Greek Health System Opts for Amputation as Money-Saver

I think it's safe to say, the Greeks are having a little worse time than most. The point of this story is to illustrate what happens when your health care is nationalized, and your nation is in financial distress.

They are having a little worse time than most because the Greek economy has been a basket case for decades before the financial crisis.

If you want to compare the US to Greece rather than Germany or France, something sort of comparable, then go for it but it doesn't do you any favours.
 
They are having a little worse time than most because the Greek economy has been a basket case for decades before the financial crisis.

If you want to compare the US to Greece rather than Germany or France, something sort of comparable, then go for it but it doesn't do you any favours.

Again (for the second time) I wasn't "comparing" anything. There is no comparison to the US with nationalized health care. We have 350 million people, how many people do Germany or France have? This wasn't about "comparing" the two, it was about what happens to nationalized health care, when the nation administering it, starts to go under. The result is not desirable... unless you like doing without your feet!
 
Again (for the second time) I wasn't "comparing" anything. There is no comparison to the US with nationalized health care. We have 350 million people, how many people do Germany or France have? This wasn't about "comparing" the two, it was about what happens to nationalized health care, when the nation administering it, starts to go under. The result is not desirable... unless you like doing without your feet!

Sorry, i assumed you were implying something similar may well befall the US if they were to adopt "socialised medicine". I should have known better, but you know how some people on the board spend their days posting scaremongering rubbish (not you of course, Dix).

But anyway, all it shows is that Greece is a mess. I never knew there were so many people interested in Greece's plight.
 
Sorry, i assumed you were implying something similar may well befall the US if they were to adopt "socialised medicine". I should have known better, but you know how some people on the board spend their days posting scaremongering rubbish (not you of course, Dix).

But anyway, all it shows is that Greece is a mess. I never knew there were so many people interested in Greece's plight.

Obamacare already establishes a "National Coordinator of Health Information Technology" and a "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" ...The "Death Panel" warned of by Sara Palin and others. So, this isn't a "scare tactic" at all, it's very real, and already the law of the land.
 
Obamacare already establishes a "National Coordinator of Health Information Technology" and a "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" ...The "Death Panel" warned of by Sara Palin and others. So, this isn't a "scare tactic" at all, it's very real, and already the law of the land.


The National Coordinator of Health Information Technology was established in 2004 by Executive Order signed by your jeans-wearing man-crush, GWB.
 
They are having a little worse time than most because the Greek economy has been a basket case for decades before the financial crisis.

If you want to compare the US to Greece rather than Germany or France, something sort of comparable, then go for it but it doesn't do you any favours.

ok.... what percent of GDP do Germany and France spend on health care costs?
 
The National Coordinator of Health Information Technology was established in 2004 by Executive Order signed by your jeans-wearing man-crush, GWB.

Yes, but the authority and scope of the position changed dramatically with the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act) of 2009.
 
ok.... what percent of GDP do Germany and France spend on health care costs?

Actually, i was simply referring to similarities in terms of France and Germany being advanced western democracies with sound fiscal management (generally) rather than Greece which is...er...what is technically known, by accountants and that, as "a fuck up".

However, if you want to post something on GDP percentages feel free. It's not really my scene though (and England v. Montenegro is on the telly).
 
Actually, i was simply referring to similarities in terms of France and Germany being advanced western democracies with sound fiscal management (generally) rather than Greece which is...er...what is technically known, by accountants and that, as "a fuck up".

However, if you want to post something on GDP percentages feel free. It's not really my scene though (and England v. Montenegro is on the telly).

1) It is a joke to believe that either France or the US has sound fiscal management... so to be fair, it would not do justice to compare either to Germany.... who does.... other than their poor judgment in loaning money to the Greeks, Spaniards and Italians.

2) go Montenegro!
 
Only someone as totally hacktacular as you would even THINK of using a hyperpartisan propaganda minister like Glenn Beck as a source for information.

Total selective bullshit and not representative of the true population.

you really showed him with that logical fallacy :palm:
 
1) It is a joke to believe that either France or the US has sound fiscal management... so to be fair, it would not do justice to compare either to Germany.... who does.... other than their poor judgment in loaning money to the Greeks, Spaniards and Italians.

2) go Montenegro!

1) Put it this way people in France, Germany, the US, and even the UK, actually pay taxes, albeit grudgingly in some cases. The same cannot be said of the good citizens of Greece.

2) Suck my balls.

:D
 
ok....what specifically is wrong with what he said?

His views are his own and he's welcome to them.

The point is that he is in no way representative of British public opinion as indicated by the "What Brits think of gov healthcare" part. It is representative of what Daniel Hannan thinks, and that's about it.
 
ok....what specifically is wrong with what he said?


I haven't read what he said, but I think the idea that this fellow maybe doesn't speak for "Brits" en toto is part of the problem here. I suppose we know what a Brit thinks of the NHS and maybe we could get charver's take and could know what two Brits think of the NHS but I'm not sure that we should add Mr. Hannan and charver think and claim to know what "Brits" think about it.
 
His views are his own and he's welcome to them.

The point is that he is in no way representative of British public opinion as indicated by the "What Brits think of gov healthcare" part. It is representative of what Daniel Hannan thinks, and that's about it.

did you actually read it? because if you did, you would have a different opinion than merely relying on the title
 
Back
Top