Well from my experiance liveing in france and the uk.France is by far the best option , two years ago i was diagnosed with crohn's disease from a french hospital almost straight away after visiting the docters and saying i had a bad stomach.While i was in the uk my crohn's disease was flareing up again after a year of being fine.For this illness whenever i had it , i took an injection once every two weeks for about a month.

So i thought thay would just prescribe me them and id be fine.I was wrong , the doctor in the uk said i would have to wait TWO MONTH before i could even see a consultant who would be able to make out the prescription for me and even then it could take months before i even get the medecine.Becaus it would cost the NHS £250 for one injection.

I only brought this up becaus if the NHS isent willing to pay for peoples medecin to make them better but actully trying to pay as least as possible at the patiants expense and even there death , since im british it makes me sad haveing to fly over to france to get the medecine that could save my life and that i cant get in the uk becaus thay dont want to pay for it !!

Im not even going to mention america , if you dont have money there , thay will just let you die on the street in front of the hospital.

Im not even going to mention america , if you dont have money there , thay will just let you die on the street in front of the hospital.

Care to give a couple of examples of that happening in the US before you make crap bag type statements?

Or did you intend this to be a US bashing thread?

Yeah, CptJake and any posters thinking of it, this is a troll thread.

Just sayin'. That's pretty much all this guy does, so ignoring is best.

No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

CptJake wrote:

Im not even going to mention america , if you dont have money there , thay will just let you die on the street in front of the hospital.

Care to give a couple of examples of that happening in the US before you make crap bag type statements?

Or did you intend this to be a US bashing thread?

Hospitals provide emergency care only to people without insurance. Chronic care or recovery is only for paying customers. This includes patients with cancer and plenty of other communicable diseases. If you want an example interact with someone that A: Doesn't have insurance and B: Has a disease or chronic illness of some kind.

Hell, talk to a homeless dude somewhere, many of them will have stories. Plenty of them die on the street every day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

That guy's documentaries present a significant number of false situations and facts. Micheal Moore is not a trustworthy documentarian, he's a propagandist. He edits interviews, falsifies quotes, and presents hearsay as fact.

Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Welcome to Massachusetts. 2nd best state for your kids to grow up in. Besides New Hampshire. But no-one cares about Cow Hampster.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, hello again.

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

Chowderhead wrote:

Welcome to Massachusetts. 2nd best state for your kids to grow up in. Besides New Hampshire. But no-one cares about Cow Hampster.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, hello again.

Lol what has that got to do with healthcare?

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Neither one of those countries rank number one in general health or longevity of population, so neither have the best in the world by most observable measurements.

o0shotty0o wrote:

Chowderhead wrote:

Welcome to Massachusetts. 2nd best state for your kids to grow up in. Besides New Hampshire. But no-one cares about Cow Hampster.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, hello again.

Lol what has that got to do with healthcare?

Sorry, forgot to mention that it's the best place because of the fact that you can't be denied health insurance.

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

Never believe Michael Moore.

Anyway, the best country is in the country of which you are a permanent resident, generally speaking, and if we're confining the conversation to develop states.

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

What has that got to do with healthcare ? And you know how meany people get shot in us ? thats more than comparible.

o0shotty0o wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

What has that got to do with healthcare ? And you know how meany people get shot in us ? thats more than comparible.

You're all fething terrible at discussing healthcare facts.

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

I lol`d hard .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

WHAT ? usa has 250 million people ?

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Let's do some math, eh Shuma?

There are 62,616,488 people in france. There are 307,006,550 people in the US. Also, he said for one season, not one year. So, let's math this gak.

157,909 (estimated) died of heart disease in the summer of 2006. Now, let's math that some more.

1 out of every 1950 people (approximate) will die of heart related deaths in the US in 2006.

1 out of every 4230 (approximate) died of HEAT related death. That's not a small difference between heat and heart. That's fething bad.

Oh, and 668 people died of HEAT related deaths in 2003 in the US, to put that into perspective.

o0shotty0o wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

I lol`d hard .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

WHAT ? usa has 250 million people ?

The US has over 300,000,000 people.

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

It still maintains significantly higher rates of heart disease. Americas not a healthy country by most measures.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

It still maintains significantly higher rates of heart disease. Americas not a healthy country by most measures.

Heart does not equal Heat, Shuma. Read the post.

CptJake wrote:
Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

Its amusing that you think heat related deaths are medically preventable.

Oh my .... thats alot of people.Ok lets stay on subject though i dident create this thread to talk only about america.Any other brits out there ?

o0shotty0o wrote:Oh my .... thats alot of people.Ok lets stay on subject though i dident create this thread to talk only about america.Any other brits out there ?

It's too late, Shotty.

Yup, sadly the NHS has been awesome for me, so no issues.

Chowderhead wrote:It's too late, Shotty.

No, I think not. I just don't know how to change the damn icon.

Chowderhead wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

CptJake wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Ok but i wasent really talking about america i was wanting to highlight france and the uk

Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

631,636 Americans died of heart disease in 2006.

Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

It still maintains significantly higher rates of heart disease. Americas not a healthy country by most measures.

Heart does not equal Heat, Shuma. Read the post.

Oh, my bad. I guess I've never seen people present heat related mortality as some sort of state healthcare issue. Generally presented as a natural disaster related issue in the context of heatwaves. Next time I'll read your posts more carefully lest they not make any sense, like now.

Let's all take a step back, and think about what we're posting. Debate, but do so politely.

Goddard wrote:Let's all take a step back, and think about what we're posting. Debate, but do so politely.

You're not likely to find a debate here.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Goddard wrote:Let's all take a step back, and think about what we're posting. Debate, but do so politely.

You're not likely to find a debate here.

Then lets not have an argument instead.

MrDwhitey wrote:Yup, sadly the NHS has been awesome for me, so no issues.

Chowderhead wrote:It's too late, Shotty.

No, I think not. I just don't know how to change the damn icon.

Well , have you got any medical illness that needs expensive treatment ? im sure its ok to get cream or whatever but what about the medecin thet costs alot of money and that saves lives ?

ShumaGorath wrote:
Oh, my bad. I guess I've never seen people present heat related mortality as some sort of state healthcare issue. Generally presented as a natural disaster related issue in the context of heatwaves. Next time I'll read your posts more carefully lest they not make any sense, like now.

Its also worth noting that 2003 was a pretty warm year in Europe and particularly so in North of France which, as per wikipedia, is not well equipped to deal with heat waves of this nature for reasons beyond the healthcare system.

Goddard wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Goddard wrote:Let's all take a step back, and think about what we're posting. Debate, but do so politely.

You're not likely to find a debate here.

Then lets not have an argument instead.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

o0shotty0o wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:Yup, sadly the NHS has been awesome for me, so no issues.

Chowderhead wrote:It's too late, Shotty.

No, I think not. I just don't know how to change the damn icon.

Well , have you got any medical illness that needs expensive treatment ? im sure its ok to get cream or whatever but what about the medecin thet costs alot of money and that saves lives ?

Yes. I have Ulcerative Colitis, and need to take Asacol to control it. It's 150 dollars a bottle, but thanks to health insurance, I get it for 10. Without it, I would need to have my colon removed.

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

I saw a documentary once, it said that the French were a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys... I also read the Complete Military History of France once, it said that France sucks in warfare:

Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare - "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchmen."

Italian Wars: Lost. France becomes the first and only country ever to lose two wars when fighting Italians.

Wars of Religion: France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.

Thirty Years' War: France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

War of Devolution: Tied; Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

The Dutch War: Tied.

