• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Wicked Witch of the West and Obamacare

Robert Prey said:
Fiddlesticks.
Click to expand...

How so?

Your argument is that if education were totally privatized, that competitive pressures would force tuition costs down.

Yet I have provided evidence that given equal market conditions, for profit schools are more expensive than public schools.

How is that “fiddlesticks?”
 
Robert Prey said:
And math and science and history and especially Civics which is hardly even taught. But the USA is on top of the world in one category:

SELF-ESTEEM!

In other words our increasingly dumb students think they're SMART!!!

But they're just too dumb to know any better. Witness the Wall Street Occupiers.

But to be fair, one more "plus" would be a thorough understanding of the "virtues" of Marxism. Witness the government school graduates on this board.
Click to expand...

If I understand your increasingly unsubstantiated position properly - and it is hard to discern a cogent line of argument in response to the points put to you - your objection seems to be a philosophical or political one based on a perception that universal healthcare of the type used in other western democracies is in some way "Marxist".

This is an illogical position. It has been shown that the systems employed in the Antipodes, Western Europe, and Canada all provide at least comparable results for significantly lower expenditure. In contrast you have not demonstrated a US-style system that has betterd this.

It might be helpful if you summarise:

1. Why these more cost effective UHC systems are inferior to the US system.

2. What improvements, if any, you would make to the US system given the chance.
 
Architect said:
If I understand your increasingly unsubstantiated position properly - and it is hard to discern a cogent line of argument in response to the points put to you - your objection seems to be a philosophical or political one based on a perception that universal healthcare of the type used in other western democracies is in some way "Marxist".

This is an illogical position. It has been shown that the systems employed in the Antipodes, Western Europe, and Canada all provide at least comparable results for significantly lower expenditure. In contrast you have not demonstrated a US-style system that has betterd this.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that the first real universal healthcare system in Europe was introduced by Otto von Bismarck, the Iron Chancellor. He wasn't exactly a Marxist.
 
Robert Prey said:
Nothing is free.
Click to expand...

Then why did you say it was? :boggled:

If you want to know why healthcare in the USA is expensive, it's because we like things like this*. That's a $165 million dollar facility. It has 68 beds. Every single bed is in its own room (roughly 450sf if you include the private bathroom). It's a wonderful achievement of architecture, engineering and will provide state-of-the-art healthcare. It's also absurdly expensive and inefficient compared to how the NHS does things.



*Note: Architect, you jelly?
 
Last edited:
Alferd_Packer said:
How so?

Your argument is that if education were totally privatized, that competitive pressures would force tuition costs down.

Yet I have provided evidence that given equal market conditions, for profit schools are more expensive than public schools.

How is that “fiddlesticks?”
Click to expand...

because that is his response when he is bested.
 
Architect said:
If I understand your increasingly unsubstantiated position properly - and it is hard to discern a cogent line of argument in response to the points put to you - your objection seems to be a philosophical or political one based on a perception that universal healthcare of the type used in other western democracies is in some way "Marxist".

This is an illogical position. It has been shown that the systems employed in the Antipodes, Western Europe, and Canada all provide at least comparable results for significantly lower expenditure. In contrast you have not demonstrated a US-style system that has betterd this.

It might be helpful if you summarise:

1. Why these more cost effective UHC systems are inferior to the US system.

2. What improvements, if any, you would make to the US system given the chance.
Click to expand...

The US system is not a free market system, though it used to be.
 
The topic is health care, not education. Please keep it on topic.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom