« Open Thread | Main | Obama Devotes Our Money to Oil Exploration — By Brazil »

As if this doesn't already happen in America.

TrollerAnonymous, cite a case where it happened here in the US as a result of refusal of services or STFU.

are you kidding me? this is big coup de grace? people don't get ambulances all the time here in america. guess someone has never spent time as a minority in a major US city, huh?

try again, folks - this crap is played out. their healthcare is simply better than ours. you clearly dont agree... but we dont care. you see today's more relevant story? "At a Barney Frank town hall meeting in Dartmouth, MA, a constituent asks, "Why are you supporting this Nazi policy?"

Frank responds: "On what planet do you spend most of your time?" He then calls her approach "vile, contemptible nonsense." He closes by saying: "Trying to have a conversation with you would be like arguing with a dining room table." "

Now THAT'S news. Stand up to the halfwits and call them on their ingorant belllicosity... hooray for dems with the balls to call you stupid in public.

"are you kidding me? this is big coup de grace? people don't get ambulances all the time here in america. guess someone has never spent time as a minority in a major US city, huh?"

As Abraham Lincoln once said, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. "Anonymous" has failed to take that lesson to heart.

'They said they were not sending an ambulance and told me I had had nine months to sort out a lift.'

If any emergency dispatch in the US said that to any "minority", trial lawyers would be tripping over themselves to get to your door.

Also don't confuse shitty service with refusal of service.

And nice misdirect.

Ah, if only I could have attended that town hall meeting, where the virtuous Barney Frank delivered a snappy comeback in his soothing, baritone voice.

Yeah Carolyn, and notice also how Bwawney Fwank didn't answer the question. All he did was insult the questioner (typical Liberal response) and "Anonymous" here thinks that is balls.

It was only 100 yards? I would have to walk farther than that to get from the hospital parking lot into the emergency room. Really, if she was in a hurry, walking really is the fastest way to go 100 yards. She could have delivered int eh hospital if she hadn't wasted time talking on the phone.

Not sure where you people come away with the idea that Healthcare in America is so friggin' great. Overall, American healthcare and associated services are average at best. Given the fact that Americans spend more money by far, then any other country, the statistics are atrocious. Massive waste. Even son of a preacher man, above, calls it "shitty service". So your happy with your shitty service? Seems to be what he's saying. Don't fuck with my shitty service! Conservative outrage. HA...

In most cases, countries that outrank the US in all areas of healthcare are those that employ some degree of socialized programs for their citizens. Those are the facts. Unfortunately, facts hold no interest for you.

What you people are essentially doing is going to battle for a small group of CEO's and investors in the healthcare insurance industry. Protecting the kings and lords that rule over you. You then claim to be "dissenters" or "protestors". Simply laughable.

Don't forget, all Moonbats would prefer to give birth to their illegitimate offspring in a teepee with nothing but a filthy deerskin to wipe up afterward.

She actually lives 100 METERS from the hospital! Do you have any idea how short a distance that is? You're the same people that would bitch at her for expecting a ride across the street and wasting time and money if you lived in England. You'd be complaining about how we have to cater to minorities and how they won't even walk across the street to the hospital.

Do you people even read the articles that are linked here, or do you just scan headlines and fly into psuedo rage/glee at having something inane and insipid to rant about all day?

Gosh, wingnutlicker thinks American health care is mediocre. Yet, I cannot help but notice that Ted Kennedy and Chris "Countrywide" Dodd did not go to Britain, Canada, or Cuba to have their cancers taken care of.

Strange, that.

Also, this dead horse talking point about how people in other countries have longer life expectancies is bunk. First of all, it's only by a matter of weeks or months that the life expectancy is longer, so it's not that big of a deal. Second, life expectancy is a function of lifestyle more than health care. In the end, would you rather live 76.4 years as a free man or 77.2 years as a vassal of the state? We should have the freedom to choose, IMHO.

