Hillary or Obama? - Page 3

Liebling:-))) · 01-28-2008, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

In socialist countries, sometime you have to wait to get the medical care. Why do you think a lot of Canadians come to the United States for their own health care????

Not the best but it's a lot better than other countries.

I NEVER have any experience to have a long waiting list for surgery...

I get treatment straight way when I need it.

I prefer to have taxes and social insurances to pay off to protect myself and my family because I want the safety than sorry... Without insurance, I would face a huge bill from for expensive surgeries, etc.

Americans work to pay tax for medicare and medicard to help poor people and then plus get insurance for themselves is an expensive than Hillary´s plan.

Hillary plan is cheaper than you work to pay tax and then plus insurance for yourself.

What would you do if you received huge surgery bill when you don't have health insurance or don't have everything cover up in your insurance?

Would you deny those article with original photo of poor boy or what?
BBC NEWS | Americas | Boy's death highlights US health debate

OPB News · Lack Of Health Insurance Leads Many To Bankruptcy

You made misleading about Canadian health system...
What Countries Have Universal Health Care? - Gadling

http://www.alldeaf.com/870382-post282.html

Canadians ADers posts...
http://www.alldeaf.com/war-political...ke-canada.html

Liebling:-))) · 01-28-2008, 04:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

I disagree because at least in this country, you don't have to sit around and wait for permission to have a life saving surgery or not....

Again, misleading information.

I really have no idea where you get those information from?

PuyoPiyo · 01-28-2008, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

Well, it wasn't enough right now because medicaid is so limited and insurance for family is rediciously expensive in certain of jobs, that cause middle income to cannot afford it, because cost of living is much higher than last decade ago, such as gas price, groceries or other stuff, recently there's credit issue too.

I believe that for rising the taxes or planning the new service would require vote from congress, if vote was turn down then Hillary has no power to increase the taxes. Right now, during Bush's term, taxes on payroll seems so higher to me but I'm STRONGLY against flat tax, middle and high income are should to pay more taxes. I think that tax would be most levied on rich people.

Yeah I can see that... Also I have to agree with you, I am against the flat tax, but I am also against high taxes.. I would prefer to support reasonable tax, but the medical taxes seems are not reasonable for me because I feel that was a personal's rights, that's all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

I see no problem for that because Hillary Clinton support Healthy, Welfare & Poverty.

In European countries including Germany, we paid high taxes because we received the rights as the equal as everyone, no matter what.

like treat by doctors, dentals, treatments, etc. I would against if I pay high taxes without treatments etc. but spend on wars and low income people only, not for yourself...

But I just see the medical insurance was a personal decision, not the governments... Some people don't want the insurance for their health, it was their choice.. I have to understand about the cars insurance, but the health insurance seems different to me..

Also about the low income people, well, how can a person, who have no arms, get a job and paying the health insurance all by her/himself?

And of course, I have to agree with you totally about paying the taxes for the war which doesn't treat us well. I only support the tax if other countries was trying to attack us, but nobody are going to attack us anymore so why paying taxes for?...

Liebling:-))) · 01-28-2008, 07:28 AM

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo

But I just see the medical insurance was a personal decision, not the governments... Some people don't want the insurance for their health, it was their choice..

Not all but some decided for not want to insure for their health but many Americans cannot afford to insure for their health.

Quote:

I have to understand about the cars insurance, but the health insurance seems different to me..

Do I understand your post correct that the car insurance is an obligation, not health insurance?

Quote:

Also about the low income people, well, how can a person, who have no arms, get a job and paying the health insurance all by her/himself?

Many people with no legs or arms cope their life well and have job.

They have their own Bank. They can sign/write with their mouth or feet.

Anyway, not just low income people but million americans cannot afford to insure health for their family because it's too expensive. Check my thread.
http://www.alldeaf.com/current-event...alth-care.html

I don't want to work to pay taxes to help low income people and plus extra insurance for myself. I would support if I work to pay taxes to help low income people including myself.

Quote:

And of course, I have to agree with you totally about paying the taxes for the war which doesn't treat us well. I only support the tax if other countries was trying to attack us, but nobody are going to attack us anymore so why paying taxes for?...