War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War: Lost, but claimed as a tie. Deluded Frogophiles the world over label the period as the height of French Military Power.

War of the Spanish Succession: Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved ever since.

American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of the fighting".

French Revolution: Won, primarily due to the fact that the opponent was also French.

The Napoleonic Wars: Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

The Franco-Prussian War: Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

WWI: Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like not only to sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

WWII: Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

War in Indochina: Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with Dien Bien Flu.

Algerian Rebellion: Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a Western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare -"We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Eskimos.

War on Terrorism: France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe.

Clearly because I saw a documentary and read this on the internet, it must be true.

I can't say from experience, but I would wager that Singapore has an excellent healthcare system, certainly one of the best in the world, based on what I have read/heard.

chaos0xomega wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

I saw a documentary once, it said that the French were a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys... I also read the Complete Military History of France once, it said that France sucks in warfare:

Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.

Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare - "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchmen."

Italian Wars: Lost. France becomes the first and only country ever to lose two wars when fighting Italians.

Wars of Religion: France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.

Thirty Years' War: France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.

War of Devolution: Tied; Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.

The Dutch War: Tied.

War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War: Lost, but claimed as a tie. Deluded Frogophiles the world over label the period as the height of French Military Power.

War of the Spanish Succession: Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved ever since.

American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of the fighting".

French Revolution: Won, primarily due to the fact that the opponent was also French.

The Napoleonic Wars: Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.

The Franco-Prussian War: Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.

WWI: Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like not only to sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline.

WWII: Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.

War in Indochina: Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with Dien Bien Flu.

Algerian Rebellion: Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a Western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare -"We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Eskimos.

War on Terrorism: France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe.

Clearly because I saw a documentary and read this on the internet, it must be true.

171000 cancer deaths in 2010 in France.

1,529,560 new cancer cases and 569,490 deaths from cancer in 2010 in america.

But anyway stop making me talk about america !!

The pictures in that link are awesome, Chowder.

Shotty, I have two conditions of which I will keep to myself thanks. I also have Asthma, which I don't mind admitting because it lets me laugh like Mutley. Which is fething awesome.

All I'm saying is the conditions suffered by me and my parents have been dealt with well by the NHS, so I have not suffered the experience that you claim to have. I do however know that refusals for treatment due to costs do happen.

I don't really know anymore so I cannot give a proper discussion in any sense, really.

o0shotty0o wrote:
171000 cancer deaths in 2010 in France.

1,529,560 new cancer cases and 569,490 deaths from cancer in 2010 in america.

But anyway stop making me talk about america !!

Once again, Math it up.

1 out of 36 people in france died from Cancer.

1 in 539 people died from cancer in the US.


Come on people! Do some fething math!

MrDwhitey wrote:The pictures in that link are awesome, Chowder.

Shotty, I have two conditions of which I will keep to myself thanks. I also have Asthma, which I don't mind admitting because it lets me laugh like Mutley. Which is fething awesome.

All I'm saying is the conditions suffered by me and my parents have been dealt with well by the NHS, so I have not suffered the experience that you claim to have. I do however know that refusals for treatment due to costs do happen.

I don't really know anymore so I cannot give a proper discussion in any sense, really.

Ok thanks for that imput , MrDwhitey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO's_ranking_of_health_care_systems

Well, pretty much objectively speaking, the best country for overall quality of healthcare is France. They pay for it, though, with 11.2% of GDP going towards healthcare expenditure in France. In terms of bang for your buck, the best places for healthcare in the world is Cuba (118th most spend per capita, 39th best system), and Oman (8th best system in the world, but only 62nd in spending). But there's other really big reasons not to live in those countries.

Among countries that'd actually be classed as okay places to live, Spain is probably giving you your best bang for your dollar, with the 7th best system in the world, but only the 24th most spending per capita.

In case you're wondering but don't want to click on the link, the US came in with the 37th best quality. This is particularly damning when you consider the US spent more than 17% of GDP on healthcare, making it not only the biggest spender in the world, but the biggest spender by about 50% over France. Switzerland and Germany don't fair much better, coming in second and third in total spending, but delivering healthcare quality at 20th and 25th in the world, respectively.

CptJake wrote:Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

That's ridiculous. Deaths to heat in France were the product of an unusually hot summer, in a country that doesn't build housing to prevent the heat, because the heat is not normally that much of an issue. It is not a product of the healthcare system.

You measure healthcare on infant mortality, life expectancy, waiting times, hospital error rates, hospital infection rates, all these kinds of things.

You will never get anywhere inventing silly reasons to ignore the possibility that something might be done better elsewhere in the world. The way to improve your society is to look at what is done well elsewhere in the world, and see if you can adapt their system into your own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

o0shotty0o wrote:Lol what has that got to do with healthcare?

Massachusetts reformed its healthcare system in 2006, to ensure universal coverage. This model served as the basis for Obama's healthcare reform.

The politics of it are hilarious, because the Republican who instituted that system, Mitt Romney, is currently a favourite for the Republican Presidential election. That healthcare reform is the sole reason he's politically relevant, but the Republicans hate Obamacare, so Romney is forced to basically run against his own legacy. So far the best solution he's come up with is 'state's rights'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

14,000 times five is smaller than 600,000. Get out your calculator and check it if you want.

Once you've done that, stop inventing stupid reasons for pretending the US healthcare system is an okay system. It is by far the most expensive system in the world, and you get a mediocre return at best. If you have the French system, you'd save $840 billion a year, and life expectancy would increase by two years. You're paying $840 billion more per year, to die sooner.

Sebster wins this thread hands down i think.

I kind of wonder if the amount of fat people we have in the US skews our numbers at all.

I'd rather live in a country with proper air conditioning, truth be told. Hell, it doesn't even have to be the USA, as much as I love it.

Monster Rain wrote:I'd rather live in a country with proper air conditioning, truth be told. Hell, it doesn't even have to be the USA, as much as I love it.

I m sure thats what people say just before thay have a heart attack.

How exactly is France's healthcare system structured, etc? I'd be interested to know how they are able to pay less than the US does and still deliver a better system.

My money is, seriously, on less fatties and better diets. I have to wonder how much of America's medical expenses are related to obesity issues, which could range from cardiovascular disease to diabetes.

o0shotty0o wrote:I m sure thats what people say just before thay have a heart attack.

That doesn't make sense.

Maybe during a heart attack they wouldn't be so concerned about it, but before? They'd probably say any number of things. Despite the fact that the USA, according to some, has the medical equivalent of witch doctors and leeches I'm confident that were I to have a heart attack I could call 911 and an ambulance would come and take me to a hospital where doctors would do doctorly things.

Monster Rain wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:I m sure thats what people say just before thay have a heart attack.

That doesn't make sense.

Maybe during a heart attack they wouldn't be so concerned about it, but before? They'd probably say any number of things.

"I think I'll have the steak."

MrDwhitey wrote:"I think I'll have the steak."

"This milkshake is delicious. Pass me another slice of that there pie, would you Darlene?"

....now I'm hungry. Thanks a lot. :(


Bacon Cheeseburger, here I come!

sebster wrote:You will never get anywhere inventing silly reasons to ignore the possibility that something might be done better elsewhere in the world.

Other than the highest political office in the land, you mean.

sebster wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHO's_ranking_of_health_care_systems

Well, pretty much objectively speaking, the best country for overall quality of healthcare is France. They pay for it, though, with 11.2% of GDP going towards healthcare expenditure in France. In terms of bang for your buck, the best places for healthcare in the world is Cuba (118th most spend per capita, 39th best system), and Oman (8th best system in the world, but only 62nd in spending). But there's other really big reasons not to live in those countries.