By the way, when my son needed a CT scan in the United States, we had to wait 45 minutes between the time the doctor requested it and the time we got it done. In Canada, the mean wait for a CT scan is 4.8 weeks.

When my son needed an MRI, we scheduled and got one done on the same day. In Canada, the mean wait is 12 weeks.

As a parent, I'm glad we don't yet have state-run health care here.

More deep insightful analysis from our resident town idiot V the K....

It's not just life expectancy idiot. it's in ALL health related areas. America is mediocre at best. We are number one in COST of healthcare and in teenage pregnancy...if that makes you proud.

I don't believe you've looked at ANY statistics to back up your views anyway V.

Sure, rich people, who pay out the ass and have millions at their disposal to spend on their individual healthcare, can buy top notch service in the US. How does that help the vast majority of us V?

Wingnut (it's not really you, I know, it's a commie loving impostor) The day you have to leave mommy's basement and live in the real world, then you will begin to understand.

In the meantime,go back to playing Halo, smoking weed and eating Cheetos. Stay off the internet. You're a moron.

They seem to ignore simple truths.

Population of United Kingdom: 61,000,000
Populaiton of United States: 312,000,000

Therefore, because we have more people, of course there will, inherently, be more medical mistakes (it's just simple logic).

Homicide Rate in UK (per 100,000): 1.4
Homicide Rate in US (per 100,000): 5.6

We have more violent crime in the US and where do people, who are victims of violent crime go... HOSPITAL!!! Death rate (potential) goes up.

Thus, we have to deal with more fatally wounded people and by their very nature, they have a LOT GREATER chance of dying. Death rate goes up, increased costs.

Illegal immigration runs rampant here and they don't pay into the system but suck from it. Therefore, cost per person goes up (because we foot the bill for illegals, in some manner).

See, there are a handful of reasons why our costs are much higher and the distortion of "zomg, more people die" than you choose to believe.

Less people may die in the Canadian system (may, don't know) but that's because they have WAYYYYY less violent crime, WAYYYYY less illegal immigration, WAYYYYY less people.

If we just gated off inner-cities (which, by all reports, are money sponges in the medical world) and patrolled the border, our costs would go down, probably 10-fold.

Oh, and of course life-expectancy will go down. You're more likely to be murdered in the US. Premature deaths that occur in the US are a large reason numbers tend to be skewed.

Plus, as VtK said, lifestyle choices affect the nations health.

V - more of your nonsense about how we will all be vassals, huh? Scary stuff... is there any way to make what passes for your intellect acknowledge that we are not all about to be enslaved by insuring people without insurance?

The moral majority should be outraged that we are the only industrialized country that does not guarantee heathcare for all citizens. If all of the jesus-based lunatics around these parts were intellectually consistent, you would be praising the attempt. But instead, you are anti-choice no matter what the circumstances... but the second that kid is born... parents not rich? fuck him.

Profound, is it not, that us lib'ruls are the ones that want to actually increase the common good while the 'christians' among us are ok with rich insurance companies and sick people?

Screw you.

You're right, you do want to 'screw us' and that's the problem.

The best solution??

GO SCREW YOURSELVES.

The moral majority should be outraged that we are the only industrialized country that does not guarantee heathcare for all citizens.

We do. We just expect people to "pay" for it, not demand others (like those nasty rich people!) do so.

Learn to take care of yourself. The government is not your mommy or daddy. Other people are not responsible for you.

The leftards just don't get it. It's not about rich insurance companies or wanting the uninsured to suffer, it's that a free market health care system delivers better results than a socialized system at lower cost. Not perfect results, but better. It's about not wanting to country to go bankrupt on a multi-trillion dollar health care scheme.

It's because we understand that if health care costs too much, that's a supply and demand problem. The solution is to increase... not restrict ... the amount of health care available.

And that is accomplished not by state control --- which has never worked well for anything --- but by encouraging more competition, and enacting tort reform so that more people will enter the medical profession. Tort reform would also reduce the amount of unnecessary tests and procedures doctors perform out of fear of lawsuits.

