The Trump phenomenon seen from overseas.

[DitkasSausage]

Sent from my LG-K540 using Tapatalk

Don't cry... it is just another thing the world has to import from the US... :) Hot women. However, I've spent a good bit of time in Eastern Europe, and man... they don't need to import anything we got... It was like EVERY SINGLE WOMAN looked like a model... I could walk the streets of Prague for hours just woman watching...

[darb72]

Don't cry... it is just another thing the world has to import from the US... :) Hot women. However, I've spent a good bit of time in Eastern Europe, and man... they don't need to import anything we got... It was like EVERY SINGLE WOMAN looked like a model... I could walk the streets of Prague for hours just woman watching...

I just got back from London and damn. They even have great asses since they walk all over the place.

[bossofataka]

On top of which, the ACTUAL healthcare (not the financing system) is the best in the world. Even the OECD explains that one of our main contributors of cost is that we are using the newest technology and newest drugs on the market. So while it is true that, as an example, if you break your arm in the UK, you WILL get treated at a lower cost, but it isn't because the UK is this magical place outside of the laws of commerce... it is because they are using cheaper equipment and cheaper medicines to get you back to health. The government controls how much they can spend operationally on taking care of a patient. So yes... you can see your doctor for cheap, and you will get cheaper healthcare. It is also why we are leading the world in Cancer Survival rates as well as HIV/AIDS survival rates... it is because we are also using the newest researched medicines and technology on that as well.

If this goes into something more serious than the silliness of the guy who thinks I live on an island, of course I know that the US has access to the very best health care availible, as long as you can pay for it in some form. But so does most other western countries aswell, but it stands to reason that US, being by far the biggest and most populous western country, with excellent medical schools, research facilities etc, will have the most top notch hospitals and doctors and always the latest treatments more accessible than most (again, as long as you have the right insurance). Of course I know this.
But, you´re making it sound like in this case the UK, and presumably every country not being the US, has some sort of cheap, half medieval health care... It´s no dramatic differences in cancer survival rates between the western world countries. Countries like Japan, Sweden and others has higher survival rates in some forms of cancer, and rarely does the US stand out like extremely much better than other western countries, like you make it sound.
Although I´ve heard that the UK, for some reason, is, or atleast was, lagging a little behind the rest of the developed world when it comes to cancer survival rates. I dare not speculate why as I´m not that familiar with how their system would differ from the ones I know first hand over here.

https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/res...survival-rates

But it has very little to do with getting treated cheap. It´s not just the US that has access to the latest equpment or medicines. Not all of them are invented over there you know... and when they are, they spread, just as all medical inventions have. I´m pretty sure as many techical soultions and medicines have been developed in the EU and Japan as in the US.
But yes, there are instances where if you have a very rare disease that is very expensive to treat, the state in some countries may not pay for it. But nothing is stopping you from having private insurance similar to the american ones.
Even Cuba, like communist health care, is excellent btw. Think a cancer med/vaccine developed there will be tested even in the US. (CimaVax).

As for HIV/AIDS survival I´ve had a hard time finding any distinction between US and other western nations at all. Most studies doesn´t even make one, and presumably it´s hard to do given the nature of this disease(s), but if you can provide me with a source for it? If I understand the study I link below, I´d say Sweden would be the place to be.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journ...16)30087-X.pdf

The last factor is administrative costs. So this IS where the government intervention is driving up costs. Our doctors don't make money like people think they do. To open a practice, you need a small army of administrators to cover just the mounds of paperwork that the government requires for every time someone wipes their butt.

But why is it so much worse in a country with a much smaller government and if anything much less goverment interference then here, or any other western world country? Why do you have to pay such ridiculous amounts for insurance and why is it so unequal? What you see and here from people in the US, and ONLY in the US, is that getting some sort of medical condition could be your ruin. I think it´s horrible that can be the case.

