Why We Don't Want "Free" Medical Care

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:48:30 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:41:09 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

Incapable of making stupid generalizations after having met some
idiots are you?

?? Martin's perfectly capable of making stupid generalisations. He's
nearly as good as you.

He knows a lot more about pilots than you

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:50:41 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:29:42 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

everyone that disagrees with him as a rightwing loon

I wouldn't label Jay as a loon.

You're not Mike

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:53:13 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:31:26 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

Other countries have written constitutions, do you get the frenzied
inaction over them you get in US?

Nope. The Austrian constitution is regularly amended without much song
and dance. Or at least the guidelines set down can be re-interpreted
in the light of current circumstances.

Gee just like the US one, amended by decisions.


And like most other constitutions. But it was the "frenzied
inactivity" that was in question. When was the last amendment, btw? I
don't know.

1992. It was the 27th concerning congressional pay raises.
Amendments are very rare and difficult to do, which is why most
changes to the constitution are by Federal Court decisions, most of
which actually happen at the Appeals Court level.

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:08:40 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:38:06 +0100, Dusty Furtile Morrocan
wrote:

However, since Europe is
routinely being subsidized at our expense,

How is it that "Europe" manages to get the "cheap"drugs while the US
can't?

Already explained as well. Go so some research

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:46:58 +0000, Mike.....
wrote:

Following up to Tim C. wrote:

However, since Europe is
routinely being subsidized at our expense,

How is it that "Europe" manages to get the "cheap"drugs while the US
can't?

I covered this, its a US problem for the US to fix and John
acknowledged that. it has no place here.

Gee, the censor speaks again. When the US fixes the problem it will
be an European problem just as I said.

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:40:20 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:54:24 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

It's the sort of thing to do when you are young and adventurous. I've
been to some pretty rough places, but no where really poor like Sudan,
Bangladesh, or Afghanistan. There is little health support in those
places, even if you are relatively wealthy. Poor people just get sick
and die.

The ironic thing is just how happy the people can be!

Horrors!! How could they possibly be happy without socialism?


Who mentioned socialism? You need a reading and comprehension
refresher course, I think.

Can't tell a joke either huh?

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:40:39 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:49:33 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:07:38 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:27:05 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:34:50 +0000, Mike.....
wrote:

Following up to Tim C. wrote:

I think he just has a need to slam "socialised medicine".

An idea I think we all had after reading the subject line before even
opening the first post.

yep.

Which is typical of people with small, closed minds like your.

make a sentence containing these words:
pot, kettle, black.

It would go right over your head.

Ouch, that hurt.

Well, go the NHS and get treated then

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:46:54 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:51:58 GMT, (John Kulp)
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 11:14:25 +0100, Tim C.
wrote:


What's the leap then? No one here has provided one iota of proof that
this didn't happen to her. There is an online petition mostly signed
by Brits supporting her with her response. The rule apparently is
that whoever is able (I won't say responsible but I haven't seen
anyone stepping up claiming responsibility for it--I wonder why) to
make decisions like this can, in fact, make them and impose them
against a patient's own doctor's views, against clear market practice
where the same drug is routinely used in many other countries and all
the rest. And all of this without apparently much, if any, recourse
on the decision. So, instead of blather like this, why don't you try
to address all that? Because you can't?

I don't doubt for one minute that what the NYT says happened to the
women is true - more or less. But it has absolutely no relevance or
logical connection to the fact that a such a rule exists or not.
Do we have to do all your thinking for you? Can't you get your family
involved.

You can't even do your own thinking much less mine. If there is not
some rule/policy allowing decisions like this to be made, how was it
then made? Where did they get the authority to do it?

Is that how it works in the US? You can't do anything unless there is
a rule specifically allowing it? No, I didn't think so.

Well, this is a government board presumably. Where did they get the
authority to do this then. As I asked before and you haven't
answered.

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:49:23 +0000, Mike.....
wrote:

Following up to Tim C. wrote:

Horrors!! How could they possibly be happy without socialism?


Who mentioned socialism? You need a reading and comprehension
refresher course, I think.

right wing Americans regard free at point of use medicine as
socialism, I suspect that's why it frightens them.

All the right wingers again. Almost everyone using the US healthcare
system has virtually the same thing with usually only a small copay to
make so people think about it before frivolously using health
services.

On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:09:02 +0000, Mike.....
wrote:

Following up to Tim C. wrote:

Who mentioned socialism? You need a reading and comprehension
refresher course, I think.

right wing Americans regard free at point of use medicine as
socialism, I suspect that's why it frightens them.

DFM said any medicine. No mention of the way it's to be paid for.

True, in that case its because he's a right wing loon.

Isn't everyone but you? Thatcher still haunting you?