We also believe people should be responsible for their own choices. If you want to be obese, if you want to drink and use drugs, if you want to have promiscuous sex... then you should have to pay more for insurance because of the lifestyle risks you chose to take on.

It's because we understand economics. You don't.

We also believe people should be responsible for their own choices. If you want to be obese, if you want to drink and use drugs, if you want to have promiscuous sex... then you should have to pay more for insurance because of the lifestyle risks you chose to take on.

VtK... you used the R word!!! OH NOESS!!!

Responsible or any word stemming from it is liberal kryptonite. The only time they're content using "responsible" is when it pertains to someone else being "responsible" for them.

This is proved by the snake-oil they peddle about global warming, free abortions, healthcare for all (at the expense of productive members of society), welfare, public housing projects, free tuition/scholarships for illegals and minorities, stimulus, etc.

Anyone who tells a woman she should walk 100meters to the hospital when she's on the verge of passing a baby out of her ladyparts has obviously never given birth! It's difficult enough to ask for an ambulance let alone walk anywhere in that condition! They could have at least sent someone with a wheelchair to her!
Not only that, did anyone notice she was having her 4th baby at age 27?! I'm surprised the Liberals aren't outraged at her audacity to procreate so often.

Liberals can be as a happy as a pig in a mud-puddle (literally in a mud-puddle) but DEMAND that we pay for their healthcare.

It's OK that, for them to be happy, we have to pay for all of their indulgences... but they're content with making us miserable in the process because we choose to work hard (you know, keep the economic system afloat which allows future generations to partake in society) and are now forced to bend to their every demand.

In short, liberals need to grow up, weild responsibility, stop bitching about what they don't have, and work for it. If it can be achieved through handouts, you can (theoretically) achieve it yourself because it's proof that the opportunity is available. They just want everything, but on the merit of someone who understands the way an economic system works and actually strives to achieve.

Oh, they love her ability to procreate rapidly, as it breeds more dependency on the gub'mint. Yet, at the same time, they support abortion, which would theoretically hinder their voting bloc.

Liberals confuse the hell out of me. Another case of liberals suffering from cognitive dissonance (doublethink).

Man, v the idiot , et al....everything you say would be all nice and comforting, yet not single word of it is true! You don't seem to understand ANYTHING

do you people understand that even the when you pay into insurance deals, in essence you are helping pay for other people's treatment.

None of you seem to understand what the following terms even mean: Socialism, insurance, health care, responsibility. You like to toss 'em around, but you prove everyday that you don't even know what you are talking about.

American to the core, is stupid to the core, and doesn't understand how studies and statistics are collected...Duh, so healthcare is bad in the US, because in America you are 4 times as likely to be a victim of violent crime. Oh yeah, that's another area where America comes in #1.

So far, for those keeping score US #1 in cost of healthcare, teenage pregnancy, and violent crime. We rule!

I always get a chuckle when nutlicker calls me an idiot and then, rather than refute any points, just calls everybody who disagrees with him stupid.

v, you don't make any points. There is nothing to refute. You don't know anything about what you are talking about. Conclusions based on emotion and willful ignorance tend to be stupid. You provide no evidence to support what you say, but just state what you believe to be fact based on some feeling or predisposition you have. Just because you heard all that crap that you spew somewhere and are prepared to regurgitate it doesn't make it true. Back it up with something, like facts. But you can't even grasp that, can you?

Let's review the World According to Nutlicker:

Laws of supply and demand: "emotion and willful ignorance."

Rants that women in labor should just walk to the hospital and sarcastic rants about violent crime and teenage pregnancy: valid points

Just so we're clear on that.

When I was just out of the Service, I refused to go to the VA for anything. I refuse to do so. Too many horror stories witnessed by me and related to me. Since leaving the service, I have had private insurance.

