Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-22-2008, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,247,328 times
Reputation: 15284

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
I am indeed generally a failure, however... since neither you nor I know in which direction such a "huge" (if 2-7% of the country is huge, with the percentage of people with diseases substantially smaller since they tend to be healthier + younger) population biases the statistics, or whether it does substantially at all, it makes little sense for you to claim that it stacks the study against America.
Since no one knows the size or condition of the population at issue ( I won't bother repeating -- yet again -- the special characteristics which tend to put it at medical risk), how can you deny that the study is seriously flawed without including this population that no one knows very much about?

I don't claim that it "stacks the study against America", though that may be so -- I do claim that general ignorance of a such statistically large and significant group -- among other factors -- casts doubt on any study's validity.

Surely you can see the reason in that...?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2008, 10:48 PM
 
Location: Your mind
2,935 posts, read 4,988,039 times
Reputation: 604
"General ignorance of such a statistically large and significant group" would decrease their effect on the study even more than otherwise, since causes of death would be less likely to be known and a greater percentage of their deaths would be obscured and unavailable for the research.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2008, 10:55 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,247,328 times
Reputation: 15284
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
"General ignorance of such a statistically large and significant group" would decrease their effect on the study even more than otherwise, since causes of death would be less likely to be known and a greater percentage of their deaths would be obscured and unavailable for the research.
Such a "decrease in effect" would, in effect, effect an increase in the study's invalidity.

In other words, it would be a bullschit study.

Still not clear?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2008, 11:12 PM
 
Location: Your mind
2,935 posts, read 4,988,039 times
Reputation: 604
You're not maintaining a consistent argument. You started out claiming, quite assertively, that the illegal population was making America look bad. Now you're claiming that their likely smaller-than-life representation in the study as a result of the basic realities of surveying populations somehow makes the whole thing invalid for the other 95%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2008, 11:45 PM
 
Location: Arizona
5,408 posts, read 7,775,408 times
Reputation: 1198
None of the characteristics Yeledaf has mentioned...several times now...relative to the dangers of a debatable portion of the overall illegal workforce environment correlate to the specific causes of preventable death examined in this study - which are stroke, cancer, diabetes, heart problems.

Again - the studies that have been done show that illegals, due to their young age and relative health in the first place, in addition to a general fear of deportation, are in fact a small portion of the overall health care picture even for their percentage of the overall population, and even more so when discussing these types of diseases more often associated with older and less physically active people..

Yeledaf is attempting, to coin one of his favorite expressions, "to construct a strawman" argument irrelevant to the premise of the original study.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2008, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Oxford, England
13,032 posts, read 24,562,728 times
Reputation: 20164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Yes, you're right. After all, what do I know? I only live here.
Hey I am only listening to what Americans ( other than than yourself and a few conservatives think. I accept it you , AmazonJohn etc... think it's pretty darn good, congratulations and well done on your good luck).

Still doesn't answer why so many AMERICANS ( not foreign interlopers with a "socialist" agenda like myself) don't agree with you ?

I spent 3 years of my life in the US listening to people tell me how awful their system was, then I read it on a weekly basis in your newspapers, see it on your TV shows, documentaries, listen to your Politicians for whom Healthcare reform is one of the crucial issues they debate (and yes, I also watch and listen to the debates).

Then I visit every year and darn what is that but the sound of Americans, once again speaking out against their wonderful Health system... I am delighted that you and some other people love it but isn't it a tad pompous and arrogant to disregard the vast majority who who don't ?
The French system might not be what they want but they certainly don't want their current system either.

Isn't that against Democracy and Freedom ? Power to the People. I mean if the Iraqis deserve it shouldn't the American people get what they want ?

You obviously think it is an issue which is of no consequence and I agree that people like me should have no bearing whatsoever on what happens. As a foreigner my rights are non-existent as they should be.

But surely Americans have a right to get what they want ? That is if a Democracy is what we are talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2008, 06:31 AM
 
365 posts, read 697,307 times
Reputation: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooseketeer View Post
Hey I am only listening to what Americans ( other than than yourself and a few conservatives think. I accept it you , AmazonJohn etc... think it's pretty darn good, congratulations and well done on your good luck).

Still doesn't answer why so many AMERICANS ( not foreign interlopers with a "socialist" agenda like myself) don't agree with you ?

I spent 3 years of my life in the US listening to people tell me how awful their system was, then I read it on a weekly basis in your newspapers, see it on your TV shows, documentaries, listen to your Politicians for whom Healthcare reform is one of the crucial issues they debate (and yes, I also watch and listen to the debates).

Then I visit every year and darn what is that but the sound of Americans, once again speaking out against their wonderful Health system... I am delighted that you and some other people love it but isn't it a tad pompous and arrogant to disregard the vast majority who who don't ?
The French system might not be what they want but they certainly don't want their current system either.

Isn't that against Democracy and Freedom ? Power to the People. I mean if the Iraqis deserve it shouldn't the American people get what they want ?

You obviously think it is an issue which is of no consequence and I agree that people like me should have no bearing whatsoever on what happens. As a foreigner my rights are non-existent as they should be.

