did you even notice those words are the headline on the PBS site?

who are you arguing with?

the 5 are:

1. United Kingdom
2. Switzerland
3. Taiwan
4. Japan
5. Germany

yet most tools and fools will mention Canada...because they have no read anything.

so go fly a kite

__________________

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know them by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against them.
-Jonathan Swift

---"Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting."

Don't feed the troll Dante. It won't do any good.

Show me how the above nations are democratic?

I almost forgot.

Attached Images

incoming.jpg (14.6 KB, 3 views)

__________________

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know them by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against them.
-Jonathan Swift

---"Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting."

knock your self out...

__________________

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know them by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against them.
-Jonathan Swift

---"Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting."

I read through the beginning of your post, most of it were digressions and an overall lacking of reading comprehension.

These posts are getting long and off-topic enough, so I'm not going to bother posting back.

So let me get this straight, you think that the private sector is more corrupt than government?

I'm baffled by this. We're talking about the government whose organizations randomly loose millions of dollars. We're talking "I don't know where the money went" situation, and we are talking about this on epic proportions.

Plus, buisnesses can be regulated, the government can't. When was the last time the government cracked down on itself for its fraudulent buisness practices? Oh yeah, NEVER. I forget sometimes, but isn't this the same government that employs buildings full of crappy teachers who sit around and read magazines because no school will take them? Yeah, that's efficient alright. I'd love to see that applied to health care.

People demand something vauge and well-intentioned like, say, Universal Health Care coverage, and the government responds by taking our money and vomiting it inefficiently and in ways that make for a larger bureaucracy.

Pure, Unmittigated, myth. The real trouble makers who people would worry about having their children share a school with are taken to specialty schools for handing that sort of thing. Taking that out of the equation, private schools still do much, much better with often-times a third of the money.

This notion is simply laughable, Catholic Schools for one will take just about any student. They reform the trouble-makers because if they don't their parents will pull them out and the school will loose the money it needs to survive. Public Schools don't care, and if you don't like how bad of a job they do, you can't transfer. Well, you virtually can't transfer, the No Child Left Behind Act was a step in the right direction, and under rare conditions you can pick new schools on Government money, but for the most part, you are stuck. The government stiffles competition, we've seen it over and over again. I don't want that in the Health Care system, simple.

And the private sector can't profit without citizen approval. If you go to McDonalds and get served a lousy burger, you won't come back, so McDonalds does its darndest to avoid that. The government can serve you crap whenever it wants, and since it creates governmet-controlled monopolies, you have no options.

This is true. However, I don't think health care is out of the realm of the private sector. The government really should just step in when things get out of hand (Think Car Insurance, Oil Change - No, Major Accident - Yes) and regulate the industry to make sure nothing bad is going on. Should the government obfusicate the basics of health care? No! Tax breaks can be used to encourage routine and preventitive care, so there really is no need to plunge the system under the government's complete whim (Like HillaryCare did)

Customers don't search for the lowest price, they search for value. If the government is buying, You'd get Fruit Loops over SuperMarket Branded Fruity Circles, despite the pricetag being twice as much. However, the Fruity Circles are just as good, but insurance that covers everything discourages customers from looking for them or any value.

The government is run by politicans. Politicians are only interested in looking good to the public's impulses. We make an observation like "This Medicine is Expensive! It Should be cheaper!" and Politicans oblige by cutting profits in hopes for votes. They disregard the consequences of their actions in the interest of profit.

So people want cheaper drugs, who doesn't? I'd like medicine to be cheaper, but the problem is that the majority of people don't understand that profits to drug corporations are what is directly responsible for the life-saving drugs we need and want.

Well then, why doesn't the government decide what a fair price is for an iPhone? Or a Computer? Or a Car? If corporations couldn't decide what they get to make on their products, why would they make them at all? Who would spend the billions of dollars to research drugs, if they weren't sure if they couldn't profit? I would hope the government would let the companies break even, but for that kind of capital, they should be able to return huge profits, or else they would leave their money to sit in a bank.

Quite frankly, successful buisnesses don't become that way by cheating consumers off. It happens all the time, but usually the general public catches on pretty quickly.

More frankly, if the drug corporations don't profit as much as other corporations do, there is no incentive for people to pour the vast amount of necessary capital into drug development.

So if you are happy with the drugs we have today, fine. Treat those life-saving morally bankrupt companies like the criminals they are by stealing from them the profits they deserve.

If you are intersted in having new drugs developed, don't encourage things that cut the profits from the market, or else investors will find something better to do with their millions.

Average Drug company spends 4 billion on advertising. That's quite a sum, but its dwarfed by the 50 billion they spend on R&D, I don't really care if you think the drugs make themselves, the fact of the matter is they don't.

