There are lots of National Health Care systems that rank above it.
2007-09-11
00:32:48
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthra...
2007-09-11
00:33:55 ·
update #1
I lived in Britain for most of my life. I never waited to see a doctor, visit a hospital or receive any treatment. In total taxes and national insurance (covering unemployment, disability, health care, social program etc) was around 26-27%.
Tax was 23%. Do the Math yourself.
My father had a heart attack, was seen staright away and survived. he currently has cancer and is not on any waiting list and on top of that he is 80 years old and a state pensioner. That is national health care.
The same goes for germany where i currently live. If you have a disease then it gets treated.
Thor Girl quotes fact like Nobel winners - these are lab based researchers and not hospital based!!!
The US also has a lower life expectancy than most European (national health countries)
2007-09-11
01:00:57 ·
update #2
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-healthcare.htm
2007-09-11
01:12:52 ·
update #3
I seem to remember a few months ago how a little girl from N. ireland went to Germany for pioneering heart treatment - not the US.
2007-09-11
01:14:00 ·
update #4
They have an infant mortality rate comparable to a developing country:
http://www.mchb.hrsa.gov/mchirc/chusa_04/pages/0405iimr.htm
(they are 2nd from bottom of the table)
2007-09-11 01:08:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by James T 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Because most of the world can't count too good...
As for the little Irish girl going to Germany, the only thing that proves is that the socialist medical system in the UK is a failure. thanks for providing evidence against your own case. You liberals accidentally do that so often I usually don't have to research much, just convict you with your own fecally retentive rhetoric.
And there is also the issue of Germany being much closer to Ireland than the US, and heart patients are fragile and might not survive the rigors of a long flight. I wouldn't want to risk the girl's life to prove American doctors could save her. Maybe you liberals would rather she had been aborted so any flight she had to take would not have contributed to global warming. What would AlGore do ?
2007-09-11 13:51:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Please lets not take the opinion of anyone who thinks you can have 5 twins...anyway, the reason she had her QUINTS in The US was because it was the closest place she could get a specialist, seeing as they are neighbouring countries, and the Canadian government was willing to pay for that. An American woman w/o health insurance would have been screwed. Oh the irony.
The real question here is, would you rather have excellence for some or near-excellence for everyone? I'll take the latter, please. I can afford private insurance but I dont think it should be considered a luxury.
2007-09-11 08:46:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by - 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Another Direct Thorgirl Attack? The Who had basic criteria to make the rankings. What they did not count was other responsibilities and taxes, Form of Government did not count either so if taxes were 78% to pay for this better healthcare it was not counted so not a negative. National Debt and GNP were not in the Mix as well. Choosing NOT to treat Prostate cancer because it would effect or curve the Findings was thrown out as well. Ignoring the Old was not considered either. Hillary looks at the Fact that America is getting OLD and counts on that very fact to balance her mental healthcare budget. Sorry if the WHO ranked America as dead Last would you not question the full ranking measures? remember before Gulf 1 Saddams army was ranked 4th in the world and in the last World Cup the US was Ranked 5th! we were quiclkly dropped to 36th after the first real game... If you look at all the data I provided you'll see Canada did better than the UK Australi Germany and France, Could it be it's proximity to the US Border?
2007-09-11 00:52:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by ThorGirl 4
·
3⤊
3⤋
Tours and Lepanto - first of all they do not invariably come to the US. Many countries provide healthcare to foreigners.
But even if there was any truth in what you said - this is exactly the problem. That while our health care is at the top end excellent - it sadly fails to deliver to many Americans. It is by far the most expensive in the world - yet produces health statistics barely above the 3rd world.
2007-09-11 01:01:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sageandscholar 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Do seem to remember" last month a Canadian women left Canada and went 800 km to America to have 5 twins WHY?
2007-09-11 06:51:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by annie 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you are directly asking a question to another participant, I suggest you use email or IM.
Thanks!
Now, if you don't mind others answering your question, I don't think anyone disputes that the US has great doctors and medical facilities - the problem is that not enough people can afford to use them to their fullest.
2007-09-11 00:49:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
That is misleading. We have the number one health care system in technology, when they rank the world's health care, they take in account access, birth defect rates, baby death rates, etc. Well, abortions are counted. If you eliminate all the abortions the US would climb to the top, then take out all the crack babies as defects and you can see where I am going with this. Let's rate health care on Merit of the care given and then the US is the overwhelming winner, numero uno, number one.
2007-09-11 00:50:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by libsticker 7
·
3⤊
3⤋
From President Harry Truman, I learned the phrase: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." I don't agree with the stat you cited. I will take the US healt care system over any other in the world.
2007-09-11 00:51:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by regerugged 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Don't pick on Thor girl, I suspect she could wipe you out with a single flinch of her finger !
2007-09-11 00:51:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bo Remmington . American ! 4
·
1⤊
3⤋