I said these situations exist in SOME European countries because they do. Funny, though, I never heard of anyone running off to Belgium to get medical care. I would tell my Danish friend about it, but he's dead. And he had several doctors in his family including a cousin. >You're proving more and more that you don't have a clue. Blah. blah, blah. Nothing to say because he posts crap with no proof. >>>> And only an European paying outrageous taxes on income, purchases, >>>> cars, etc. etc. would believe what you outline is free. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >imposed by your insurance companies or the simple fact that you don't >have coverage as do to many... I don't pay anywhere near the taxes you do for this stuff and neither does any other American. Complete crap as usual. And I have had exactly NO rationing for any of my medical care by anyone. I did a heart scan on my doctor's advice which wasn't covered by insurance. Cost $350. Big deal. It now costs $250. Outrageous isn't it? And I got it done in 1 day after I called for an appointment. It showed a slightly elevated calcium count which might indicate a slightly higher risk of heart disease. So I researched the internet and found the top cardiologist in Denver where I live. I called and could have had an appointment the next day but had a conflict so I made one the next weekl. He did a nuclear stress electrocardiogram the same day. Total cost $25. Outrageous again. Rationing huh? Completely covered by insurance with no questions asked. Had my Danish friend had the same test with a much higher risk profile, he would be alive today not dead. The only thing simple here is you, who doesn't have a clue, as usual, what he's talking about, >And thank God I can decide to put an end to my suffering in the final >stages of my decease if ever I would get cancer ( you know when the >morphien only still works in such a high dose that you'r in fat >unconscious)... You can take about a thousand over the counter drugs that would do the same thing without the government doing it for you ace. Or jump off a bridge or something. Go pay for your own suicide if you are so determined and don't foist it off on others pretending you're doing some great social service.. >And now I'm off to the South of France for week of serious diving. Watch out the Belgium doctors don't put CO in your tank other than air to relieve your obvious misery. >>Did I say we don't allow it? I just told you that you should do some >>research on what's in those laws (the who, when, how etc) before [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > they still have some Nazis there like they did during WWII. Absolutely true. Like Great Britain, Denmark, U.S.A., Iran, South Africa, Russia, Germany. >>>>No, that import isn't allowed in the US, thus giving the money >>>>grabbers within the pharma industry every opportunity to ask as much [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > you're talking about. Importing is done all the time but is > completely insufficient to affect prices. ;-))) > Feel free. I never said these situations were prevalent in Belgium in > the first place because I don't know the situation there, unlike you [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > because they do. Funny, though, I never heard of anyone running off > to Belgium to get medical care. The risk of driving on public roads in Belgium by far outweighs the benefits of their health care system. Or, Michael? ;-) >>But you are paying outrageous prices for them and the rationing is >>imposed by your insurance companies or the simple fact that you don't [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > heart scan on my doctor's advice which wasn't covered by insurance. > Cost $350. Big deal. It now costs $250. Outrageous isn't it? Pretty expensive, yes. > got it done in 1 day after I called for an appointment. It showed a > slightly elevated calcium count which might indicate a slightly higher > risk of heart disease. On a scan? Impressive ;-)). So they burnt you to ashes and did a atom asorbency spectrum >So I researched the internet and found the top > cardiologist in Denver where I live. I called and could have had an > appointment the next day but had a conflict so I made one the next > weekl. He did a nuclear stress electrocardiogram the same day. Total > cost $25. Outrageous again. Rationing huh? Same price here. Only we miss the nuclear part, becaues of the non proliferation program. >Completely covered by > insurance with no questions asked. Had my Danish friend had the same > test with a much higher risk profile, he would be alive today not > dead. The only thing simple here is you, who doesn't have a clue, as > usual, what he's talking about, You've gotta like being ridiculous. > You can take about a thousand over the counter drugs that would do the > same thing without the government doing it for you ace. As a diver you don't need drugs. Forgot that? BTW, you're not a diver, ain't you? So don't let the door ....... Matthias >>>Did I say we don't allow it? I just told you that you should do some >>>research