Starting out, the only insurance I could afford wasn't all that great but for the lowest priced coverage I could afford, I was able to have a dangerous heart arrhythmia surgically corrected along with regular follow up care and not wind up flat broke. In fact, considering the cost of the procedures, care and meds, I came out way ahead even with the cheapest insurance.

Leftists have this image of Conservatives living in mansions, riding in limos and sipping Dom Perignon. Typical liberal indoctrination.

I am not wealthy by any means. I work hard, I pay my bills and I live simply as well as take care of my health by eating right, exercising regularly and avoiding caffeine, not smoking, etc.

The idea of a hard working, middle class Conservative doesn't enter their minds.

Can someone please describe for me what "socialized healthcare" means? Is anyone interested in discussing the issue? It seems to me that the issue is that by all accounts around 45 million Americans don't have access to health insurance, and therefore to health care "products" they require when they get sick. Do any of you"righty's" have a solution for this? Is this a selling point for the self described "greatest country in the world ?" If so, those of us who live in other western democracies may wish to give up our "socialized medicine" in order to adopt the American model, where those who can afford it get care, and those who can't, don't. Until then, you'll continue to be the laughing stock of the world due to the appalling lack of care for the citizens of the US who don't have insurance.

You have a right to carry a gun (and shoot each other and your presidents) and also the right to free speech. What about the right to universal health care, whether private or public. Anyone ever thought about that ? What kind of human being would argue against affordable and accessable health care for all its country's citizens ?

It's amusing that some Americans are arguing against universal health care as some kind of leftist socialist plague....and then they go to their church on a Sunday and worship their imaginary God... who would presumably also be against taking care of all the humans in a society. Not.

This issue isn't left and right or right v wrong. 45 million people without insurance is the issue. Even those with insurance can't get access to all the services they need as some of them arent covered.

You guys should be addressing these facts. If you care.

45 million without healthcare is a crock. Knock out the 10 million illegals, 10 million who opt not to pay for cobra when they change jobs,(guilty as charged), 10 million young people who opt not to pay for healthcare in their 20's (guilty as charged, along with most of my friends and siblings)and you're left with 15 million under insured, can't qualify for insurance or have not bothered to sign up for a government insurance policy even though they qualify.

None of the current bills address this problem except by creating a government healthcare option which will end up in a few years insuring 80 million employed individuals who were already insured and excluding many of the 15 million without healthcare insurance now. The goal of any bill should be to target those who need healthcare and are not able to get it by loosening the regulations on insurance companies so they can sell policies across state lines, policies that provide catastrophic healthcare coverage only, allow for tax deductions for healthcare premiums, heck I'd even mandate young people buy coverage for themselves and allow small businesses the right to buy basic catastrophic insurance for their employees.

Here in NJ all companies selling healthcare insurance MUST now include coverage a wide range of treatment for kids with Autism. Compassionate you say, how many people will loose their coverage now as more businesses will not be able to afford the increase in the government mandated costs? How many employees will drop their coverage rather than pay the higher premiums? In Europe there is a shortage of programs for kids with Autism, not so here in NJ, but by demanding all companies provide a gold standard of coverage for kids with this disorder it will mean over time less access of treatment by all. Before you say I am cold hearted we have 2 cousins and a neighbor whose kids are autistic.

None of the bills attack what is the major problem with healthcare in the future: rising costs. This is according to the CBO not right wing talkers. Why does anyone believe that socialized medicine administered by the government will not lead to rationing, delays, less access to healthcare by the majority as that has been the result in every other nation that has gone this route. Poor Natashia Richardson might have survived her head injury if she had immediate access to a MRI, life flight helicopter, and trauma center all of which are available in the US except in rural areas.

As for our higher infant mortality rates many European nations do not include stillborn or infants who only live a short time in their statistics. Our inner city violence has two effects on healthcare statistics a) higher costs to treat victims and b) higher mortality rate overall since most victims are teenagers. The real statistic to look at are survival rates for stroke, heart attack, and cancer and there we are winning hands down.