What corporation has a Advertising to R&D ratio better than that?

Its true that some drug corporations pull old drugs to slightly modify them and then place them back on the market, but if they are free people will be more gullible to that sort of thing. You prove my point that the most expensive advertised health care isn't going to be the best. When consumers don't see the bill, they won't care if an imitation of an older drugs works as well for a quarter of the price, they'll just insist on getting what they saw on TV because they won't be paying.

We see it all the time, private institutions do much better than their government counterparts because if they don't instead of sucking more of our tax money, they're finished.

I'll ask again, remember when the government made cars?

And I'm showing you our government has botched the education system they have in your mentioned countries, they'll botch health care too. The best solution is the one that works for everything else. It's what gave us the iphone, its what gives us our fancy cars, and the things we love the most in life. It does better at education, and reformed it can do better for healthcare.

This whole argument is theory. Examples only go so far here, but I've offered them. (Education System, Government Designing cars (can't wait until you look that up))

I'd say your simplistic view of zero-sum economics is not based in reality...

In America we have come to hate corporations almost as much as we have come to hate bush. We blame them both for things they have no control over. Gas prices rise, it couldn't possibly be the democratic refusal to build refineries, it's gotta be those oil corporations, making profits.

As for profit at what cost, I would argue very rarely is there ever a cost. Profits are usually used for corporations to grow, or are invested in the stock market so other corporations can grow. This is the growth that leads to new jobs, a better economy, and more consumer goods.

You seem to have a problem with drug corporations profiting because their products are necessary for life. What you like to discount is that the corporations that made these drugs spent billions to make them, and they easily could have put those billions into a plethora of other money-making ventures. If you refuse to let them take a profit, why would they ever make the mistake of investing billions for the good of man again?

So Did the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.

This thing is thousands of pages of red-tape that wold stifle the health care industry. Its a good thing even the democrats wouldn't put their name on it.

btw, for anyone reading this, to get an idea of how big it is, check it out;
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:H.R.3600.IH:
The huge page that you will open will be the TABLE OF CONTENTS!!!!!

It was utter rubbish, and anything of the sort would be exponentially detremential to our nation. Its as simple as that. There might be a good way to approach the situation encompassing the way you want to go about this, but HillaryCare is about as far away from that as possible.

TLDR

No, No. The Congressional Record as in I will be reading through the entire bill. Right now I'm looking for the part I mentioned... This is going to take some time.

Not really sure what you are talking about here (what's new?)

no sch!t

The private sector has more corruption that government because is is larger..far larger. The S&L scandals, the eighties = Dennis Levine, Ivan Boesky, Drexel Burnham, Pckens, Love Canal, Chemical Companies poisoning people and covering it up, Tobacco Executives and lying about cancer results, Bernie
Ebbers and ENRON, Adelphia, Anderson,

Quote:

Xerox In April, the SEC filed a civil suit against photocopy giant Xerox for misstating four years' worth of profits, resulting in an overstatement of close to $3bn. Xerox negotiated a settlement with the SEC with regard to the suit.

..
Tyco, Global Crossing,
we can go on...

__________________

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know them by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against them.
-Jonathan Swift

---"Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting."

Originally Posted by DanteAugustusGermanicus
Private schools preform better because (I've said this before---talk about in one ear and out the other) they DO NOT have to take everyone.
private schools do better with smaller amounts of students and they DO NOT have the responsibility to educate everyone.


you've never lived in a poor area where choices are limited. you are very middle class in your outlook (not that there is anything wrong with that)

government controlled monopolies? name them and what they control...

come on...name them and what they control.


[quote=SuperDinoYoshi;585034]This is true. However, I don't think health care is out of the realm of the private sector. The government really should just step in when things get out of hand (Think Car Insurance, Oil Change - No, Major Accident - Yes) and regulate the industry to make sure nothing bad is going on. Should the government obfusicate the basics of health care? No! Tax breaks can be used to encourage routine and preventitive care, so there really is no need to plunge the system under the government's complete whim (Like HillaryCare did)[/quote[ you keep trying to simplify complex social issues by mentioning cars and oil changes. tax breaks do not help poor people and too many people given the choice, will opt out of health care or choose the lesser plan. I saw it where I worked where varying types of plans where offered. I always chose the most expensive one I could (and still they tried not to pay when the time came). Others chose a lesser plan...it's like people who claim more dependents than they have.

In the end everyone will pay for those who shirk or delay because we are not ready as a society to deny care to our fellow citizens.


yeah, right.


not all politicians are alike. stop demonizing a whole group in order to make a sh!tty point or two.

lies and propaganda. that is not the whole story and it is as generalized a sweet kiss as you can get without blowing a drug executive

__________________

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know them by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against them.
-Jonathan Swift

---"Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting."