What I said. You have different values and beliefs than I do. And compassion, humanism and justice are apparently not among yours. Yours are apparently dignity, self-determination and wealth.

There is nothing compassionate about supporting taking other people's money to give to other people.

Compassion would be YOU giving your own money to someone else voluntarily.

Aroddo -

Your avatar is spookily appropriate.  Slight modification here & there, BO could use it.

On the site, it had familiar names suck as Ann Coulter, Dick Morris, and Bill O'Reilly. Seems like it's pretty much a Jewish GOP supporting site. Wikipedia agrees with me.

Let's look at some quotes:

"The current "health care" bill threatens to take life-and-death decisions out of the hands of individuals and their doctors, transferring those decisions to Washington bureaucrats." -- multiple democrats have continuously reiterated that the purpose of the current bill is to provide a public option. So, the competition will lower the cost of health care and improve the quality, thus giving those who are constrained by money choices. Explain to me how more choice takes life and death decisions away from us.

"if you preferred to have a nice hospital room with "amenities" rather than being in an unsanitary ward with inadequate nursing care, as under the National Health Service in Britain" -- As smart as this guy may be, he really can't say that without providing some sort of source. He's not a doctor, he's an economist and social commentator, so he can't use himself as a source

"it is as predictable as the sunrise that medical care for the elderly will be cut back under a government-controlled medical system." -- you mean if such a system focused on preventive care, which includes promoting a healthy lifestyle, they government wouldn't need to spend as much money on heart surgeries? okay, I buy that.

"It is part of a whole mindset of many on the left who have never reconciled themselves to an economic system in which how much people can withdraw from the resources of the nation depends on how much they have contributed to those resources." -- That's probably because that's not what the current economic system is. I don't pay fire insurance so that the trucks will come to my house, I pay taxes to contribute to the fire department, which services everyone, even those who would be unable to pay for fire insurance.

On a side note, I know at least one reasons why medicare is costing so much:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Prescription_Drug,_Improvement,_and_Modernization_Act

quick quote from that:

"it prohibits the Federal government from negotiating discounts with drug companies;" -- so if I were the CEO of a perscription drug company, I'd want to charge Medicare a lot more for the same quality drugs so I have bigger profits and then the shareholders like me more?

That sounds like the people who voted that legislation in (repubicans in '03) were trying to make Medicare bankrupt.

Don't pretend that Wikipedia is a reliable source for controversial issues, such as politics.

About the second issue (medicare bill), let's go "trusty" news sources that say the same thing:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/29/60minutes/main2625305.shtml (says drug companies influenced the bill)

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MMAUpdate/ (includes the text of the law)

quote from the summary of the bill: ( http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MMAUpdate/downloads/PL108-173summary.pdf )

"The Best Price section of title XIX is amended to exclude from the best price calculation prices negotiated from manufacturers for covered discount card drugs under a Medicare endorsed discount drug card" (near bottom of page 24)

If you're going to say wikipedia is untrustworth on said topic, prove that it's wrong.

Have you ever read the discussion/talk page for a controversial Wikipedia article?

Melchiz,

You're one to talk.  Where exactly did you find your facts?  Your statements about medical professionals in Cuba being "medics" and the cost of american drugs being ridiculously priced because of R&D costs...... lmao!  Wiki-friendly indeed!

You think for one second that the US would have the medical talent within its borders that it does at the moment if it wasn't for the fact that doctors from other nations around the world (including Canada....my own home) were being lured there by the almighty american (well not so almighty these days) buck?  Maybe you should do some fact-checking yourself before posting.

The "brain drain" as it's been referred to up here in Canada has been going on for decades.  You're only kidding yourself if you think that you have the "best medical professionals" for any other reason than (what used to be) the lure of the american buck.  I have family members who (being medical professionals now living in the US) are part of that "brain drain".  My facts come straight out of my own personal experience........no WIKI-article here! 

the Monk

My information about medical practice in this country and abroad is not derived from egomaniacs at Wikipedia, but testimony from physicians. Do you want to know why so many foreign MDs choose to practice in the US? Perhaps you should ask them. From my experience, very few claim that reimbursement is the primary reason for their being here. The only ones who are concerned about money are the refugees from countries with socialized medicine, such as Canada, who feel that these wealthy societies demand too much of them and provide too little in return. Physicians from places such as Nigeria and India come to the United States for its world-leading medical research, quality of care, superior medical training, and access to state-of-the-art equipment.

As for Cuban healthcare, my sources are South American (primarily Venezuelan) practitioners who have worked with the Cuban-trained medics.

I consider myself lucky to have access to the best facilities and doctors in the world. What is the cost to me? Less than $100/month.

lol...completely ignoring the research...and your comment isn't related to health care...

Regardless, I'd rather be in a system where the doctor became a doctor not because he would be rich, but because he wants to help people. A stronger bond with my doctor would make me healthier in the long run.

After all, doctors exist to help me heal myself, so I'd rather be seen as a human being instead of a bag of symptoms and a paycheck.

 Melchiz,

My family members are certainly not "refugees"..........I'm beginning to think your age might be showing itself here. 

Please read my first posting to this thread (on page 1).  As a result of that accident I received care at one of north america's teaching hospitals (http://www.lhsc.on.ca/About_Us/LHSC/Who_We_Are/Medical_Breakthroughs.htm) the "London Health Sciences Centre" which is certainly no sub-standard hospital by any measure.   Take a guess at what it cost me?  Nothing.

the Monk

Please, PLEASE go up to a physician and say that. To even suggest that the majority of doctors are in it primarily for money is absolute foolishness. There are many jobs that are less demanding and far more rewarding in terms of pay. As someone who works in medicine and has spent his entire life around dedicated healthcare workers, I am offended and disgusted.

You couldn't pay me to receive care there over Mass General, the Mayo Clinic, Brigham and Women's, UCLA, Johns Hopkins, the Cleveland Clinic, or one of the may outstanding hospitals in New York City.

Also, attacking my age is a great strategy. Please continue!

Melchiz,

Making statments such as "You couldn't pay me to receive care there..." when the London Health Sciences Centre is recognized as one of north america's premier teaching hospitals where (believe it or not.....those doctors you'd rather see at the Mayo etc. have studied) DOES in fact show your age.  Please feel free to keep digging!  

--  monk out

Unfortunately, most of the hospitals I listed are not only teaching hospitals, but directly affiliated with the top medical schools in the world. Also, many of these teaching hospitals are of higher standing than the London Health Sciences Centre.