Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Funny how you obsess on Brazil while ignore the dozens of other counties in Europe, Asia and other areas that are more industrialized and a better comparison for the US, all have far superior healthcare systems and better access. Even on Brazil itself you show yourself to be naive and you just made a fool of yourself with your own words by pointing out you went to Brazil on medical mission. Do you not realize that the fact you were on a medical mission, means you were directed to more impoverished areas that are not representative of the country as a whole? You realize people are also sent to America areas in the US on medical missions too right? Like in Appallachia and run down inner cities? Do you think you get a representative view of US health care system from just anecdotes there? Your personal experience on that mission is worthless and unrepresentative. Expats work in a broader area, work in middle class areas that are better representative and hae found that Brazilian healthcare in those main areas is pretty good.
By now either you're trolling or just being dumb for no good reason other than not wanting to here inconvenient facts, either way I'm done spoon feeding you what's been obvious as a crisis to anyone paying attention for a decade now even without the links. The US has a big problem with it's healthcare. Deal with what it.
Obsess?YOU, yes YOU I'll remind you are the one who brought up Brazil as a role model. From your post: "Nobody's saying countries like Germany, England, France, Sweden, Japan, Brazil, Argentina have perfect healthcare, but there are basic things any healthcare system has to do to be considered an effective first-world system, and the other systems do these successfully while USA fails on the most basic part, making sure people have healthcare access when they need it without going bankrupt."
"The Atlantic" is hardly a scientific source. I'll skip it entirely.
The article from "The Doctor Weighs In" is an opinion piece and is a great article about "how to lie with statistics".
NBC News? Seriously?
The WHO list is interesting, and the article (from a Canadian source) points out that "neither Canada nor the USA ranks in the top 25." I will point out that neither do Finland, Australia, Denmark or New Zealand, and that NZ is ranked lower than the US. I'll also point out the article is from at least as far back as 2010. There is no date, but the first comment is from 2010.
I think it is well known that life expectancy in the US dropped for the second year in a row.
You are seriously misjudging me if you think I'm an apologist for the US system. But I won't debate with someone who calls names.
We had strong labor unions at one time, ironically, at the same time that some countries, such as Canada and the UK were developing their UHCs, and we didn't have UHC then, or now. Unions are concerned about their members, not anyone else.
LOL, America has never had anywhere near as strong of a labor union movement than many countries in Europe. Not even at the heyday of union power. America has historically been a very business run society compared to other developed countries.
There is no way we would have had Medicare without stronger unions in the 1960s. The fact that you demonize unions and claim they simply care about no one but themselves show that you have a very right wing view of worker's rights similar to what we hear from Fox News and other corporate media.
Sensible greed is like I said. Wanting things is not wrong. Greed is where you don't understand why it's good for others to have things also.
There used to be a name for the concept of understanding, desiring, acknowledging... that "it's good for others to have things also", it was called 'the common good'.
There used to be a name for the concept of understanding, desiring, acknowledging... that "it's good for others to have things also", it was called 'the common good'.
In fact, I believe I read something about that somewhere.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, ..."
Anyone recall where that's from?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