Among countries that'd actually be classed as okay places to live, Spain is probably giving you your best bang for your dollar, with the 7th best system in the world, but only the 24th most spending per capita.

In case you're wondering but don't want to click on the link, the US came in with the 37th best quality. This is particularly damning when you consider the US spent more than 17% of GDP on healthcare, making it not only the biggest spender in the world, but the biggest spender by about 50% over France. Switzerland and Germany don't fair much better, coming in second and third in total spending, but delivering healthcare quality at 20th and 25th in the world, respectively.

CptJake wrote:Except you did talk about the US.

France, 2003: 14,802 heat-related deaths in one summer.

Great frickin country that is huh? Show me something comparable in the US.

That's ridiculous. Deaths to heat in France were the product of an unusually hot summer, in a country that doesn't build housing to prevent the heat, because the heat is not normally that much of an issue. It is not a product of the healthcare system.

You measure healthcare on infant mortality, life expectancy, waiting times, hospital error rates, hospital infection rates, all these kinds of things.

You will never get anywhere inventing silly reasons to ignore the possibility that something might be done better elsewhere in the world. The way to improve your society is to look at what is done well elsewhere in the world, and see if you can adapt their system into your own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

o0shotty0o wrote:Lol what has that got to do with healthcare?

Massachusetts reformed its healthcare system in 2006, to ensure universal coverage. This model served as the basis for Obama's healthcare reform.

The politics of it are hilarious, because the Republican who instituted that system, Mitt Romney, is currently a favourite for the Republican Presidential election. That healthcare reform is the sole reason he's politically relevant, but the Republicans hate Obamacare, so Romney is forced to basically run against his own legacy. So far the best solution he's come up with is 'state's rights'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:Yeah, but the US has about 5 times as many people as France does.

14,000 times five is smaller than 600,000. Get out your calculator and check it if you want.

Once you've done that, stop inventing stupid reasons for pretending the US healthcare system is an okay system. It is by far the most expensive system in the world, and you get a mediocre return at best. If you have the French system, you'd save $840 billion a year, and life expectancy would increase by two years. You're paying $840 billion more per year, to die sooner.

Funny, I don't ever recall of mentioning that the US system is an okay system.

So whats the deal with high fructose corn syrup? Sort of off topic I know but doesn't France outright ban the crap? Maybe we should follow suit.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601831.html

Are people really going to try to discuss things with this guy after the last thread?

oh dear, so many opinions, such little knowledge.

The US has the greatest healthcare IF you have money. If you don't it sucks. No-one can argue with this. Last time I looked US ranks 17th in WHO tables but that was a while again. Those tables are on percentages of people treated.

This cannot be argued with.

Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact. The number of people treated to the same level of skill we totally suck at.

Sasori wrote:Are people really going to try to discuss things with this guy after the last thread?

I'm surprised he hasn't been banhammered yet, it's kind of embarrassing to see the mods allow someone with such offensive posting history to still continue.

fullheadofhair wrote:
Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact.

Is it?

Many statistics seem to contravene this fact. I mean, I guess you might measure technology by "number of MRI machines" or "number of super machine X", but treatment really can only be measured by results. If its simply measured by "treatment" then hitting every sick person with a baseball bat till their retinas detach would allow us to reach 100% treatment.

I guess you may have meant that any curable illness you may have can be cured if you have enough money, but that's true of basically any Western nation. When discussing medical systems the points of contention always revolve around mass considerations.

dogma wrote:

fullheadofhair wrote:
Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact.

Is it?

Many statistics seem to contravene this fact. I mean, I guess you might measure technology by "number of MRI machines" or "number of super machine X", but treatment really can only be measured by results. If its simply measured by "treatment" then hitting every sick person with a baseball bat till their retinas detach would allow us to reach 100% treatment.

I guess you may have meant that any curable illness you may have can be cured if you have enough money, but that's true of basically any Western nation. When discussing medical systems the points of contention always revolve around mass considerations.

No, you missed my point but then made the point I was making. What I am saying is on a pure technology advancement and the discovery of new treatment basis the US leads leads the world. My wife works in radiology and what they are doing is nothing short of amazing. However, when it comes to treating the largest number of people in a fair and equitable manner the US sucks. I think if you don't have health insurance your death rate increase by 25% if you have an illness or accident that requires you to go to a hospital - a stat I remember from a US newspaper during Obamacare "debate".

o0shotty0o wrote:Oh my .... thats alot of people.Ok lets stay on subject though i dident create this thread to talk only about america.Any other brits out there ?

Yeah, we're here. We're just ashamed of you.

fullheadofhair wrote:

dogma wrote:

fullheadofhair wrote:
Technology and treatment wise the US is the best. That is fact.

Is it?

Many statistics seem to contravene this fact. I mean, I guess you might measure technology by "number of MRI machines" or "number of super machine X", but treatment really can only be measured by results. If its simply measured by "treatment" then hitting every sick person with a baseball bat till their retinas detach would allow us to reach 100% treatment.

I guess you may have meant that any curable illness you may have can be cured if you have enough money, but that's true of basically any Western nation. When discussing medical systems the points of contention always revolve around mass considerations.

No, you missed my point but then made the point I was making. What I am saying is on a pure technology advancement and the discovery of new treatment basis the US leads leads the world. My wife works in radiology and what they are doing is nothing short of amazing. However, when it comes to treating the largest number of people in a fair and equitable manner the US sucks. I think if you don't have health insurance your death rate increase by 25% if you have an illness or accident that requires you to go to a hospital - a stat I remember from a US newspaper during Obamacare "debate".

Realistically if you can afford the level of technological care that the U.S. can provide at it's fullest potential borders are likely meaningless to you and it's highly likely you're traveling to a care facility that specializes in your malady. Training and equipment are not the sole purview of the United States, other nations can easily afford the most expensive equipment we have. As much as it is it's not that expensive to secure trained doctors and the best items. At those levels of cost any number of nations can have the best treatment options. Pioneering technology and it's possession don't truly make for good health care if it's overzealously used or misused. Statistically quality of care is reduced as the number of specialists utilized rises, and nations like Japan and Germany are leaders in medical fields with often equal or greater successes then the United States. The U.S. attracts some of the best professionals in the world as it's business model for health care is very advantageous for specialty and surgical caregivers, but those people exist elsewhere.

chaos0xomega wrote:How exactly is France's healthcare system structured, etc? I'd be interested to know how they are able to pay less than the US does and still deliver a better system.

It's a mix of private and public healthcare, where people are given a level of guaranteed care, then offered incentives to go out and arrange their own healthcare with private companies if they wish.

The structure of the system isn't anything incredible, there are similar systems in place in just about every developed country, it's just that for cultural and political reasons France is willing to spend a bit more on their system than other countries. Britain spends 8% of GDP on healthcare, and France spends 11% - that difference in funding makes a difference to the quality of healthcare.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Monster Rain wrote:I'd rather live in a country with proper air conditioning, truth be told. Hell, it doesn't even have to be the USA, as much as I love it.

It isn't about France not having decent air conditioning. It's about having people used to certain temperatures, and housing built to retain or release heat.

In Australia, a very hot country, people were as bemused as you are that folk in France and the UK were dying at temperatures we'd consider a bit too chilly to go down to the beach. Yet in Australia when temperatures get to levels that Europeans would consider time to sit in tents connected to their refridgerators, our old people start dying from the cold.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RatBot wrote:My money is, seriously, on less fatties and better diets. I have to wonder how much of America's medical expenses are related to obesity issues, which could range from cardiovascular disease to diabetes.