Exactly!

Reba · 01-28-2008, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

...Americans work to pay tax for medicare and medicard to help poor people and then plus get insurance for themselves is an expensive than Hillary´s plan.

Hillary plan is cheaper than you work to pay tax and then plus insurance for yourself.

Who do you think would pay for the medical insurance for the low income people? The American taxpayers. Hillary's plan would be more expensive for middle income people like me and Hubby. It will cost more for us, not less.

Reba · 01-28-2008, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

...Do I understand your post correct that the car insurance is an obligation, not health insurance?

That's right. Car insurance is required so that the injured parties and their property are protected. The person who causes the accident is responsible for the damages of the innocent injured persons and their property.

Liebling:-))) · 01-28-2008, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Who do you think would pay for the medical insurance for the low income people? The American taxpayers. Hillary's plan would be more expensive for middle income people like me and Hubby. It will cost more for us, not less.

I mean any Americans who cannot afford to insure the health insurance extra for the family or themselves when they work to pay taxes for Medicard/Medicare for low income family. It would be cheaper for them if they are under Hillary's plan if they WANT to insure health insurance. One ADers in my thread stated that she like to insure health for her family but she feel $400 per month for family insurance coverage is too much whom she work to pay taxes. That's why I thought she would not need to insure extra when she work to pay taxes to Medicare/Medicard if she join Hillary's plan.

Liebling:-))) · 01-28-2008, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

That's right. Car insurance is required so that the injured parties and their property are protected. The person who causes the accident is responsible for the damages of the innocent injured persons and their property.

Here in European countries both insurances for car and health are obligation.

Foxrac · 01-28-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Right, I'm registered as an independent voter.

I prefer not to be labeled but I would say I'm generally politically and socially conservative.

How about you?

Yup, that what I thought.

I think that you know about me, I'm full liberal and registered democrat voter.

PuyoPiyo · 01-28-2008, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

Not all but some decided for not want to insure for their health but many Americans cannot afford to insure for their health.

True...

Quote:

Do I understand your post correct that the car insurance is an obligation, not health insurance?

Yupp that's right. It's because the car insurance is protecting people from causing any of problem with other strangers that they cannot afford to pay, while the health insurance was only for taking care of the person who owns the insurance.

Quote:

Many people with no legs or arms cope their life well and have job.

They have their own Bank. They can sign/write with their mouth or feet.

Anyway, not just low income people but million americans cannot afford to insure health for their family because it's too expensive. Check my thread.
http://www.alldeaf.com/current-event...alth-care.html

I don't want to work to pay taxes to help low income people and plus extra insurance for myself. I would support if I work to pay taxes to help low income people including myself.

Speechless because that's your opinion, I respect that

Quote:

Exactly!

*nods*!

Byrdie714 · 01-28-2008, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I don't want Hillary, Obama, or McCain.

I voted in the SC primary last Saturday, and my choice didn't win, so I'll probably be stuck with McCain. He's a good man but he's not a conservative. Since 1980, no Republican nominee was chosen at the national convention without winning SC.

How can you vote in the primaries if you are an independent voter? You said that you voted in the SC primary and then say you are an independent voter?

Quote:

Right, I'm registered as an independent voter.

I prefer not to be labeled but I would say I'm generally politically and socially conservative.

How about you?

Can independents vote in the primaries as I know in this state, if you are an independent, you can't vote in the primaries.

From what I gather, you are a registered Republican........

Please clairfy.

Byrdie714 · 01-28-2008, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I don't know. I don't think Hillary gives a hoot about the party, except for how it can serve her needs.

Just my opinion.

I think the relationship works both ways.

jillio · 01-28-2008, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

I disagree because at least in this country, you don't have to sit around and wait for permission to have a life saving surgery or not....

Ever heard of insurance companies? The majority of them require pre-approval for surgeries. And, in that situation, you have a bunch of pencil pushers dictating the neccessity of medical treatment and second guessing the doctors.

Reba · 01-28-2008, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

I mean any Americans who cannot afford to insure the health insurance extra for the family or themselves when they work to pay taxes for Medicard/Medicare for low income family. It would be cheaper for them if they are under Hillary's plan if they WANT to insure health insurance. One ADers in my thread stated that she like to insure health for her family but she feel $400 per month for family insurance coverage is too much whom she work to pay taxes. That's why I thought she would not need to insure extra when she work to pay taxes to Medicare/Medicard if she join Hillary's plan.

It wouldn't be cheaper for my family. It will be more expensive because our taxes will increase.

Reba · 01-28-2008, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

I think the relationship works both ways.

Reba · 01-28-2008, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

How can you vote in the primaries if you are an independent voter? You said that you voted in the SC primary and then say you are an independent voter?

Depends on the state.

In South Carolina, anyone (Republicans, Democrats, independents, etc.) can vote in either primary (Republican or Democrat). The only rule is that they can't vote in both. Yes, even a Republican can vote in a Democrat primary (and vice versa).

That's not the case in every state but that's the way it is here. It makes for interesting elections in SC.

Byrdie714 · 01-28-2008, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Ever heard of insurance companies? The majority of them require pre-approval for surgeries. And, in that situation, you have a bunch of pencil pushers dictating the neccessity of medical treatment and second guessing the doctors.

Re-read the post....

Quote:

I disagree because at least in this country, you don't have to sit around and wait for permission to have a life saving surgery or not....

I can understand the insurance companies deciding if one should have the bunion surgery or not. But in most cases of life saving i.e. heart attacks, etc.

Liebling writes:

Quote:

Again, misleading information.

I really have no idea where you get those information from?

Thank you for providing the link as it was stated in the link that Canadians had to wait, plus there was statistics of people waiting for their surgeries..

Quote:

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/160/10/1469.pdf

Secondly...do you really believe everything that Michael Moore says in his documentary? Remember that documentaries are a matter of opinion. Doesn't mean it's right or wrong, just neither. And Michael Moore is a 'flamer' just like you , me and everyone else on these boards.

Liebling writes:

Quote:

I mean any Americans who cannot afford to insure the health insurance extra for the family or themselves when they work to pay taxes for Medicard/Medicare for low income family. It would be cheaper for them if they are under Hillary's plan if they WANT to insure health insurance. One ADers in my thread stated that she like to insure health for her family but she feel $400 per month for family insurance coverage is too much whom she work to pay taxes. That's why I thought she would not need to insure extra when she work to pay taxes to Medicare/Medicard if she join Hillary's plan.

I know I am going to get h*** for saying this but if the individual thinks its too much to have their families health covered for that amount of money is too much then that particular individual doesn't have their family's best interest at heart.

Insurance costs money. Period. If you want the best for your family, you will shell out money for the best. If not, then don't complain. You get what you pay.

Reba writes:

Quote:

Who do you think would pay for the medical insurance for the low income people? The American taxpayers. Hillary's plan would be more expensive for middle income people like me and Hubby. It will cost more for us, not less.

And if we cover the low income people and when it comes time for the middle class to say, " Cover me please," the Feds will say..."Sorry, you make too much money!".

Good point Reba, it will be expensive for us middle class people.

Anyway, getting back to Hillary vs. Obama......

Obama will probably get the South due to the race card whereas Hillary will get NY, MA, CT, and CA.

They both may not want to be side by side if one is the President and Vice-President, but if their party wants them too, they will probably give into the Democrat party....

Byrdie714 · 01-28-2008, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Depends on the state.

In South Carolina, anyone (Republicans, Democrats, independents, etc.) can vote in either primary (Republican or Democrat). The only rule is that they can't vote in both. Yes, even a Republican can vote in a Democrat primary (and vice versa).

That's not the case in every state but that's the way it is here. It makes for interesting elections in SC.

WOW!

That's interesting! Thanks for the info!

jillio · 01-28-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Re-read the post....

I can understand the insurance companies deciding if one should have the bunion surgery or not. But in most cases of life saving i.e. heart attacks, etc.

Liebling writes:

Thank you for providing the link as it was stated in the link that Canadians had to wait, plus there was statistics of people waiting for their surgeries..

Secondly...do you really believe everything that Michael Moore says in his documentary? Remember that documentaries are a matter of opinion. Doesn't mean it's right or wrong, just neither. And Michael Moore is a 'flamer' just like you , me and everyone else on these boards.

