Reply With Quote
Aren't they, though.facts are stubborn things
So Many Half-Truths, So Little Time
A fraud not only is stating something that is untrue, but also failing to state something that is necessary to avoid making a true statement misleading. A material omission as amounting to a fraud is a basic legal concept certainly familiar to this administration.
So it is for the frequent assertion that we spend more per person on health care, but have a shorter life span than other industrialized countries. True, but there is a failure to state material facts necessary to avoid the misleading impression that the shorter life span is a result of our health care system.
In fact, we do have a shorter life span, but not because of our health care system. So points out Steve Chapman today:
A half-truth is not the truth. But there's so little time to uncover all the half-truths driving this administration.It's true that the United States spends more on health care than anyone else, and it's true that we rank below a lot of other advanced countries in life expectancy. The juxtaposition of the two facts, however, doesn't prove we are wasting our money or doing the wrong things.
It only proves that lots of things affect mortality besides medical treatment. Heath Ledger didn't die at age 28 because the American health care system failed him.
One big reason our life expectancy lags is that Americans have an unusual tendency to perish in homicides or accidents. We are 12 times more likely than the Japanese to be murdered and nearly twice as likely to be killed in auto wrecks.
In their 2006 book, "The Business of Health," economists Robert L. Ohsfeldt and John E. Schneider set out to determine where the U.S. would rank in life span among developed nations if homicides and accidents are factored out. Their answer? First place.
That discovery indicates our health care system is doing a poor job of preventing shootouts and drunk driving but a good job of healing the sick. All those universal-care systems in Canada and Europe may sound like Health Heaven, but they fall short of our model when it comes to combating life-threatening diseases.
Aren't they, though.facts are stubborn things
Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't a bear; he was a Democrat.
OK, you're confusing me. Donkey = democrat, elephant = republican, bear = communist. Right? Democrats today are socialists and communists!
You don't seem confused at all.
Neat finding.
I think his expertise is intelligence but, he has well-reasoned opinions on a whole host of topics.
He's generally a good read.
"Spurstalk, Monkeys flinging Poo... it'll just waste your day...."
"Another Liberal Fraud Exposed."
Isn't that extremely hypocritical?
I mean, maybe I'm wrong, and please correct me if I am.
This article juxtaposes the problems: WE SURE DO! have the best health care, but one is lucky to afford it, additionally, if we had a more social country, there would not be as many murders over compe ive ridiculous things like shoes, car rims, and respect.
I really do not know how to combat Liberal bashing, I could threaten to talk about GEORGE BUSH incessantly!!!!
They always say the Left can attack the Right, but then they don't have a plan. Maybe the opposite is true.
(I'm sorry, I'm in a bad mood, but if we don't get social healthcare, many of my friends will die far before their time. Maybe, you don't have poor friends, so you can't relate. They shouldn't call us "bleeding-heart liberals," maybe they should call us "beating-heart liberals.")
What would Jesus do? He'd die making certain that people would get social health care. And just when you think you shouldn't have put your trust in him, one fish would become many, water would become wine, and bread would fall from the sky.
I don't understand how Christians can so adamantly oppose this. "Anti-abortion Anti-healthcare."
I guess, I had never considered that you can put a bottle OR a gun in a baby's mouth! Gosh, I'm in a bad mood.
That's contrary to the quote that effectively says "give a man a fish, he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he will eat everyday."What would Jesus do? He'd die making certain that people would get social health care. And just when you think you shouldn't have put your trust in him, one fish would become many, water would become wine, and bread would fall from the sky.
I don't understand how Christians can so adamantly oppose this. "Anti-abortion Anti-healthcare."
I guess, I had never considered that you can put a bottle OR a gun in a baby's mouth! Gosh, I'm in a bad mood.
The solution is to raise other people up. Not take tax payers down.
And the "power animal" for the communists is the Duck.
Give a man a fish, so that he might eat, so that you might be able to teach him how you got that fish.
Regardless how you change it, that does not promote the general welfare. It promotes dependency.
That'd be fine if the man would be willing to learn to fish. Problem is, you give him a fish and he thinks, "why learn? I'll just keep getting my fish from this rube."
He is more likely to learn to fish if he remains hungry during the process. Necessity is a better motivator than dependency.
It makes sense and Yanni provided a link.
You miss the point right there. Even if you're not "lucky" enough to afford it, you still get it.
I think I know why you think this is true but, I'd like to hear your explanation.
Why will your friends die?
I suppose if each country gets to factor out their worst attributes, then each of them would be in first place.
Link? Btw, our worst attribute is obesity.
I think the point being that if you factor out the mortality unrelated to the quality of health care, we're at the top of the heap.
Ah, the inconvenient truth for the revolutionaries.
if you factor out death, we are all immortal
So you think the US is the only country where you could do that kind of "analysis"?
I take your point that the US is close to the top, but we are still paying nearly twice as much for the same results.
This article doesn't address the fact that the U.S. is behind 33 other countries (many of them much poorer than we are) when it comes to infant mortality rate, and I strongly doubt much of that disparity can be attributed to homicides and auto accidents.
That rests on differences in how infant mortality stats are calculated in each country.
So Americans live unhealthy lives, face a greater risk of death on the roadways, and are still at the top of the heap. Sure, it's not surprising that it would cost more. Of course, do these calculations of cost include the time spent waiting for procedures in those other countries? Do those cost stats reflect the less comfortable care that is provided in those countries? Americans are generally not willing to sit around and wait for something.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