on what's in those laws (the who, when, how etc) before [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Absolutely true. Like Great Britain, Denmark, U.S.A., Iran, South Africa, > Russia, Germany. "I hate Illinois Nazis" -Jake Signature"If you guys would just settle to earth and admit that guns are just noisy potentially dangerous tools and quit waving them around like a steel dick then there's be no need for discussions like this." - JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com http://picasaweb.google.com/Popeye8762 > > Absolutely true. Like Great Britain, Denmark, U.S.A., Iran, South Africa, > > Russia, Germany. > > "I hate Illinois Nazis" -Jake "It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." >>>Absolutely true. Like Great Britain, Denmark, U.S.A., Iran, South > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of > cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "hit it" Signature“TANSTAAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American. >>>I know some Scandinavians who don't. >> >> they still have some Nazis there like they did during WWII. > >Absolutely true. Like Great Britain, Denmark, U.S.A., Iran, >South Africa, Russia, Germany. Not making government policy like The Netherlands and Belgium they don't. >> Feel free. I never said these situations were prevalent in Belgium in >> the first place because I don't know the situation there, unlike you [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >outweighs the benefits of their health care system. >Or, Michael? ;-) That may well be true. >>>But you are paying outrageous prices for them and the rationing is >>>imposed by your insurance companies or the simple fact that you don't [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Pretty expensive, yes. After you figure in those ridiculous, endless European taxes I don't pay, I was paid to take the test. >> got it done in 1 day after I called for an appointment. It showed a >> slightly elevated calcium count which might indicate a slightly higher >> risk of heart disease. > >On a scan? Impressive ;-)). So they burnt you to ashes and >did a atom asorbency spectrum Usual juvenile statement. And yes, that is exactly what a heart scan shows. >>So I researched the internet and found the top >> cardiologist in Denver where I live. I called and could have had an [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Same price here. Only we miss the nuclear part, becaues of >the non proliferation program. Then there would be no way to see a blockage as any competent cardiologist would tell you. >>Completely covered by >> insurance with no questions asked. Had my Danish friend had the same [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >You've gotta like being ridiculous. Hardly, but the true facts of the matter really bother you don't they? Your little Eurosocialist myth punctured is it? >> You can take about a thousand over the counter drugs that would do the >> same thing without the government doing it for you ace. > >As a diver you don't need drugs. Forgot that? >BTW, you're not a diver, ain't you? Only since I started at age 15 junior. Long before PADI or NAUI existed. >>>got it done in 1 day after I called for an appointment. It showed a >>>slightly elevated calcium count which might indicate a slightly higher [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Usual juvenile statement. And yes, that is exactly what a heart scan > shows. You are a bit vague as to heart scans. An ultrasound duplex doppler scan shows atrial and ventricular function as well as flow dynamics and faults, and the state of the arterial walls (intima, media, stiffness, compliance, and the "locational" parameters used to qualify enervation of the hearts muscles. Elektrocardiography further extends on the spreading of the electrical enervation emrging form the atrioventricular node and sinus node. A misalignment of atroventrikular enervation may indicate a lack of _Kalium_ (potassium) supply. I may be not sufficiently informed. Can you tell me pls., which lab data specifically defines yr calcium counts? Matthias >You are a bit vague as to heart scans. >An ultrasound duplex doppler scan shows atrial and [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Can you tell me pls., which lab data specifically defines yr >calcium counts? Nice spiel, but how would I know? I had the test done, I didn't do the test. Go ask a radiologist. john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote in news:4724f268.38377944 @news20.forteinc.com: >>You are a bit vague as to heart scans. >>An ultrasound duplex doppler scan shows atrial and [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Nice spiel, but how would I know? I had the test done, I didn't do > the test. Go ask a radiologist. So, finally you confess that you don't know what your talking about... >>>>I know some Scandinavians who don't. >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Not making government policy like The Netherlands and Belgium they > don't. So, you think Scandinavian Nazis are running the government in Belgium...hmm, your mental