Maybe, obesity certainly plays a part in .

Yet, the US is not the fattest country in the world (I know Australia recently overtook you, aussie aussie aussie oy oy oy). But it is uniquely positioned in terms of the waste of it's healthcare system.

Think about it this way, I have a guaranteed level of healthcare here in Australia, I might have to wait an hour to see a doctor willing to take me on the government's dime, but if I'm sick I will get seen. If I want care with shorter waiting periods, I can choose a private insurer. The key there is I get to choose, because I'm paying it myself, I get to look through what HBF and Medibank and all the others are offering, and decide which company's services and costs are best for me. I did this recently with my fiance, because we wanted to go on the same plan, and we sat there with consultants from different companies and they explained what they did and didn't offer. The companies are driven to compete against each other because consumers are exercising real choice, and against the general position, because they have to offer something inherently desirous to draw us away from the public option.

In the US, if you want to have coverage, you have to be with a private insurer. The alternative to private insurance is 'hope like crazy you don't get cancer'. Right there the insurers have a captive audience. To make it even worse, most people don't even pick their own insurers, instead their companies picks an insurer based on whatever they think is important, and you put up with it. That's a great big intermediary lumped between the provider and the insurer, and that kills the efficiencies that should be gained from people getting to pick their own providers.

It's the waste of that basic system that's costing you money, and giving you poor health outcomes.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:Funny, I don't ever recall of mentioning that the US system is an okay system.

Then what was the point of your comment on the US having lots of people, other than as a means to defend the instances of heart disease?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Albatross wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Oh my .... thats alot of people.Ok lets stay on subject though i dident create this thread to talk only about america.Any other brits out there ?

Yeah, we're here. We're just ashamed of you.

What did this guy do?

I submit heat deaths are indicative of the health care system.

Health care involves identifying an issue and getting a patient to an appropriate provider. When there is a wide spread issue, part of the system is responsible for communicating to the population what is going on, how to ID it and treat it, and steps on what to do if you recognize it in others. When civilians, especially the old and infirm which most of those deaths were, are dying from heat related issues, the health care system failed.

It takes a while for heat related issues to turn to to heat stroke and kill you, unless you are doing massive labor in really bad conditions. These people were not.

In many countries , when you develop those symptoms, you call and an ambulance comes and an EMT fixes you up and gets you to a hospital. Or a buddy or family member gets you to a hospital. Obviously something drastic happened in France in the summer of 2003 and the system failed. Period. There is no other way to explain that many deaths from a common cause in that period of time.

And ALL heat injuries are treatable and recoverable. All of them. It is close to criminal to allow folks to die from heat injuries. It is not like cancer that can hide in you or heart disease that the first real symptom may be a massive cardiac arrest.

So, yeah, to me it makes perfect sense to use several thousand preventable deaths in such a small population as indicative of the health care system.

Your opinion may differ.

ShumaGorath wrote: Micheal Moore is not a trustworthy documentarian, he's a propagandist. He edits interviews, falsifies quotes, and presents hearsay as fact.

Aye Shuma knows the score, as much as I lean towards the dems in the states, I could never shake the feeling that MM was pretty much the exact same as the folks that he slates all the time.

His films are just left wing propaganda.

He is also very fat and irritating, he looks like he needs a fething good scrub as well and I have no respect for people with poor personal hygiene.

Without resorting to pulling random stats from t'internet, I'd have to say Cuba. I'm sure I read somewhere that Americans and even Europeans are travelling there for healthcare.
Not sure where though......

Actually what happens in America, is if you dont have insurance, you tell the nurse staff, they set you up with someone from DHS (Department of Human Services) and then they treat you. Sooooooooooo no body actually dies in this process. Yea its far from perfect, and the DHS insurance is laughable half the time, but you will at least be treated

Ouze wrote:

That is hands down the best i have seen...
Also Albatross has already voiced my thoughts on this thread.

Ouze wrote:

Thats my biggest lol of the week.

Although, Ive only been back from my lengthy ban for an hour.

You havnt missed much in a week

o0shotty0o wrote:Im not even going to mention america , if you dont have money there , thay will just let you die on the street in front of the hospital.

This is the most ignorant thing I've read in 2011.

What did this guy do?

kronk wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Im not even going to mention america , if you dont have money there , thay will just let you die on the street in front of the hospital.

This is the most ignorant thing I've read in 2011.

You should see his other thread. Half his comments fought for the "most ignorant thing I've read of 2011" title.

Of course as it was pure trolling, who knows what he really thinks as a person.

kronk wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:Im not even going to mention america , if you dont have money there , thay will just let you die on the street in front of the hospital.

This is the most ignorant thing I've read in 2011.

Good for you.

o0shotty0o wrote:No i watched a documetary called sicko , he shows footage of someone dieing outside a hospital becaus he couldent show that he had any insurance or money.

That wasn't a documentary in the way of being a work of nonfiction.

An excellent site for this kind of discussion is Nationmaster.

I would suppose that an indicator of a country's healthcare system would depend on a basic number of healthy years that people live.
Not being a statistician, I am unable to break this down sufficiently to give a truly accurate picture as there are a number of factors that could play into the results (population density, wars, comparative wealth, etc.)


Life Expectancy (number of healthy years):

# 1 Japan: 73.6 years
# 2 Switzerland: 72.8 years
# 3 Sweden: 71.8 years
# 4 Australia: 71.6 years
# 5 France: 71.3 years
# 6 Iceland: 71.1 years
= 7 Austria: 71 years
= 7 Italy: 71 years
# 9 Spain: 70.9 years
# 10 Norway: 70.8 years

Having lived in Japan and utilized their healthcare system, I am able to attest to how well the system operates and both the quality and availability of care are fantastic.

o0shotty0o wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:Yup, sadly the NHS has been awesome for me, so no issues.

Chowderhead wrote:It's too late, Shotty.

No, I think not. I just don't know how to change the damn icon.

Well , have you got any medical illness that needs expensive treatment ? im sure its ok to get cream or whatever but what about the medecin thet costs alot of money and that saves lives ?

Now you have a point. If you're going to compare health systems you have to compare what they actually do, not heat deaths, not rate of heart disease (protip thats lifestyle), but actual treatment, cure rates, cost to patient, but also total cost. A system can be great but incredibly inefficient, or great but only for a small number of people.

CptJake wrote:I submit heat deaths are indicative of the health care system.

Health care involves identifying an issue and getting a patient to an appropriate provider.

The guy with cold water and air conditioning, and maybe bags of ice? Because that's how you treat heat stroke, even in a hospital. France identified these issues, and made them public, but air conditioning didn't exist for many people, and heat stroke (which, if you're young, elderly or infirm, sets on without exertion) affects judgment; which is a big deal if you aren't, say, conditioned to deal with heat stroke.

CptJake wrote:
In many countries , when you develop those symptoms, you call and an ambulance comes and an EMT fixes you up and gets you to a hospital. Or a buddy or family member gets you to a hospital. Obviously something drastic happened in France in the summer of 2003 and the system failed. Period

If you develop heat stroke, and aren't already treating it, you aren't making it to the hospital.

And here I thought Americans believed in self-reliance.

KingCracker wrote:Actually what happens in America, is if you dont have insurance, you tell the nurse staff, they set you up with someone from DHS (Department of Human Services) and then they treat you. Sooooooooooo no body actually dies in this process. Yea its far from perfect, and the DHS insurance is laughable half the time, but you will at least be treated

QFT.

dogma wrote:And here I thought Americans believed in self-reliance.