Liebling writes:

I know I am going to get h*** for saying this but if the individual thinks its too much to have their families health covered for that amount of money is too much then that particular individual doesn't have their family's best interest at heart.

Insurance costs money. Period. If you want the best for your family, you will shell out money for the best. If not, then don't complain. You get what you pay.

Reba writes:

And if we cover the low income people and when it comes time for the middle class to say, " Cover me please," the Feds will say..."Sorry, you make too much money!".

Good point Reba, it will be expensive for us middle class people.

Anyway, getting back to Hillary vs. Obama......

Obama will probably get the South due to the race card whereas Hillary will get NY, MA, CT, and CA.

They both may not want to be side by side if one is the President and Vice-President, but if their party wants them too, they will probably give into the Democrat party....

I did read your post, and elective type surgeries excluded, many insurance companies require pre-approval for all surgeries. In addition, some require a second opinion by a doctor directly associated with the insurance company. Further, people are having to wait innordinate amounts of time to gain approval to see a specialist due to insurance company regulations. Not to mention limiting freedom of choice for which practitioner you use. They can deny payment for any service at any time. Personally, I do not agree with insurance company representatives without any form of medical training deciding the efficacy of medical treatment. I prefer my treatment decisions to be between myself and a medical professional. If I want someone with a high school diploma making medical decisions for me, I'll ask any stranger on the street corner, thank you.

Reba · 01-29-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I did read your post, and elective type surgeries excluded, many insurance companies require pre-approval for all surgeries. In addition, some require a second opinion by a doctor directly associated with the insurance company. Further, people are having to wait innordinate amounts of time to gain approval to see a specialist due to insurance company regulations. Not to mention limiting freedom of choice for which practitioner you use. They can deny payment for any service at any time. Personally, I do not agree with insurance company representatives without any form of medical training deciding the efficacy of medical treatment. I prefer my treatment decisions to be between myself and a medical professional. If I want someone with a high school diploma making medical decisions for me, I'll ask any stranger on the street corner, thank you.

Reba did NOT write:

And if we cover the low income people and when it comes time for the middle class to say, " Cover me please," the Feds will say..."Sorry, you make too much money!".

Those were Byrdie's words below my quote.

Reba · 01-29-2008, 01:27 AM

I was watching the President's State of the Union speech tonight. Sometimes the camera would pan to Hillary, Obama, and Teddy. Hillary was very nicely dressed and made up but she totally spoiled it by her facial expression. Every time the camera caught her, she looked constipated. What a crabapple.

Obama and Teddy were sitting together like two sweethearts. Blah! Just 18 months ago Teddy couldn't even get Obama's name right (He called him Osama Bin Laden during a speech.)

I heard Teddy and his druggie son Patrick make their endorsement speeches for Obama today. Teddy sounded drunk, and Patrick sounded high. I suspect there's more behind their endorsement of Obama than what meets the eye. Maybe a cushy position for Patrick on Obama's presidential staff?

Or are they so sick of the Clintons that they'll do anything to tick them off?

Liebling:-))) · 01-29-2008, 08:08 AM

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Thank you for providing the link as it was stated in the link that Canadians had to wait, plus there was statistics of people waiting for their surgeries..

Did you check the date of link before you provided here? I looked your link. It says 1999.
Re-read your link.
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/160/10/1469.pdf

My link with many Canadian's positive comments, I provided you in previous post dated July 2007.

Again, please re-read Canadian's positive comments.
What Countries Have Universal Health Care? - Gadling

You need to listen Canadians's to real life experience situation than listen media or whatever.

Quote:

Secondly...do you really believe everything that Michael Moore says in his documentary? Remember that documentaries are a matter of opinion. Doesn't mean it's right or wrong, just neither. And Michael Moore is a 'flamer' just like you , me and everyone else on these boards.

Many Canadia's positive comments are not Michael Moore. I really has no idea where you get it from?

Quote:

I know I am going to get h*** for saying this but if the individual thinks its too much to have their families health covered for that amount of money is too much then that particular individual doesn't have their family's best interest at heart.