state is becoming clearer and clearer to everyone... >>> Feel free. I never said these situations were prevalent in Belgium >>> in the first place because I don't know the situation there, unlike [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > That may well be true. Matthias just can't stand the fact that we have speed limits on highways... >>>>But you are paying outrageous prices for them and the rationing is >>>>imposed by your insurance companies or the simple fact that you [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Hardly, but the true facts of the matter really bother you don't they? > Your little Eurosocialist myth punctured is it? No, but do continue trying...it amuses us... >>> You can take about a thousand over the counter drugs that would do >>> the same thing without the government doing it for you ace. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Only since I started at age 15 junior. Long before PADI or NAUI > existed. Was that before or after Gagnan and Cousteau invented the demand regulator? >>>As a diver you don't need drugs. Forgot that? >>>BTW, you're not a diver, ain't you? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Was that before or after Gagnan and Cousteau invented the demand > regulator? Their claim. In fact it was Commheines(sp?) who did. Matthias Matthias Voss <spammat.voss@gmx.de> wrote in news:fgevd3$n79$02$3@news.t- online.com: >>>>As a diver you don't need drugs. Forgot that? >>>>BTW, you're not a diver, ain't you? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Matthias I stand corrected. >>>>> Funny, I am only married to an European, travel there about 10 >>>>> times a year or so, have a son studying in Rotterdam. Right, I [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > in both countries. Why don't you try following you own advice so you > don't make so many patently false statements? You mean like this one: http://im.dk/publikationer/healthcare_in_dk/c8.htm or this one: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/sodo/1998/00000056/00000003/ a rt00008 or this one: www.euro.who.int/document/e72967.pdf or this one: http://dspace.mah.se:8080/handle/2043/4105 ... perhaps you're using a different version of google? yeah, that must be it...it explains the selective filtering >>> I already have. The Netherlands has been doing this for years know >>> and its completely legal. Which it obviously is in Belgium as well [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > otherwise have to pay medical care for is a cost saving measure > whether you like it or not. is that an automatic reply program you're using? hten you should fix it, because it keeps on spouting the same bullshit... >>I know some Scandinavians who don't. > > they still have some Nazis there like they did during WWII. did they ever tell you that there are younger people living there too? or are you just living in the past? >>>>>>> B. we are heavily subsidizing your drugs >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > you're talking about. Importing is done all the time but is > completely insufficient to affect prices. So, import more... >>> Complete bullshit as I said before. All you are doing is importing >>> drugs from countries who have negotiated the discounts for you. You [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Blah, blah, blah. Why don't you read the link I gave before > continuing to make a fool out of yourself? Because it doesn't proof your point...now, what was that about someone making a fool of himself? >>>>>>> C. preventive care is practically nonexistent >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Blah. blah, blah. Nothing to say because he posts crap with no proof. well, she doesn't want to come back to the US for medical treatment... http://www.expatica.com/actual/article.asp?subchannel_id=24&story_id= 3342 3 oh yeah, did I tell you that I live but 20 kms from the Dutch border...? >>>>> And only an European paying outrageous taxes on income, purchases, >>>>> cars, etc. etc. would believe what you outline is free. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > dead. The only thing simple here is you, who doesn't have a clue, as > usual, what he's talking about, VA coverage paid by the government (meaning taxes), I assume? >>And thank God I can decide to put an end to my suffering in the final >>stages of my decease if ever I would get cancer ( you know when the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > determined and don't foist it off on others pretending you're doing > some great social service.. You see, I can simply ask it to my doctor, without the need for jumping of a bridge and have other people clean up the mess...and have you ever seen a terminally ill patinet jump out of his hospital bed to go to a pharmacist and buy drugs to commit suicide? >>And now I'm off to the South of France for week of serious diving. > > Watch out the Belgium doctors don't put CO in your tank other than air > to relieve your obvious misery. In our country doctors don't have to work in dive centers and neither do they in France (and to help you with your