Well, I mean, up to the point where you actually can't do something yourself, or simply don't know how.

You're right about heat stroke though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:

You know who else believed in troll threads?

Hitler.

Dogma's reply made me think of something..

Do you think that there is a correlation between education level and life expectancy?

I mean, say a country is full of people who complete university, wont they have better stats not just due to the health service itself, but also down to the care the citizens take of themselves? Isnt this a good reason why Japan are up there? Not because they have the best doctors and hospitals, but the best diets and exercise regimes?

I mean, I learned alot about sports science and nutrition thanks to my years in the commando's, my only real vice is binge drinking.

I know what I need to do when its extremely cold, or extremely hot. I know how to ensure I stay hydrated, I know basic first aid and battlefield triage. I know that protein and salts and fats are all essential for fuelling your body efficiently, but in the correct amounts.

Isnt this stuff more important than the actual health service? Prevention is more important than a cure, and I haven't seen a doctor in 15 years, so surely It wouldn't matter if the nation I lived in had gakky healthcare right?

I hypothesize that the UK performs poorly thanks to a poor education system, and a large percentage of its populous relying on state wellfare, thus they either ignorantly or purposely develop drink/drugs/obesity issues and become reliant on the system.

In a nutshell, the more fat, stupid, ignorant chavs you have, the more they drink and smoke and do drugs, and the worse your nations average health is.

Not due to the poor service, but due to the citizens. And I bet if you check the stats for heart disease in somewhere that's famous for fat drunk chav's (Glasgow for example) they are enormously higher than somewhere nice and pleasant like Oxford.

Whaddya think?

That your posting style is abrasive yet often fun to read.

mattyrm wrote: I hypothesize that the UK performs poorly thanks to a poor education system, and a large percentage of its populous relying on state wellfare, thus they either ignorantly or purposely develop drink/drugs/obesity issues and become reliant on the system.

In a nutshell, the more fat, stupid, ignorant chavs you have, the more they drink and smoke and do drugs, and the worse your nations average health is.

Not due to the poor service, but due to the citizens. And I bet if you check the stats for heart disease in somewhere that's famous for fat drunk chav's (Glasgow for example) they are enormously higher than somewhere nice and pleasant like Oxford.

Whaddya think?

I think that you're on to something. I don't know if any healthcare system could counteract millions of people eating themselves to death.

You paint such a lovely picture of Glasgow, by the way.

Monster Rain wrote:You paint such a lovely picture of Glasgow, by the way.

A Scottish friend of mine told me this wonderful little tale.

"In Britain, it's eat five fruit/veg a day. In Scotland, it's three, in Glasgow, it's one and be glad of it."

When I went up to Edinburgh recently via bus, when we stopped at Glasgow, the only people getting on were five youths whom I believe the label "Chav" could be applied, and a Social Worker. That made me happy. Quite well behaved chaps though, so no issue.

Monster Rain wrote:

I think that you're on to something. I don't know if any healthcare system could counteract millions of people eating themselves to death.

You paint such a lovely picture of Glasgow, by the way.

If as Freddie Mercury said, "Fat bottomed Girls they make the rocking world go round" then the city of Glasgow should be rewarded for it's herculean effort in making the world continue to spin on its axis.

Citizens of Glasgow, I salute you!

Whats wrong with being a chav ? or a yob ? or an asbo?

I personally like talking to them becaus thay act and talk to me like im super man just becaus ive been educated and thay have not , makes me feel powerful. hehe

o0shotty0o wrote:
Whats wrong with being a chav ? or a yob ? or an asbo?

I personally like talking to them becaus thay act and talk to me like im super man just becaus ive been educated...

That's definitely the impression that I get.

Monster Rain wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:
Whats wrong with being a chav ? or a yob ? or an asbo?

I personally like talking to them becaus thay act and talk to me like im super man just becaus ive been educated...

That's definitely the impression that I get.

Why the hate ?

Sasori wrote:Are people really going to try to discuss things with this guy after the last thread?

Doesn't look like it.

There just aren't words for the shame i feel at the ignorance of some of my countrymen... This thread makes Jesus cry

Oh my, so much rage. Well since Im no expert on this subject I wont make any bold claims, but I do belive that Germany, the UK, Norway, France, Sweden, Dennmark and other European/ Asian countries has excelt medical systems, but if I had to choose I would have to go with Norway since its my homeland.

mattyrm wrote:
Do you think that there is a correlation between education level and life expectancy?

I mean, say a country is full of people who complete university, wont they have better stats not just due to the health service itself, but also down to the care the citizens take of themselves? Isnt this a good reason why Japan are up there? Not because they have the best doctors and hospitals, but the best diets and exercise regimes?

I doubt it. The sedentary lifestyles that come with higher education tend to promote obesity, which makes everything about health worse. Then there's the issue of deliberately choosing to live shorter lives due to a preference something over living longer. Then there's genetics. Then there's being educated in the right things, and not just educated.

You have to be educated sure, but in the right way, while having the desire to leverage your education in order to live longer, healthier lives.

dogma wrote:

mattyrm wrote:
Do you think that there is a correlation between education level and life expectancy?

I mean, say a country is full of people who complete university, wont they have better stats not just due to the health service itself, but also down to the care the citizens take of themselves? Isnt this a good reason why Japan are up there? Not because they have the best doctors and hospitals, but the best diets and exercise regimes?

I doubt it. The sedentary lifestyles that come with higher education tend to promote obesity, which makes everything about health worse. Then there's the issue of deliberately choosing to live shorter lives due to a preference something over living longer. Then there's genetics. Then there's being educated in the right things, and not just educated.

You have to be educated sure, but in the right way, while having the desire to leverage your education in order to live longer, healthier lives.

You could make some argument that education plays a role. According to nation master, there's a 61% correlation between the number of years spent in school in a given country and the odds of living to reach 65 years of age. Keep in mind that this is a blank number and doesn't take into account factors such as obesity, wars, etc.

Here's the top 10 in years spent in education:

# 1 United States: 12
# 2 Norway: 11.8
# 3 New Zealand: 11.7
# 4 Canada: 11.6
# 5 Sweden: 11.4
# 6 Australia: 10.9
# 7 Switzerland: 10.5
# 8 Germany: 10.2
# 9 Finland: 10
# 10 Poland: 9.8

And the chances of a woman reaching 65 years of age:

# 1 Japan: 92.1%
= 2 Spain: 91.4%
= 2 Greece: 91.4%
# 4 Italy: 90.9%
# 5 Sweden: 90.8%
# 6 Switzerland: 90.5%
= 7 Finland: 90.3%
= 7 Cyprus: 90.3%
# 9 Australia: 90.2%
# 10 France: 90.1%

Though, looking at it a little deeper it's probably just indicative of how well rounded such countries as Sweden, Finland and Switzerland are in terms of citizen quality of life...

I have to say that the NHS does pretty damn well for anyone who is injured or sick, they are just overworked/abused and don't get enough dosh thanks to certain people.

agnosto wrote:
Though, looking at it a little deeper it's probably just indicative of how well rounded such countries as Sweden, Finland and Switzerland are in terms of citizen quality of life...

Yeah, my guess is that if you ran the numbers by country you would see an insignificant positive correlation, though the true test would be looking at individuals in a single country, or small region.