Insurance costs money. Period. If you want the best for your family, you will shell out money for the best. If not, then don't complain. You get what you pay.

wow, I am total speechless over your comment here. I feel really bad for Americans who want to have healthy insurance for their family's safety but they cannot afford.

Liebling:-))) · 01-29-2008, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo

Speechless because that's your opinion, I respect that

I am surprised that you didn't know that the people with no legs or arms can acheive their own life and have family. They can do everything like we (deaf) are. I am surprised that you think they can't but they can do like we deaf can do anything.

The people with no arms and can write with their feet and can take care of their baby with their feet - go shopping, normal life like everyone...

The people with no legs and can write with their mouth and paint with their mouth... and can take care of their baby with their arms - go shopping like normal life ...

PuyoPiyo · 01-29-2008, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

I am surprised that you didn't know that the people with no legs or arms can acheive their own life and have family. They can do everything like we (deaf) are. I am surprised that you think they can't but they can do like we deaf can do anything.

The people with no arms and can write with their feet and can take care of their baby with their feet - go shopping, normal life like everyone...

The people with no legs and can write with their mouth and paint with their mouth... and can take care of their baby with their arms - go shopping like normal life ...

Where did I say that I didn't know that those people was unable to support themselves?

Of course, I do know they can support themselves, but was it easy? Of course not, also the governments shouldn't pressure them to do so.

My opinion, those people who suffered a cause them unable to work premanent(sp?) have nothing to be blame on, it was the governments, AND those people without disablity who was working too.

The reason why I blame governments for those people who suffered by health issue that stopped them from working premanent(sp?) is because the government was the one who create the ecomonic, causing the population boom, create many things that give the disability people harder time to deal with.

And for the workers, usually.... Sad but true, if the manager look at two applications, one application was from a person who wasn't disablity, and other application was from a person that are disablity, the manager would pick the application from a person who doesn't have disablity over the application that was from a person that are disablity, so that the manager can have a good quality of service. It's just that how it works.

No wonder so many of people who are disablity was having so hard time to find a job.

Liebling:-))) · 01-29-2008, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo

Where did I say that I didn't know that those people was unable to support themselves?

Of course, I do know they can support themselves, but was it easy? Of course not, also the governments shouldn't pressure them to do so.

My opinion, those people who suffered a cause them unable to work premanent(sp?) have nothing to be blame on, it was the governments, AND those people without disablity who was working too.

The reason why I blame governments for those people who suffered by health issue that stopped them from working premanent(sp?) is because the government was the one who create the ecomonic, causing the population boom, create many things that give the disability people harder time to deal with.

And for the workers, usually.... Sad but true, if the manager look at two applications, one application was from a person who wasn't disablity, and other application was from a person that are disablity, the manager would pick the application from a person who doesn't have disablity over the application that was from a person that are disablity, so that the manager can have a good quality of service. It's just that how it works.

No wonder so many of people who are disablity was having so hard time to find a job.

Oh I got your point. Unfortunlately yes, it's sad fact...

I thought you don't know because of your own word..."Also about the low income people, well, how can a person, who have no arms, get a job and paying the health insurance all by her/himself?"

Yes, we work to pay taxes and social insurance to help the people who are unable to go work etc... I see no problem for that because I got the equal treat as them... no need extra insurances for myself... what I work to pay taxes and social insurances is including for myself.

PuyoPiyo · 01-29-2008, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

Oh I got your point. Unfortunlately yes, it's sad fact...

I thought you don't know because of your own word..."Also about the low income people, well, how can a person, who have no arms, get a job and paying the health insurance all by her/himself?"

Yes, we work to pay taxes and social insurance to help the people who are unable to go work etc... I see no problem for that because I got the equal treat as them... no need extra insurances for myself... what I work to pay taxes and social insurances is including for myself.

Ohh that, my word, thank you for reminding my word

I got your point... The people with disablity do need other "normal" workers's help, we should be treat very equal. With you on this one.

