Alaska Darin Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 you cons just refuse to believe that people actually do noble and extraordinary things for reasons other than financial gain. why is that so difficult for you to accept? or is it that it doesn't neatly fit in your philosophy?yes, va contracts with private entities for some services, largely because the entire us system is currently a hybrid model which therefore loses much of the economy of scale. plenty of examples of successful, efficient, cost effective single payer systems around. 1. I'm not a "con". 2. Your aberration doesn't make it a rule. Rules are generally made by majorities. 3. There aren't ANY examples of efficient or cost effective single payer systems. You're an idiot if believe anything to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 No one thinks it's ALL about the money. YOU refuse to accept the idea that money is PART OF the incentive to be a doctor. Blindly dismissing the very idea that health care quaility *might* be affected becase of changing incentives ignores everything we know about human nature. As soon as you admit this very obvious thing, we can all (maybe) start to have the very real discussion about how big of an issue it might be. who said anything about eliminating financial incentives? of course, there has to be a payoff for the work. but i suspect it doesn't need to be at the current level which, for specialists at least, is far above anywhere else in the world, on average (the percentage of health care dollars spent on primary care docs in the us is about 6% to give some perspective). i agree that compensation needs to be at the top end of competing professions in order to justify the effort and sacrifice for the majority of prospective students. so if you're in the top 3-4% of compensation for the country you live in, is that not enough incentive? does it need to be the top 1-2%? doesn't appear to be the case in many other countries. but changing funding for medical education would help and would likely be necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 1. I'm not a "con". 2. Your aberration doesn't make it a rule. Rules are generally made by majorities. 3. There aren't ANY examples of efficient or cost effective single payer systems. You're an idiot if believe anything to the contrary. so our system, paying more of worse outcomes, is evidence of care better utilized and cost better contained? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 so our system, paying more of worse outcomes, is evidence of care better utilized and cost better contained? Did I say that? Nice conclusion, retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Did I say that? Nice conclusion, retard. So the other systems that produce better measures overall at less cost are all not Single Payor? http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0910064 http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/health-outcomes-report-cards-by-country/ If that's not what you said, what were you saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 So the other systems that produce better measures overall at less cost are all not Single Payor? http://www.nejm.org/...56/NEJMp0910064 http://theincidental...rds-by-country/ If that's not what you said, what were you saying? How about that "Single Payer" isn't the reason other countries have better health outcomes? Correlation doesn't equal causation. Unless you're really dumb. Or maybe: "Single Payer" won't fix the problems with health care in the United States, since they are directly correlated to government involvement/micromanagement of both health care and daily life? Getting the government more involved while ignoring the actual reasons health care in this country grows consistently more expensive is going to lead to an even larger disaster in the future. I love how people believe & post drivel like that, as if those numbers are even close to the truth. Like the GAO in this country has ever even been close on a forecast? There's obviously no easy way to hide expenses to show a desired outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) As for "better outcomes," that is based on flawed methodology. Edited July 31, 2013 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 How about that "Single Payer" isn't the reason other countries have better health outcomes? Correlation doesn't equal causation. Unless you're really dumb. Or maybe: "Single Payer" won't fix the problems with health care in the United States, since they are directly correlated to government involvement/micromanagement of both health care and daily life? Getting the government more involved while ignoring the actual reasons health care in this country grows consistently more expensive is going to lead to an even larger disaster in the future. I love how people believe & post drivel like that, as if those numbers are even close to the truth. Like the GAO in this country has ever even been close on a forecast? There's obviously no easy way to hide expenses to show a desired outcome. It must be a global conpiracy to make the US healthcare system look bad... and everybody is on it.... that explains it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 (edited) It must be a global conpiracy to make the US healthcare system look bad... and everybody is on it.... that explains it ya know, i never thought of that...but it's clearly the most reasonable explanation. and the new england journal, editted and mostly written by american physicians is complicit.. Edited July 31, 2013 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 ya know, i never thought of that...but it's clearly the most reasonable explanation. and the new england journal, editted and mostly written by physicians is complicit.. are you !@#$ing kidding, now that we have recklessly smashed the incentives for a aspring MD to make income in the top 2-3% of 300+ Americans, they have fought back by cooking peer reveiewd evidence to make the US health system looks bad... We only have ourselves to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 are you !