geographical ignorance: the South of France ain't a part of Belgium). >>>You should google once preventive care and Sweden and Denmark... >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >http://im.dk/publikationer/healthcare_in_dk/c8.htm Funny, here they are saying they are going to promote what the US healtcare system has been doing for decades, isn't it. And, like you, this is a lot of blather because adults are NOT getting adequate preventive care just as my friend didn't and he died as a result. Saying something doesn't mean it gets done, which is why they have a private system there. The public one ain't working ace. Notice how, except for the children, all the so called adult preventive ones are lifestyle choices instead of tests? Went right over your head didn't it? Right Danes. Stop smoking and lose weight and get exercise. That your preventive care, not colonoscopies, etc. >or this one: > >http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/sodo/1998/00000056/00000003/ >a >rt00008 Only about children and adolescents like I said. Nothing about adult preventive care for cancer, heart disease, etc. Just like I said. >or this one: > >www.euro.who.int/document/e72967.pdf Says nothing about the rationing that occurs but does talk about the private system which is where you get the quality care like I said. IF you can pay for it after paying for the public one that doesn't provide it and IF you don't mind paying twice like I said. >or this one: > >http://dspace.mah.se:8080/handle/2043/4105 Yeah, preventive child and maternal care has a lot to do with preventive adult care for cancer, heart disease etc. doesn't it? Only you would think that. Let's see, if I provide milk for kids free that means I am providing milk for adults doesn't it? Right. >... > >perhaps you're using a different version of google? yeah, that must be >it...it explains the selective filtering No, your cites above prove exactly the case I was saying. Adults don't get preventive care for a whole host of serious and life threatening diseases, rationing exists, etc. etc. >>>>You should google once preventive care and Sweden and Denmark... >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > it? Right Danes. Stop smoking and lose weight and get exercise. That > your preventive care, not colonoscopies, etc. So, you want expensive tests...figures when you're giving consultancy to the healthcare industry >>or this one: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tandf/sodo/1998/00000056/00000003 >>/ a >>rt00008 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > IF you can pay for it after paying for the public one that doesn't > provide it and IF you don't mind paying twice like I said. Ever thought about the fact that it can't talk about something that doesn't happen? >>or this one: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > you would think that. Let's see, if I provide milk for kids free that > means I am providing milk for adults doesn't it? Right. I only had to prove that there's preventive care, because that's what you denied... >>... >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > don't get preventive care for a whole host of serious and life > threatening diseases, rationing exists, etc. etc. and here you are complaining about the high cost of health care in the US...and still life expectancy in Scandinavia is higher than in the US...funny isn't it? Must be related to the non-existent preventive care. >>>>>You should google once preventive care and Sweden and Denmark... >>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >So, you want expensive tests...figures when you're giving consultancy to >the healthcare industry This shows the stupid European mentality perfectly. If it costs money, don't do it. Ration it and let the victims die. Perfect. >> Says nothing about the rationing that occurs but does talk about the >> private system which is where you get the quality care like I said. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Ever thought about the fact that it can't talk about something that >doesn't happen? Of course, it could idiot. It could explain how it does do it. Haven't seen any of that. >>>or this one: >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I only had to prove that there's preventive care, because that's what >you denied... Then show us all where it is in the countries I mentioned for those with heart disease, cancer, etc. >>>perhaps you're using a different version of google? yeah, that must be >>>it...it explains the selective filtering [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >US...funny isn't it? Must be related to the non-existent preventive >care. Where did I complain about the high cost of healthcare in the US? Let me make it easy for you liar. I didn't. And comparing Scandinavia to the US is idiotic. They're quite homogenous. Where are all the hispanics there. And others that come from totally different cultures where they get no healthcare. You don't know the difference between an apple and an orange either do you? |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message