For some reason, I've yet to see anyone quoting the occasional charity threads you can see about helping a fellow american gamer that's now in serious financial trouble after suffering from an accident.

o0shotty0o wrote:My opinion of gays are different than theres.And thay dont like that

..that, and the fact that your hate-filled rants look like they were composed by a semi-literate 7-year old.


I mean, who spells 'they' incorrectly?

Albatross wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:My opinion of gays are different than theres.And thay dont like that

..that, and the fact that your hate-filled rants look like they were composed by a semi-literate 7-year old.


I mean, who spells 'they' incorrectly?

This made me chuckle out loud in a quiet room full of strangers.

That's what I get for checking Dakka on my iPad.

Being stared at oddly by a room full of strangers is just what you get for having an iPad.

Monster Rain wrote:

Albatross wrote:

o0shotty0o wrote:My opinion of gays are different than theres.And thay dont like that

..that, and the fact that your hate-filled rants look like they were composed by a semi-literate 7-year old.


I mean, who spells 'they' incorrectly?

This made me chuckle out loud in a quiet room full of strangers.

That's what I get for checking Dakka on my iPad.

Please, please, please tell me that you are in a doctor's waiting-room right now. That, at least, would salvage something from this abortion of a thread.

Alas, I am waiting for my daughter to get out of gymnastics.

I hope she doesn't sprain her ankle. I don't have enough chickens to trade the woods witch for some of that there doctorin'.

Monster Rain wrote:Other than the highest political office in the land, you mean.

Well played, good sir.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CptJake wrote:I submit heat deaths are indicative of the health care system.

You submit wrong. There is plenty of blame to be handed out across France, particularly to families who left their elderly at home when they went on vacation, but not so much on the healthcare system.

In fact, the French healthcare system actually worked extremely well, for those who were in it. This is why the deaths from heat were such a weird set of statistics - the sick and the very old survived because they were in care, it was the less old who died, as they remained in houses that were never built for 40' temperatures.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KingCracker wrote:Actually what happens in America, is if you dont have insurance, you tell the nurse staff, they set you up with someone from DHS (Department of Human Services) and then they treat you. Sooooooooooo no body actually dies in this process. Yea its far from perfect, and the DHS insurance is laughable half the time, but you will at least be treated

For emergency care. Which is half the problem, people are ignored while they have minor complaints, and then a fortune is spent when that flairs up into something major. This is both more expensive, and less effective than seeing a doctor before something becomes a major problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

o0shotty0o wrote:My opinion of gays are different than theres.And thay dont like that

Okay, making a guess about what your opinion might be... good on them for not liking your opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:In a nutshell, the more fat, stupid, ignorant chavs you have, the more they drink and smoke and do drugs, and the worse your nations average health is.

Not due to the poor service, but due to the citizens. And I bet if you check the stats for heart disease in somewhere that's famous for fat drunk chav's (Glasgow for example) they are enormously higher than somewhere nice and pleasant like Oxford.

Whaddya think?

That I enjoy seeing how, no matter the topic, you manage to blame it on chavs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:I doubt it. The sedentary lifestyles that come with higher education tend to promote obesity, which makes everything about health worse.

There's a much stronger correlation between low incomes and obesity though.

I know a lot of people explain this by talking about greater time pressures on the working poor, and the low cost of high fat food and blah blah blah, but ultimately I think there's a pretty strong correlation between being lazy and earning less money, and a pretty strong correlation between being lazy and being fat, therefore...

Norway is the best country in terms of healthcare.

Cheesecat wrote:

Sasori wrote:Are people really going to try to discuss things with this guy after the last thread?

I'm surprised he hasn't been banhammered yet, it's kind of embarrassing to see the mods allow someone with such offensive posting history to still continue.

Nope, I was banned instead of him.



The U.S system is poo, basically. I know that the Scandinavian countries are up there in terms of great healthcare.

This thread is giving me chest pains...

Which country should I be in again?

Medium of Death wrote:This thread is giving me chest pains...

Which country should I be in again?

The one shotty is in, if not, you are ignerent, gay, and a word that the gays made up.

They have their own words now?

Surely all red blooded men are doomed...

DOOMED!

Medium of Death wrote:They have their own words now?

Surely all red blooded men are doomed...

DOOMED!

DOOMBREAD?

Medium of Death wrote:They have their own words now?

Surely all red blooded men are doomed...

DOOMED!

That reminds me of a commercial I saw about supporting (or not supporting, I forget) Prop 8 in California. Gays were basically described as a dark cloud on the horizon. It was shamefully bad.

purplefood wrote:

Medium of Death wrote:They have their own words now?

Surely all red blooded men are doomed...

DOOMED!

DOOMBREAD?

DOOMFART?

DOOMBREADED strips of BLAME, with a side order of VICTIM

You know, I heard that the new CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORTS were perfect for traveling through some space corridors and industrial towers.

I think this thread has just passed the point of no return.

I remember Richard Moore having a documentary about this XD

In a good way right?
I heard you get a lovely view from the point of no return...

purplefood wrote:In a good way right?
I heard you get a lovely view from the point of no return...

Is it so beautiful that it should have never existed?

Goddard wrote:

purplefood wrote:In a good way right?
I heard you get a lovely view from the point of no return...

Is it so beautiful that it should have never existed?

Not quite that good...
Nice though.
It'd make for one hell of a postcard...

purplefood wrote:

Goddard wrote:

purplefood wrote:In a good way right?
I heard you get a lovely view from the point of no return...

Is it so beautiful that it should have never existed?

Not quite that good...
Nice though.
It'd make for one hell of a postcard...

Oh, it sounds lovely!

Goddard wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Goddard wrote:

purplefood wrote:In a good way right?
I heard you get a lovely view from the point of no return...

Is it so beautiful that it should have never existed?

Not quite that good...
Nice though.
It'd make for one hell of a postcard...

Oh, it sounds lovely!

Very much so...
There's a tea house and everything.

purplefood wrote:Very much so...There's a tea house and everything.

I very much want a picture of it now.

Goddard wrote:

purplefood wrote:Very much so...There's a tea house and everything.

I very much want a picture of it now.

Use your mind camera!

purplefood wrote:

Goddard wrote:

purplefood wrote:Very much so...There's a tea house and everything.

I very much want a picture of it now.

Use your mind camera!

IT'S SO BEAUTIFUL!

And now it's time to flee the scene...

Monster Rain wrote:Alas, I am waiting for my daughter to get out of gymnastics.

I hope she doesn't sprain her ankle. I don't have enough chickens to trade the woods witch for some of that there doctorin'.

If she sprains her ankle and you can't wrap it in free market, she's going to have to appear before a death panel. Thanks, Obama.

Ouze wrote:...she's going to have to appear before a death panel. Thanks, Obama.

You listen here, Jack.

If someone ends up being killed by a liberal democrat death panel, it's their own damn fault!

I'm surprised this isn't locked yet.

I suspect the OP has been suspended again, he appears to have been absent for the last few pages.

Monster Rain wrote:You listen here, Jack.

If someone ends up being killed by a liberal democrat death panel, it's their own damn fault!

If they're a plucky, self-motivated up and comer, then they should be able to pull themselves out of obamacare by their own bootstraps, anyway.

Came for a bootstrappy response, can leave satisfied


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goddard wrote:I suspect the OP has been suspended again, he appears to have been absent for the last few pages.

Oh, o0shotty0o - August 10th, 2011 - August 24th 2011 - we knew ye too well. RIP

We shall begin a great lament...

Our dirge shall shake the very foundations of the internet.

Meh, I've seen better.