One factor that is outside of the OECD perview is our broken litigious and tort system in America. If you die for ANY reason under the care of a hospital... the hospital gets sued for $100,000's if not millions of dollars... every... single... time. If a person comes in breathing with a knife in their head and dies in the waiting room... that family is going to sue. So hospitals have to cover their lawyers and liability at a horrendous rate. Not one politician addresses tort-reform as a driving cost of our health insurance... not one. Why? They are all lawyers that got rich on the same system!

I´ve also heard this can be a "good" thing when it comes to for example cancer treatment. Rather one test too many than one to few to not risk gettign sued. Some say in many cases there´s over treatment too because of this, which drives up the costs unneccisarily.

When you look at COSTS alone... the US sucks. When you look at actual care, the US ranks at the top. I saw people complaining about making appointments? That's not that big of a deal... you make an appointment to see your hair stylist. On top of which, if you are sick, we have what's called "Urgent Care" units where you can show up without an appointment and get care. I heard a lot of people overseas weren't aware of that so I thought I would point that out. It is a little more expensive than going to see your doctor ($50 compared to $25) and if you cannot pay... guess what... they treat you anyhow.

Well, every country hopefully have "Urgent care". never heard of one that doesn´t so I certainly would hope so... Here that would be $10 btw.
So yes, of course the US has great medical care... for those that can afford it. We here have pretty much as good and better when looking at survival artes for many many things. For everyone. For now, like I´ve stated before, we had a goverment run by Ayn Rand- worshippers for 8 years, and they managed to do some damage.

It's true that for minor to average health issues... socialized healthcare will seem much more appealing. You don't get charged for every skinned knee, bad cough, or flu. However, it has a ceiling that is relatively low on range of care. While I think it is dramatic to call them "Death Panels", there are groups of bureaucrats that determine what the state is and is unwilling to pay for. Once the state determines that it is unwilling to pay for a procedure or medicine, the choice does NOT get relayed to the citizen, but instead it is almost illegal to perform or use. The UK sentenced a child to die because he needed care that Parliament was unwilling to pay for. They went a step further to "send a message" to their citizens by banning the family from taking the child to the US, who had several clinics that specialized in that form of care.

Now you make it sound even worse... Like a scare mongering republican trying to persuade his fellow americans how horrible all non-US health care is after all. Yeah, good for flu and a scratched knee, but anything above that, the "DEATH PANEL" will say you get no treatment, even if you´re willing to pay for it on your own! They´ll stop you beacuse... they´re cheap and EVIL!

I think we have already established that in general you get every bit as good treatment in Europe or Japan as in the US. Pick your poison and the survival rate for some cancer forms or other illnesses is higher in the US, or in Japan, or in Sweden, or in Germany etc.

It´s not illegal whatsoever, and your story about the UK child sound like an urban legend from a tabloid. There is absolutley NO WAY that the british parliament would or even could stop anyone from seeking medical care elsewhere.

[darb72]

It´s not illegal whatsoever, and your story about the UK child sound like an urban legend from a tabloid. There is absolutley NO WAY that the british parliament would or even could stop anyone from seeking medical care elsewhere.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537990/
https://www.theguardian.com/healthca...ildrens-rights

Uh-huh.

[NCRAVEN]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537990/
https://www.theguardian.com/healthca...ildrens-rights

Uh-huh.

Man. That Charlie Gard case seemed like it was yesterday.

[blah3]

You need to stop lumping in the whole of Europe with the top care you cans get in Europe
You sure as hell not getting anywhere near equivalent care in Greece for example as you are in the United States. UK care and Sweden care and Greece care are not equivalent to each other

[bossofataka]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537990/
https://www.theguardian.com/healthca...ildrens-rights

Uh-huh.

Uh-huh what? This is no decision made by "The British Parliaments Death Panel" whatsoever. This are rare tragic cases that do occur sometimes, and you have similar laws in place in the US aswell for that matter. And stop making straw man attempts, either reply to this subject as a whole or stay out of it.