Why do we need to redesign a system where 80% of the population is happy and replace it with one that are currently also falling apart (see recent media reports from Cananda, UK, Denmark ect.) As far as our appalling lack of care would you please explain why in a recent poll our poorest citizens were happier with their healthcare coverage than the middle class is in the UK now. Why does anyone think that the government can run any industry other than the military better than the private sector?

I know you guys don't give a toss about what British people actually think about the NHS... but ask any brit and they'll tell you under the *old* british NHS, this lady would've never been left in the street. It's only in recent years as the "free market" has been shoe-horned onto the old NHS that we've had this sort of thing happening.

"Why does anyone think that the government can run any industry other than the military better than the private sector?"

It's easy to argue that the military *would* be better run by the private sector.

It's only in recent years as the "free market" has been shoe-horned onto the old NHS that we've had this sort of thing happening.

I do care what British citizens think about their health care. I'm interested to learn how the free market has recently been "shoe-horned onto the old NHS." I'm also interested to learn how the free market is responsible for reduction in services, per this example. Thanks in advance.

Ok, here's so math for ya.

312,000,000 people in USA.
20% under-employed or unemployed.
.8*312,000,000 = 249,600,000 people fully employed.

Now, I've seen decent health insurance plans that amounted to $6/day.

$6 * 365 = $2190/year/person

Ok, now using that 15,000,000 lacking insurance that Anonymous @ 12.05 pointed out (and he's right on target)...

15,000,000 * $2190 = $32,850,000,000/year to cover those people.

Now, using those 249,600,000 people fully employed... we can do this problem...

$21,850,000,000 / 249,600,000 = $131.61

So, if the 249.6M people who are "fully employed" were to have their taxes increased annually by a mere $131.61, which is small in the grand scheme of things, then we could cover the legitimate 15M that aren't qualified or under-insured.

But, by liberal standards, this would be deemed stupid because it's a simple solution. Instead, they would prefer to perform massive surgery (overhaul) to the entire system as opposed to minor stitching.

In the mid-70's, Congress decided that American military hospitals were not being fully utilized by military dependents, who were opting instead for private medical care using CHAMPUS. Congress mandated that all military dependents living within a 50-mile radius of a military hospital use the government facility. In some areas of the nation, this 50-mile radius rule worked well. But, in the SF Bay area, the Oakland Naval Hospital was many more land miles away due to the large body of water in between NAS Moffett Field and Oakland Naval Hospital. It took several babies' births on Highway 17 before this absurd rule was amended. Anytime a Federal bureaucrat is in charge of medical treatment decisions, there will be negative unintended consequences.

Realized I messed this up....

where it says "$21,850,000,000 / 249,600,000 = $131.61"

should be "$32,850,000,000 / 249,600,000 = $131.61"

Regardless, entire post still stands.

Dear Anonymous - glad to see you have the courage to tell me your name.

A few things: Firstly the heath care systems in Canada, Denmark, UK etc are not falling apart. To say so is lies, and propaganda spread by right wing US Media. (how you can have credibility as a non neutral media outlet beats me). I am both a British and Canadian citizen who has lived in both countries. Currently I live In Canada. Let me tell you - the health care works just fine. The system serves ALL PEOPLE. That's the way it should be.

2nd. The US is not winning anything hands down. It's not a competition! Look after your citizens based on need. Is that so hard to do? Obviously - because some folks might not get as rich!!

3rd. It doesn't matter how many of your poor citizens are happier than middle class UK folks in some poll from somewhere. Its the 45 MILLION who don't have it which is the problem!

Do you understand the issue ? 45 MILLION!!!!! Even if its out by 10 million thats still 35 MILLION!!!!!!!!!!

What's your solution ? Go to a town hall with your gun holstered and yell about Hitler and socialism ??

As long as you have millions without access to healthcare you will have yes - an appaling lack of it.

GOD BLESS AMERICA. You sure need it.