Byrdie714 · 01-29-2008, 11:14 AM

German HealthCare isn't what it's cracked up to be:

Quote:

Whining on the Rhine: Pharmas React to Germany's Prescription Drug Reform. As many know, Germany's healthcare reform has been in the works for years and for as many years Germany's pharmaceutical industry (that includes many global companies) has been fighting the changes as unfair. The Wall Street Journal reported this week ("German Curbs on Drug Costs Rile Big Brands" -Monday May 2, 2005), on the affect of German health care reforms on the pharmaceutical industry, specifically the reference pricing on drugs recently instituted to cull costs. The drug formulary and reimbursement plan will favor drugs that are available as generics or in cheaper dispensing forms.

"The ministry decided last year it would no longer cover the higher prices of branded drugs that it deemed to have the same medical efficacy as available generics. So the commision drew up a list of drugs that it won't pay full price to cover."

The reform was undertaken for good reason. Germany was spending almost as much per capital on healthcare as the United States, yet with higher unemployment rates and inefficiency. The goal of the reforms is to reduce by 23 billion the annual 142 billion Euros spent on statutory health funds. The healthcare system, largely funded by the state, is bloated and corrupt. Health fraud and corruption among doctors, insurance funds and drug companies was costing the country up to 1 billion euros per year. The Financial Times reported about the widespread fraud in a July 13, 2003 article in Comments and Analysis ("Fraud is a very serious problem - and one that is getting worse all the time': German Health Care Reform"). Hundreds of doctors, as well as insurers and equipment companies were involved in multi-million Euro schemes. The pharamaceutical companies, the article notes, were not above the fray:

"...four large drug retailers and 250 specialist doctors, mostly radiologists and urologists, are under investigation over kickback payments"
..And another investigation revealed:

"Some 1,600 doctors and 270 sales representatives of a German branch of the former SmithKline Beecham are under investigation in a bribes scandal...The company is accused of paying doctors across Germany up to Euros 25,000 each, often as gifts or holidays - including trips to the 1998 football World Cup in France - in exchange for using its drugs"
Although the pharmaceuticals interests are clearly to maintain market share of their name brand drugs, the pharma industry has couched their fears differently at different times. Bernd Wegener, chairman of the BPI association of pharmaceutical companies, as quoted by Hugh Williamson of the Financial Times May 15, 2003 ("Drug Industry Attacks German Health Care Reforms"), said that the reforms were "a severe blow for patients" because they would push up the cost of many drugs.

The response has been sometimes been dramatic, sometimes over the top, sometimes babbling. One title in MMW -Fortschritte der Medizin (Germany, Nov. 2001) noted in a crypically translated title: "Drug manufacturer on the savings package of Ulla Schmidt [Health Minister]: Grip in the moth box of planned economics"

The pharmaceutical companies have naturally been actively lobbying against the reform measures with direct appeals to the Chancellor, lawsuits that challenge the changes, and direct campaign efforts by the pharmaceutical industry to politicians, patients and physicians. Philip Burchard, the head of AstraZeneca PLC's business in Germany, quoted by WSJ spoke ominously of the affects on the pharmaceuticals:

"It's actually a pretty disastrous thing for us...In a way, it's like losing your patents because your forced to reduce your price."
Or being exposed to open market competition.

The costs savings at stake for the German government are significant. Lipitor (Pfizer) is one of the drugs that is targeted, as the generic Simvastatin, introduced in 2003 is being favored by the German government as a cheaper cholesterol reducing drug. The patients are responding by increasingly choosing generics over brand name pharmaceuticals for cost reasons.

"German patients who used to get Lipitor free of charge at their local pharmacy now must pay almost $65 out of pocket for a three-month supply. Simvastatin, the generic that the commission says is comparable to Lipitor, is almost free to patients"

Despite all the howls from the pharmaceutical companies, they continue the post record sales profits year after year. Lipitor is one of many drugs with generic equivalents that the German government wants to save money on. Despite the threats from generics though, year after year Lipitor has led pharmaceutical sales both overall and in it's class. Last year (2004) Lipitor topped previous years with record revenues of 10.9 billion.

Quote:

http://www.acronymrequired.com/2005/..._on_the_1.html

So everything isn't necessairly rosy in the Rhineland or as the article stated, "the Whineland".