But surely Americans have a right to get what they want ? That is if a Democracy is what we are talking about.
wow heavy... you must be one of those roving reporters from the BBC or something... I love how foreigners blast us with their fine tuned ops about our freedoms/democracy... your sheep are calling, maybe you should answer them instead...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2008, 07:03 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,387,388 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
I didn't. You did.
Ah, historical revisionism. Let's go to the video tape. On the afternoon of January 8...

<yeledaf>
Statistics, please of any public health disaster which remotely aproaches France's summer of 2003?
<saganista>
Look into the Lancet/Hopkins study on Iraq's Summer of 2003...
<yeledaf>
Any public health disaster in the United States. That was the obvious implied comparison...

The discussion proceeds from there to an embarassing analysis of the truly horrible numbers out of Chicago in 1995. This is the last mention of Iraq until the early morning hours of January 21, when we suddenly see...

<yeledaf>
Exposed as a fraud and a lie. Funded by Soros. More slowballs, please.

I repeat: It was hardly worth your reply to a nearly two-week old post if you had nothing more than playground talk to offer on the matter

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
You dare very little, prefering to quibble over lies about war dead. Most people who have never been in combat exhibit similar characteristics.
You mean like Bush. Speaking of whom and despite its being the topic at hand, you offered in this purported reply no comment at all concerning his December 2005 estimate of 30,000 Iraqi dead. What again was the source for that? Was there any actual basis for it at all? Will you dare defend it this time around, or is it again to be shunned for purposes of partisan expedience?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2008, 07:13 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,387,388 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
For good reason: it is accurate.
Not per any established thesis or construct. You simply fling these charges of anti-American bias at whatever you are unable to explain. Hardly a narrow field there. And hardly is it unbecoming, to use your word for it, to decry such factless argumentation for its lack of any foundation in fact. Fact is what has built up the now large library of studies and reports documenting the comparatively sorry state of the American medical system. Fable is all that props up any dismissal of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2008, 09:10 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,387,388 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
I'll go with door number one.
Aw, so close. Door #2 was just the next one along. In fact, because French workers are required to take at least five weeks vacation per year, and the French school year runs through mid-July, virtually the entire country goes on vacation during August. For the entire month. In scenes reminiscent of The Hajj, factories close and cities drain in the days of late July and early August, while beach and mountain resort towns swell with the population of a nation. The flow is then reversed at the end of the month. This effect is one of the national characteristics of France and would have been well known to any familiar with that country. Here is one CBC reporter's diary of recently experiencing it...

CBC News: Reports from abroad: David Common

There are two relevant groups that do not participate in the annual August pilgrimage at rates even approximating those of the general population. The first is the elderly. Vacationing families routinely lodge those unable to cope with the rigors of travel and a beach or mountain life in the care of nursing homes. The second is doctors. While nearly all high-level officials at the Ministry of Health were indeed on holiday in August of 2003, only 20% of doctors were. And while we're at the process of debunking right-wing disinformation, let's dispense with the myth that the (grossly exaggerated) number of doctors who were on vacation that month stand as testimony to some sort of socialist system-rigging and an obvious condemnation of the weaknesses of central planning. Such ideas result from the baseless assumption referred to in earlier posts that national health care systems are all communist-style, state-run collectives wherein doctors would have somehow negotiated the approval of apparatchik higher-ups in the right of half of them to be at the beach in August. In fact, doctors in France are fully independent, self-employed professionals. None (except those literally employed within state agencies) is an employee of the state, and their work hours, locations, and all other such conditions of employment (such as when to go on vacation) are determined by individual doctors themselves. Neither are French doctors in the thrall of any insurance companies. All decisions relating to appropriate medical care are independently made by French doctors in their full professional consideration of the conditions and preferences presented by such French patients as may individually choose to see them. It is the doctor-patient relationship that drives French medical care (to the top of the charts), not the doctor-government relationship, and not the doctor-insurance company relationship. It is also true that doctors as a group in France earn only about twice the national average wage, where doctors in the US earn about five times the average. French doctors don't care. For one thing, they pay zero for malpractice and other liability insurance. Such matters are handled within judicial appeals systems operated and fully paid for by the state. For another, French doctors do not have educational debts to pay off. While competititon for entry into French medical schools is as stiff as it is here, once you are in, your medical education is free. No charge. No loans. No debts. Now in fairness, it should be pointed out that the French medical system is, on a per capita cost basis, likely the most expensive system in Europe. The French value proper medical care and are willing to pay for it. Luckily for them, they are able to support what the World Health Organization has rated as the best medical system in the world for 40% less than what Americans pay per capita for a system that excels only at the margins and that rated a lowly 37th in WHO tallies.

The bottom line here is that the arguments you have raised are as I have characterized them. They reflect no understanding of France or of the French medical system. Neither do they reflect an understanding of the methods and standards of scholarly statistical study. All they reflect is a knee-jerk need to defend America and whatever is American, regardless of what the truth of the matter might be.

Last edited by saganista; 01-23-2008 at 10:46 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top