[bossofataka]

You need to stop lumping in the whole of Europe with the top care you cans get in Europe
You sure as hell not getting anywhere near equivalent care in Greece for example as you are in the United States. UK care and Sweden care and Greece care are not equivalent to each other

Yes you do, Greece isn´t that much different from the rest of the western world as far as I know. It is usually ranks well. As for how the 2008 crisis that is still basically carrying on there might have affected it lateley I´m not sure though. It might have deteriorated because of this.
Of course there are some differences in care between countries, but in general none too dramatic in the western world as a whole.

EDIT: There are some reports of the issues that the financial crisis has created, which makes sense in a country that was, and in some way still is in crisis.

[Ortizer]

If this goes into something more serious than the silliness of the guy who thinks I live on an island, of course I know that the US has access to the very best health care availible, as long as you can pay for it in some form. But so does most other western countries aswell, but it stands to reason that US, being by far the biggest and most populous western country, with excellent medical schools, research facilities etc, will have the most top notch hospitals and doctors and always the latest treatments more accessible than most (again, as long as you have the right insurance). Of course I know this.
But, you´re making it sound like in this case the UK, and presumably every country not being the US, has some sort of cheap, half medieval health care... It´s no dramatic differences in cancer survival rates between the western world countries. Countries like Japan, Sweden and others has higher survival rates in some forms of cancer, and rarely does the US stand out like extremely much better than other western countries, like you make it sound.
Although I´ve heard that the UK, for some reason, is, or atleast was, lagging a little behind the rest of the developed world when it comes to cancer survival rates. I dare not speculate why as I´m not that familiar with how their system would differ from the ones I know first hand over here.

https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/res...survival-rates

But it has very little to do with getting treated cheap. It´s not just the US that has access to the latest equpment or medicines. Not all of them are invented over there you know... and when they are, they spread, just as all medical inventions have. I´m pretty sure as many techical soultions and medicines have been developed in the EU and Japan as in the US.
But yes, there are instances where if you have a very rare disease that is very expensive to treat, the state in some countries may not pay for it. But nothing is stopping you from having private insurance similar to the american ones.
Even Cuba, like communist health care, is excellent btw. Think a cancer med/vaccine developed there will be tested even in the US. (CimaVax).

As for HIV/AIDS survival I´ve had a hard time finding any distinction between US and other western nations at all. Most studies doesn´t even make one, and presumably it´s hard to do given the nature of this disease(s), but if you can provide me with a source for it? If I understand the study I link below, I´d say Sweden would be the place to be.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journ...16)30087-X.pdf




But why is it so much worse in a country with a much smaller government and if anything much less goverment interference then here, or any other western world country? Why do you have to pay such ridiculous amounts for insurance and why is it so unequal? What you see and here from people in the US, and ONLY in the US, is that getting some sort of medical condition could be your ruin. I think it´s horrible that can be the case.



I´ve also heard this can be a "good" thing when it comes to for example cancer treatment. Rather one test too many than one to few to not risk gettign sued. Some say in many cases there´s over treatment too because of this, which drives up the costs unneccisarily.



Well, every country hopefully have "Urgent care". never heard of one that doesn´t so I certainly would hope so... Here that would be $10 btw.
So yes, of course the US has great medical care... for those that can afford it. We here have pretty much as good and better when looking at survival artes for many many things. For everyone. For now, like I´ve stated before, we had a goverment run by Ayn Rand- worshippers for 8 years, and they managed to do some damage.



Now you make it sound even worse... Like a scare mongering republican trying to persuade his fellow americans how horrible all non-US health care is after all. Yeah, good for flu and a scratched knee, but anything above that, the "DEATH PANEL" will say you get no treatment, even if you´re willing to pay for it on your own! They´ll stop you beacuse... they´re cheap and EVIL!