@#$ing kidding, now that we have recklessly smashed the incentives for a aspring MD to make income in the top 2-3% of 300+ Americans, they have fought back by cooking peer reveiewd evidence to make the US health system looks bad... We only have ourselves to blame. Did you figure out the difference between price and cost yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 It must be a global conpiracy to make the US healthcare system look bad... and everybody is on it.... that explains it You're taking too many ridiculous cues from birdog. Stop jumping to strawmen conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 It must be a global conpiracy to make the US healthcare system look bad... and everybody is on it.... that explains it The U.S. healthcare "system" is really bad, I never said anything to the contrary - but none of the "solutions" you or "tarddog" apparently covet will have a positive effect. Don't let that stop you from the incessant strawmen you keep posting, though. I enjoy watching you retards regurgitate stupidity so vainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 you cons just refuse to believe that people actually do noble and extraordinary things for reasons other than financial gain. why is that so difficult for you to accept? or is it that it doesn't neatly fit in your philosophy?yes, va contracts with private entities for some services, largely because the entire us system is currently a hybrid model which therefore loses much of the economy of scale. plenty of examples of successful, efficient, cost effective single payer systems around. 1) I'm not a con either. 2) You're trapped in your own fallacy: You've already established a position (multiple times, through the course of your posts) that doing anything for financial gain is ignoble. Now you're assuming the converse is true - that if someone in your judgement is noble, then they are not motivated by financial gain. In philosophy, logical formalism has a term for that: "!@#$ing idiotic." You're just too naive to comprehend the multitude of shades of grey. And that's besides the fact that you're generalizing an anecdote. Plus...there's nothing "noble and extraordinary" about becoming a MD. Hell, by your standards it'd be more noble to stay an astrophysicist, since there's no money in it. And it's certainly far more extraordinary, given there's probably about ten thousand MDs in the world for every astrophysicist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Did you figure out the difference between price and cost yet? I've know the difference forever, do you know how it works in Healthcare? If so, explain in detail. The U.S. healthcare "system: is really bad, I never said anything to the contrary - but none of the "solutions" you or "tarddog" apparently covet will have a positive effect. Don't let that stop you from the incessant strawmen you keep posting, though. I enjoy watching you retards regurgitate stupidity so vainly. so you're saying you have nothing else valuable to add? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Jesus Effing Christ. NO ONE believes that there are NO "..people who do noble and extraordinary things for reasons other than financial gain". Part of the incentives for people going into medicine is financial. It is YOU who can't accept that when you lower those incentives you will, BY DEFINITION, decrease the incentive for people to go into medicine. Since you refuse to accept that very basic and obvious truism, we can't ever get past that to have the real and important discussions. You're the problem. Not 'them'. You should excuse birddog. His opinions are at the mercy of his progressive leaders. He's not telling you what he knows. He's telling you what he's been told. And when trapped by the stupidity of progressive logic, he grabs for progressive argument tool #13: call the person a conservative and go to an extreme. Want to cut Medicaid/Medicare? "You cons just want grandma to die and poor people to rot." Want to cut welfare and food stamps? "You cons want to literally take food out of babies' mouths." Want to promote personal accountability? "You cons don't care about the lower/middle class." Want to argue against Obamacare? "You cons refuse to believe in anything other than financial gain." Want to discuss race relations: "Not all cons are racists, but all racists are cons." There was a time the progressive argument was considered a worthwhile argument. Any more it's just mindless people repeating what they're told until they either have to start brushing everything in large strokes, or they have to pull out some online meme that mocks a female candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 I've always wondered how idiots get away using a word with conotations of careful behavior and prudence as a perjorative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 I've always wondered how idiots get away using a word with conotations of careful behavior and prudence as a perjorative. The Left has always been quite good at "consficating"words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 The Left has always been quite good at "consficating"words For the life of me I cannot tell what this cartoon is trying to convey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 1) I'm not a con either. 2) You're trapped in your own fallacy: You've already established a position (multiple times, through the course of your posts) that doing anything for financial gain is ignoble. Now you're assuming the converse is true - that if someone in your judgement is noble, then they are not motivated by financial gain. In philosophy, logical formalism has a term for that: "!@#$ing idiotic." You're just too naive to comprehend the multitude of shades of grey. And that's besides the fact that you're generalizing an anecdote. Plus...there's nothing "noble and extraordinary" about becoming a MD. Hell, by your standards it'd be more noble to stay an astrophysicist, since there's no money in it. And it's certainly far more extraordinary, given there's probably about ten thousand MDs in the world for every astrophysicist... here's some words i wrote earlier. "noble and extraordinary things for reasons other than financial gain. no ambiguity to the meaning yet you misunderstood. clearly the sentence conveys the belief that noble and extraordinary things can be done for financial gain. kinda makes the cartoon above actually a little funny. just a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts