Do you consider healthcare as a right for every citizen a far left position? (voted, slavery)
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.
Cancer survival rates in the US are superior to every single country, bar none.
The 5-year survival rate for the 4 most common cancers is appalling in Britain. Compare:
Breast Cancer: UK 69.7% while US leads the World at 83.9% If you're a woman, you want to be in the US, not the UK.
Colorectal Men: UK 42.3% while US leads the World at 59.1%
Colorectal Women: 44.7% while US leads the World at 60.2%
Prostate: UK 51.1% while US leads the World at 91.9% If you're a man, you want to be in the US, not the UK, because your survival chances are 1.7x better than in the UK.
The NHS might be okay for a boil on the bum or bronchitis, but not for serious life-threatening illnesses.
You can read Delay, Dilution and Denial, by the British National Health Service for an expose on that.
And, for the record, those facts come from your own US Centers for Disease Control, the British National Health Service and a British medical journal, Lancet, which is the equivalent to our AMA Journal of Medicine.
You can find those facts in the CONCORD Study.
Explain to us why a woman with breast cancer would ever want to be in Britain with a dismal survival rate?
Cancer survival rates depend on the stage of the cancer and other variables such as a patients age, there is also a tendency in common cancers to over diagnose in the US, and this may be one of the reasons that the US has a higher rate of cancer diagnosis in the first place.
In terms of the NHS, the Royal Marsden in London was the first hospital dedicated to the study and treatment of cancer hospital in the world and the NHS has some very good hospitals, equipment and dedicated staff, and cancer survival rates continue to improve significantly and encouraging people to undergo regular cancer screening is part of the NHS strategy, which will include an extra £20 billion NHS Spending,
Under the plans, the NHS will create a national network of “one stop shops” for cancer checks to drive up detection rates.
GPs will be told to send all patients with possible cancer symptoms to rapid diagnostic centres, which will normally provide a diagnosis within two weeks – and sometimes on the spot.
The new, “scan first” strategy, means that patients will typically get a diagnosis – or all clear – within three weeks of first seeing their family doctor.
A network of at least 20 “rapid diagnostic centres” will begin work over the next two years, with further centres rolled out across the country with a significant increase in MRI Machines, CT Scanners and more early testing.
As we all know we can do anything with statistics but that doesn't mean they are accurate. I think I have posted my opinion here more that once but here goes again. We do owe everyone emergency care, but that is all. Yes, there are times when the government should and can step in, but we also have to remember our country was based on you work for what you get. The idea that we all have a right to everything is just plain wrong.
As we all know we can do anything with statistics but that doesn't mean they are accurate. I think I have posted my opinion here more that once but here goes again. We do owe everyone emergency care, but that is all. Yes, there are times when the government should and can step in, but we also have to remember our country was based on you work for what you get. The idea that we all have a right to everything is just plain wrong.
Aside from the fact no one has proposed rights to everything; wrong in who's estimation? The citizen of a country with fewer individual, economic or press freedoms? The only country undergoing a crisis in healthcare delivery with millions un-insured? The only country with millions of it's citizens unable to afford or obtain regular pre-emptive healthcare examinations?
Why would a citizen of such a country have any currency at all to debate "rights" when they willingly acquiesce to having fewer of them?
I am neither far left nor far right but I vote GOP 99% of the time and I think healthcare is a RIGHT that ALL citizens should have. I believe its part of what the governments job is to take care of its citizens.
So are you saying that if it was put into the US constitution it would become a right? And therefore whether something is a right or not depends on whether it is listed as such in a government document like the US constitution?
If the "right" to health care were added to the US Constitution as an Amendment, it would become a Constitutional Right, like the uninfringeable Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms. Does that mean others can be forced/obligated to pay for it? No. Just like no one is forced to pay for arms owners' guns and ammunition. Do you understand?
If the "right" to health care were added to the US Constitution as an Amendment, it would become a Constitutional Right, like the uninfringeable Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms. Does that mean others can be forced/obligated to pay for it? No. Just like no one is forced to pay for arms owners' guns and ammunition. Do you understand?
Liberals have always had an issue with Constitutional Rights. They think a Constitutional Right is anything they agree with and anything they don't like, even if it's explicitly enumerated in the actual Constitution, should be banned. This is why people like Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who is a disgrace is a hero to leftists.
Liberals have always had an issue with Constitutional Rights. They think a Constitutional Right is anything they agree with and anything they don't like, even if it's explicitly enumerated in the actual Constitution, should be banned. This is why people like Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who is a disgrace is a hero to leftists.
Agree.
The bottom line in why I've compared the proposed/supposed "right" to health care to the actual enumerated Constitutional Rights is to make sure everyone understands that just because people may have a "right" to something does NOT mean others can be obliged/forced to pay for anyone else's access to, invocation, and exercise of such supposed "rights," even when they're Constitutional Rights.
Sure, go ahead and make health care a "right." The onus is then on whoever wants to exercise that "right" to pay for that health care themselves just like arms owners pay for their own guns and ammunition.
I gotta ask if the day ever comes you are overwhelmed with medical bills how will you handle it?
An irrelevant question. The fact that one person cannot afford something does not mean someone else has an obligation to provide it, no matter how much they might need it.
If you disagree, please explain where that obligation comes from. What circumstances resulted in the player legitimately owing that money to the payee.
And any BS George Costanza-esque "People! We're living in a SOCIETY" answer is not a legitimate reason.
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.