I think we have already established that in general you get every bit as good treatment in Europe or Japan as in the US. Pick your poison and the survival rate for some cancer forms or other illnesses is higher in the US, or in Japan, or in Sweden, or in Germany etc.

It´s not illegal whatsoever, and your story about the UK child sound like an urban legend from a tabloid. There is absolutley NO WAY that the british parliament would or even could stop anyone from seeking medical care elsewhere.

There was a huge story a couple years back about parents wanting to try an experimental treatment for their child in the UK that was dying, and them being told they had no right to move the child to try and get the other treatment because the UK doctors said the odds of it working weren't good enough.

It got to the point the Vatican was lobbying the UK government to let them fly the child to their country for treatment.

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

[darb72]

Uh-huh what? This is no decision made by "The British Parliaments Death Panel" whatsoever. This are rare tragic cases that do occur sometimes, and you have similar laws in place in the US aswell for that matter. And stop making straw man attempts, either reply to this subject as a whole or stay out of it.

No, we don't have similar laws. Courts in the UK sided with the hospitals that those children's parents should not be allowed to seek other treatment options. You have no clue what you're talking about which is about what we've come to expect. Instead of taking the loss you start fussing about "straw man" arguments which shows a complete lack of understanding of the most basic logical fallacies on your part.

As for me staying out of it, no. Ditka does a pretty good job pointing out your complete lack of understanding on this subject, but sometimes it's just fun to mock the stupid.

[blah3]

Yes you do, Greece isn´t that much different from the rest of the western world as far as I know. It is usually ranks well. As for how the 2008 crisis that is still basically carrying on there might have affected it lateley I´m not sure though. It might have deteriorated because of this.
Of course there are some differences in care between countries, but in general none too dramatic in the western world as a whole.

EDIT: There are some reports of the issues that the financial crisis has created, which makes sense in a country that was, and in some way still is in crisis.

If you think Greece has somewhat equivalent care to the better places in Europe and that care is almost equivalent to US care, then you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You have credo. Health care in Greece is way worse than the us, and it’s not just from the financial crisis

[bossofataka]

No, we don't have similar laws. Courts in the UK sided with the hospitals that those children's parents should not be allowed to seek other treatment options. You have no clue what you're talking about which is about what we've come to expect. Instead of taking the loss you start fussing about "straw man" arguments which shows a complete lack of understanding of the most basic logical fallacies on your part.

As for me staying out of it, no. Ditka does a pretty good job pointing out your complete lack of understanding on this subject, but sometimes it's just fun to mock the stupid.

Yeah, you do. Expanded access? The FDA? Or in other cases the willingness of certain pharmaceutical companies willingness to pay etc. Laws and regulations that do the exact same thing as this case about Charlie Gard. Or do you honestly think that every bloody american will be given the most expensive care infinitley for every rare condition there is? That companies and state would go willingly bankrupt to test new experimental treatments for decades on a one person if necessary, denying all others treatment meanwhile?

Read this:

https://books.google.se/books?hl=en&...02010.&f=false

But this is nothing but a little side note in the whole discussion about health care. This is what Ditkas stated:
UK sentenced a child to die because he needed care that Parliament was unwilling to pay for. They went a step further to "send a message" to their citizens by banning the family from taking the child to the US, who had several clinics that specialized in that form of care.

This is completeley false and misleading in every aspect, and if you can´t see that, you´re the stupid one.

But this is not what the disussion is about. These few extreme cases can be debated forever depending on what views you have on ethics, but has nothing to do with the health care system.

I have no clue what I´m talking about...? Where did I lose here? Tell me, where am I wrong? Which stats that I presnet are wrong? What facts that I stated are wrong? They aren´t.
No, it´s you who just can´t handle being questioned by someone who isn´t just a little less or more right wing `meeerican, agreeing how mistreated white males are in todays society and which of the stupid libtard democrats is the worst. I´m not stupid, and I apparently have vastly much more knowledge then you, that much is clear.