Liebling writes:

Quote:

wow, I am total speechless over your comment here. I feel really bad for Americans who want to have healthy insurance for their family's safety but they cannot afford

That is when it's time to look at one's family economics. Does your family really need the extra television set? Extra car? Extra x-box in little Johnny's bedroom? Some families need to get their economic priorities straightend out if they want the best healthcare. Sometimes it's simple as switching jobs/careers.

In my experience, the ones with the best healthcare packages are the union jobs and the sad thing is that union jobs are far and few in between.

Reba writes:

Quote:

I was watching the President's State of the Union speech tonight. Sometimes the camera would pan to Hillary, Obama, and Teddy. Hillary was very nicely dressed and made up but she totally spoiled it by her facial expression. Every time the camera caught her, she looked constipated. What a crabapple.

Obama and Teddy were sitting together like two sweethearts. Blah! Just 18 months ago Teddy couldn't even get Obama's name right (He called him Osama Bin Laden during a speech.)

I heard Teddy and his druggie son Patrick make their endorsement speeches for Obama today. Teddy sounded drunk, and Patrick sounded high. I suspect there's more behind their endorsement of Obama than what meets the eye. Maybe a cushy position for Patrick on Obama's presidential staff?

Or are they so sick of the Clintons that they'll do anything to tick them off?

You saw that too?!

I was suprised that Obama was compared to JFK and endorsed by his daughter.

Interestingly enough, Matt Lauer interview the two of them together and he pointly asked Ted Kennedy if he was still friends with the Clintons and Ted said, "Yes".

It will be interesting to see the fall-out from that.

Liebling:-))) · 01-29-2008, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

German HealthCare isn't what it's cracked up to be:

So everything isn't necessairly rosy in the Rhineland or as the article stated, "the Whineland".

I laughed sooo hard... I living here in Germany and know German health system in real life...

Those links support my knowledge.

I never have any problem with German health system for years...

The German health care system has the reputation of being one of the best in the world. There is an extensive network of hospitals and doctors covering even the remotest areas of Germany.

Germany Guide: Introduction, The German health care system The German health care system has the reputation of.

The German Health System
German Health System - Health Care Provider Germany

US Health System Ranks Last Compared to Other Countries: Studies dated May 15, 2007
US Health System Ranks Last Compared to Other Countries: Studies - CommonDreams.org

Reba · 01-29-2008, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

The German health care system has the reputation of being one of the best in the world. There is an extensive network of hospitals and doctors covering even the remotest areas of Germany.

Germany Guide: Introduction, The German health care system The German health care system has the reputation of.

OK. Your link states:

"..The downside is that medical costs are high. Health care costs - for doctors, hospital stays and even medicines - are among the most expensive in the world. There is no such thing as "free" treatment in Germany, not even in state hospitals. All care, including emergencies, has to be paid for by you or your health insurance!

When coming to Germany, it is therefore extremely important to have a full health care insurance, as a serious illness could cause a financial disaster. In most cases, you will even be obliged to prove you have adequate cover. ..."

Reba · 01-29-2008, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

The German Health System
German Health System - Health Care Provider Germany

This link states:

"...But medical costs - for doctors, hospital stays and even medicines - are high - they are among the most expensive in the world.

The aim of the new reformed German health service to share the pain of reform with Germans forced to pay more out of their own pockets for medical care and additional big changes will be needed in the coming years to stem the costs of the system as the German population ages...."

01-29-2008, 01:27 AM	#81 (permalink)
Reba Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 20,786	I was watching the President's State of the Union speech tonight. Sometimes the camera would pan to Hillary, Obama, and Teddy. Hillary was very nicely dressed and made up but she totally spoiled it by her facial expression. Every time the camera caught her, she looked constipated. What a crabapple. Obama and Teddy were sitting together like two sweethearts. Blah! Just 18 months ago Teddy couldn't even get Obama's name right (He called him Osama Bin Laden during a speech.) I heard Teddy and his druggie son Patrick make their endorsement speeches for Obama today. Teddy sounded drunk, and Patrick sounded high. I suspect there's more behind their endorsement of Obama than what meets the eye. Maybe a cushy position for Patrick on Obama's presidential staff? Or are they so sick of the Clintons that they'll do anything to tick them off? __________________ "This most beautiful system [The Universe] could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being." -- Sir Isaac Newton Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other. --John Adams

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com