Monster Rain wrote:Meh, I've seen better.

...lol....

I miss Gailbraithe. His posts were immaculately-spelled, at least.

Albatross wrote:I miss Gailbraithe. His posts were immaculately-spelled, at least.

I'm kind of curious to see how his views would clash with the OP. I suppose one of us could pretend to be G-Baby, but it wouldn't be the same without him.

It appears Tzeentch has some special purpose for this thread, prolonging it's life through extraordinary means.

I propose we begin discussion on stereotypes: their origins, and how one can live and socialize with tolerance.

Goddard wrote:It appears Tzeentch has some special purpose for this thread, prolonging it's life through extraordinary means.

I propose we begin discussion on stereotypes: their origins, and how one can live and socialize with tolerance.

Well, I've always been curious about the origins of the stereotype of black people really loving purple liquids and watermelons. Also I don't really understand why lesbians are stereotyped as having short hair.

Cheesecat wrote:

I'm kind of curious to see how his views would clash with the OP. I suppose one of us could pretend to be G-Baby, but it wouldn't be the same without him.

To be honest, I'm shocked I see so many references to Gail in OT

I mean, he was bad, but damn people was he really that bad How many months has it been and he still gets mentioned XD

LordofHats wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

I'm kind of curious to see how his views would clash with the OP. I suppose one of us could pretend to be G-Baby, but it wouldn't be the same without him.

To be honest, I'm shocked I see so many references to Gail in OT

I mean, he was bad, but damn people was he really that bad How many months has it been and he still gets mentioned XD

I think it's because most of us have never experienced a person who is able to express so much rage on such a frequent basis.

Out of respect for those who are no longer with us and/or able to respond... let's let them all rest peacefully.

OK?

Seriously, where the hell do stereotypes come from?

Well, they generally start from some tiny kernel of truth that gets blown out of proportion and applied across the board to all members of the stereotyped group.

For example, in the Middle Ages in Europe, Jews were not allowed to own land, and not allowed to hold various professions. What they were allowed to do, however, was be moneylenders, so many Jews became moneylenders out of necessity. This made many of them wealthy, but also led to the stereotype that all Jews are rich and greedy and control the world bank and yadda yadda yadda.

Anyone who isn't a bigoted moron knows that the Jews, as a collective group, don't control the media/banks/whatever, even if many prominent people in those fields are Jewish. There are many prominent non-Jews in these fields as well. It's not like Jews hold monthly gatherings during which they figure out how they can oppress the goyim and maintain their power, but there are people who sure act like this happens. Anyone who isn't a bigoted moron knows not all Jews are wealthy. But the stereotype still exists.


As for black people liking watermelon and grape drink, I don't know where the stereotype started. As for fried chicken, that stereotype is bs. Everyone likes fried chicken.

RatBot wrote:Well, they generally start from some tiny kernel of truth that gets blown out of proportion and applied across the board to all members of the stereotyped group.

For example, in the Middle Ages in Europe, Jews were not allowed to own land, and not allowed to hold various professions. What they were allowed to do, however, was be moneylenders, so many Jews became moneylenders out of necessity. This made many of them wealthy, but also led to the stereotype that all Jews are rich and greedy and control the world bank and yadda yadda yadda.

Anyone who isn't a bigoted moron knows that the Jews, as a collective group, don't control the media/banks/whatever, even if many prominent people in those fields are Jewish. There are many prominent non-Jews in these fields as well. Anyone who isn't a bigoted moron knows not all Jews are wealthy. But the stereotype still exists.

I think the Jewish/Muslims stereotypes are the only origins that I already know.

Many of the contemporary "modern" ones I blame on popular media perpetuating something out of proportion. I also think it has to do with the human brain's desire to categorize things.

Who doesn't like watermelon?

Monster Rain wrote:Who doesn't like watermelon?

Exactly! Stereotypes are so unbelievably stupid I don't even know what to say!

Come to think of it, you're right, everyone likes watermelon, too.

Monster Rain wrote:Who doesn't like watermelon?

Me?

Shaz is gross.

Watermelon Jolly Ranchers though...

RatBot wrote:Come to think of it, you're right, everyone likes watermelon, too.

Stop stereotyping people. I am very offended sir I hate wate-

Okay I'll just stop there. I love watermelon.

You know what's an offensive stereotype? That watermelons just sit around waiting to get picked, and the best they can hope for is get cut up and eaten by some human.

You never hear about the watermelon that's studying at Yale, do you? No you fething don't.

Did I really miss -another- one of these threads? I ought to come check on this bloody forum more often.

It even -was- Burzday.


Also as a Canadian I can proudly say I sometimes go to the hospital just because I feel like it.

RatBot wrote:Well, they generally start from some tiny kernel of truth that gets blown out of proportion and applied across the board to all members of the stereotyped group.

Tiny?!

I am the only controversial guy on here or what? Speak the truth! Risk the ban!

Stereotypes exist because they are TRUE. If I just make one up like "All black people collect stamps" then it wont catch on, because it is ridiculous. Now obviously stereotypes arent always true, but they are far more likely to be true on an individual basis. Thus, the stereotype is true.

And every single colour/race/creed uses them, and laughs about it. So lets just calm down and accept it. As the guys on Avenue Q said

"Everyone's a little bit racist
Sometimes. Doesn't mean we go
Around committing hate crimes.

Look around and you will find
No one's really color blind.
Maybe it's a fact
We all should face
Everyone makes judgments
Based on race"

I will of course leave out all the race/religion based ones, are all Americans fat and don't own passports? Do all Brits have bad teeth? Do the French all womanise? Do the Germans have a gak sense of humour? Are the Irish stupid? Of course not. Its ridiculous to say all, but gak loads of them do, are, and have.

Lets not have PC dogma blind us to what's obviously merely an amusing quirk that almost everyone indulges in. Doesn't mean you want to exterminate everyone.

Oh and yes, Northern people are much tougher and (stupider) than Southern softies.

That's cos of the coal diet. Coal and gravel if you were lucky!

I read a report in a newspaper that said that Northern men were more likely to cry than Southern men if they heard a sad song on the radio. It was using science. FACT. Northern men aren't tough.

Compare that to the minor anecdotal evidence I have of a Northern friend of mind who had one tooth pulled without anaesthetic after it didn't take,and then proceded to instruct the dentist to pull the other tooth anyway. But that's just anecdotal evidence, which as we know is not any kind of proof of anything.

htj wrote:I read a report in a newspaper that said that Northern men were more likely to cry than Southern men if they heard a sad song on the radio. It was using science. FACT. Northern men aren't tough.

Any man that cries is weak and deserving of scorn.

Here is a good story, my missus (American) thinks that my dad is funny because he is uncouth and drinks too much. We were sat on the couch before we went for a drink with him a couple of weeks ago, it was about 11am and he starts down the local about 1230.

The Golf was on and my Dad points at this American golfer.. "Here Laura, look at this poof here.. he's what? 40 year old? I saw him on here last week right, and he started fething crying.. CRYING on national television, because his fething Dad died! Honestly! Cos his fething Dad died.. on national television. What a fething pansie"

She said "well, you know, you can get close to your family Dave" and he looked at her like she was fethed in the head.

"Ppffff.... how close can you get to your fething Dad?!?"

Made her laugh anyways.

mattyrm wrote:

htj wrote:I read a report in a newspaper that said that Northern men were more likely to cry than Southern men if they heard a sad song on the radio. It was using science. FACT. Northern men aren't tough.

Any man that cries is weak and deserving of scorn.

Here is a good story, my missus (American) thinks that my dad is funny because he is uncouth and drinks too much. We were sat on the couch before we went for a drink with him a couple of weeks ago, it was about 11am and he starts down the local about 1230.

The Golf was on and my Dad points at this American golfer.. "Here Laura, look at this poof here.. he's what? 40 year old? I saw him on here last week right, and he started fething crying.. CRYING on national television, because his fething Dad died! Honestly! Cos his fething Dad died.. on national television. What a fething pansie"

She said "well, you know, you can get close to your family Dave" and he said..

"ppffff.... how close can you get to your fething Dad!?"

Made her laugh anyways.

And I too, matty, and I too. Your dad sounds like an entertaining fellow. A character, if you will.

He is funny, he's also a proper bastard.

I always call him Dave when I'm with him, instead of Dad.

People that don't know us so well always get confused as to our relationship when I keep calling him Dave or "Mean old Dave" and after someone informs them he is my Father they say "Why don't you ever call him Dad?"

I always answer "Dad sounds affectionate" and people find this amusing, but its only half a joke.

Sounds like you have a complicated relationship with him. I quite like the title 'Mean Old.' I might have to increase my awfulness, try and pick it up myself by the time I get to a ripe old age.

Ireland - one of the best materinity care in the world. Crap general health though.

I like the UK NHS - as a type 1 diabetic I need insulin and couldn't afford it if I was in the states.

mattyrm wrote:Do all Brits have bad teeth?

No. According to a recent study (I HAD THE LINK AT ONE POINT, I SWEAR) the UK has some of the best teefs in the world. I think Japan was higher on the bad teeth list.

Certainly not here. Most people in the US forego doctor's visits unless it's life threatening or they're on medicaid. It's too expensive, and the insurance is too expensive too.


The US medical industry is disgustingly corrupt.

Goddard wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Do all Brits have bad teeth?

No. According to a recent study (I HAD THE LINK AT ONE POINT, I SWEAR) the UK has some of the best teefs in the world. I think Japan was higher on the bad teeth list.

I'd believe it. I did a semester abroad in Japan a couple years ago, and as one keen fellow American observer noted, "Japanese chicks have some busted-ass teeth." They're not rotting, mind you, but I don't know if they even know that there's such a thing as dental braces. They do have dentists, I walked by a couple of dental offices. I imagine being a Japanese dentist must be quite depressing.

Goddard wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Do all Brits have bad teeth?

No. According to a recent study (I HAD THE LINK AT ONE POINT, I SWEAR) the UK has some of the best teefs in the world. I think Japan was higher on the bad teeth list.

Mate someone posted that a couple months back, I read it. Didnt we score higher than the US?

ITS ALL LIES.

I think it is an aspect of their culture. They think it looks cute. Kawaii? I think it is?

Could be wrong, don't take this as fact.

I'm contemplating whether reading this entire thread was a waste of my time...

samwellfrm wrote:I'm contemplating whether reading this entire thread was a waste of my time...

" border="0" />




It is officially worth your time.

Goddard wrote:I think it is an aspect of their culture. They think it looks cute. Kawaii? I think it is?

Could be wrong, don't take this as fact.

I don't think snaggly teeth are considered cute in Japan, and it's more that straight vs. crooked teeth are simply a non-issue to them for whatever reason. Obviously, I didn't ask anyone about it, not even people with perfect teeth, cuz it would've been rather rude. IIRC many of the Japanese men I met also had bad teeth, but for some reason () I didn't notice it as much.

*

mattyrm wrote:

RatBot wrote:Well, they generally start from some tiny kernel of truth that gets blown out of proportion and applied across the board to all members of the stereotyped group.

Tiny?!

I am the only controversial guy on here or what? Speak the truth! Risk the ban!

Stereotypes exist because they are TRUE. If I just make one up like "All black people collect stamps" then it wont catch on, because it is ridiculous. Now obviously stereotypes arent always true, but they are far more likely to be true on an individual basis. Thus, the stereotype is true.

And every single colour/race/creed uses them, and laughs about it. So lets just calm down and accept it. As the guys on Avenue Q said

"Everyone's a little bit racist
Sometimes. Doesn't mean we go
Around committing hate crimes.

Look around and you will find
No one's really color blind.
Maybe it's a fact
We all should face
Everyone makes judgments
Based on race"

I will of course leave out all the race/religion based ones, are all Americans fat and don't own passports? Do all Brits have bad teeth? Do the French all womanise? Do the Germans have a gak sense of humour? Are the Irish stupid? Of course not. Its ridiculous to say all, but gak loads of them do, are, and have.

Lets not have PC dogma blind us to what's obviously merely an amusing quirk that almost everyone indulges in. Doesn't mean you want to exterminate everyone.

Oh and yes, Northern people are much tougher and (stupider) than Southern softies.

I would say most stereotypes revolve around anecdotal evidence than the actual truth (with a few exceptions).

Cheesecat wrote:I would say most stereotypes revolve around anecdotal evidence than the actual truth (with a few exceptions).

I would agree.

Australia has free good quality Healthcare.

I've had good treatment with Canada's universal healthcare.

Seems like a bit of an argument for argument's sake to me. I thought that stuff was reserved for the comments section under YouTube videos...

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Seems like a bit of an argument for argument's sake to me. I thought that stuff was reserved for the comments section under YouTube videos...

To what do you refer?

Goddard wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Seems like a bit of an argument for argument's sake to me. I thought that stuff was reserved for the comments section under YouTube videos...

To what do you refer?

The overall vibe of the thread. Trading blows, my country is better than your country etc. Not a particularly nice thing to be talking about.

Cofessor Dallax wrote:

Goddard wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Seems like a bit of an argument for argument's sake to me. I thought that stuff was reserved for the comments section under YouTube videos...

To what do you refer?

The overall vibe of the thread. Trading blows, my country is better than your country etc. Not a particularly nice thing to be talking about.

Indeed.

Goddard wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:

Goddard wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Seems like a bit of an argument for argument's sake to me. I thought that stuff was reserved for the comments section under YouTube videos...

To what do you refer?

The overall vibe of the thread. Trading blows, my country is better than your country etc. Not a particularly nice thing to be talking about.

Indeed.

Cool gallery pic man

Cofessor Dallax wrote:

Goddard wrote:

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Seems like a bit of an argument for argument's sake to me. I thought that stuff was reserved for the comments section under YouTube videos...

To what do you refer?

The overall vibe of the thread. Trading blows, my country is better than your country etc. Not a particularly nice thing to be talking about.

I agree with you.

Cofessor Dallax wrote:Cool gallery pic man

Thanks, haha

I detest "universal healthcare" to an extent, only because I live in America where most people care so little about their bodies. I don't want my taxes to be responsible for someone who ate at Chef Ronald's for half their life or smoked cigs for 40 years and now they're crying for constant health care.

mattyrm wrote:Tiny?!

I am the only controversial guy on here or what? Speak the truth! Risk the ban!

Stereotypes exist because they are TRUE.

Some stereotypes exist because that characteristic is generally true across a population. Other stereotypes exist because people want to believe them, they make something easier to understand.

Figuring out which is which is the tricky bit, of course.

Some are accidentally true. For example, black people liking chicken is true in so far as everyone likes chicken. It is delicious in so many different ways.

I'm going to go with Australia on this one, I really don't mind paying a bit of tax if it means I don't have to worry about hospital bills.

Buddhists don't like chicken...







*ducks*

So they don't like ducks either then?

I'm Buddhist, and I loveee me some chicken.