Is this true? Will americans be required to have microchips? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: ablacon64
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 09:25:34 pm
content: I hope this is not true:http://patriotupdate.com/26712/666-every-american-to-be-microchipped-in-2013-per-obamacare

author: mikelem
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 09:41:44 pm
content: If it smells bad, it probably is.http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/microchip.asp

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 09:53:39 pm
content: Fucking neocons will stop at nothing to instill fear. It's the only way they know to lead.

author: ablacon64
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 09:55:17 pm
content: Thanks. Good is a false news, I imagined in Brazil in some years having to wear a chip provided by the local government. Nightmare....

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 10:00:33 pm
content: You don't even need snopes. This is simply a case of reading comprehension failure. The article you linked to quotes the legal language they are concerned about at the bottom and it has nothing to do with what they are complaining about. The quoted text simply does not state that anyone will required to get any kind implant. The text (which apparently isn't actually part of the law) directs the government to maintain a database of implantable devices (like pacemakers, hip replacements, insulin monitors, etc.) to monitor their safety and efficacy.It isn't like there aren't bad or stupid things the government does, there is no need to make shit up. This is just a bunch of conspiracy theorist idiots with 2nd grade reading skills and a persecution complex a mile wide.edit: @poptones: no need to get political, this are just crazy conspiracy theorists (which exist for almost any demonstrably false belief you can imagine), and at least these ones don't seem to be affiliated with any people that actually have any power. Just batshit crazy people shouting at tje universe.

author: Obi_Kwiet
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 10:30:43 pm
content: How does someone who can't read, write a book?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 10:36:37 pm
content: As an aside, seems they are now using palm scanners in US primary schools to pay for lunches:http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-10-02/news/bs-md-ca-school-scan-20121002_1_karen-sarno-lunches-scannerThe first thing that strikes me is, the spread of germs. Every single child putting their hand on a scanner at lunch time just before they eat, yeah, that's smart...Dave.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2012, 10:59:14 pm
content: OK, you can put on your tinfoil hats now...What I don't like about the school lunch thing is these are children. Screw the privacy, it's not like the biometric data is being used to sell them gloves. It's that these are CHILDREN. Children, if anyone has seen the film Tideland, are incredibly adaptable and accept things around them as "normal." When these children grow up most are likely to see this as just another part of life, we use biometrics to "pay" for stuff from the government. It's not a nice world that establishes.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 05:47:43 am
content: Quote from: Obi_Kwiet on October 10, 2012, 10:30:43 pmhe told people who can write. first microchip, next is a clock showing how long you going to live.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 06:32:40 am
content: I thought it was so,if your pet American went astray,the Council could check & send them home!

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 07:49:23 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 10, 2012, 10:36:37 pmGotta spend that money on anything other than educating children!

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 08:06:39 am
content: That is just the anti Obama and his health care for all crazies again, ie. the Democrats. having to call your party democrats is like the communists having to call their country the peoples democratic republic of whatever. The first thing you know from such titles is they are none of anything the title tries to imply.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 08:09:50 am
content: Quote from: G7PSK on October 11, 2012, 08:06:39 amI like to keep free from politics frankly as both parties are a joke! Just like in the UK. I do dislike politicians quite a lot - but you have to vote for one, or your "vote will be wasted".

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 09:54:45 am
content: It's not just the people with 2nd grade reading skills ... The ones doing it are the freaking christians. Or so they say "New world order"

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 10:00:48 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on October 11, 2012, 05:47:43 amOnly if you can afford healthcare, otherwise you'll die early.Because, government healthcare is, you know, that evil socialism crapDave.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:17:49 am
content: Dave didn't Australia just get rid of that crap because it didn't work? Your government needs to have a talk with ours. Hopefully, our new president will get rid of it. I am scared of it myself.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:27:00 am
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 11, 2012, 11:17:49 amGet rid of what?Dave.

author: bullet308
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 12:36:31 pm
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 11, 2012, 11:17:49 amGee, I don't know, but personally, I have a lot more fear of not having heath care myself. Mostly because at present, and for the first time in my life, I don't have any insurance. Right now, its a race between my being able to find a full-time job, Obamacare kicking in, and my dying of something really horrible and expensive. Not a good way to live.Nobody ditches a national health care scheme. At least, no other industrial democracy other than they US would ever seriously contemplate such idiocy.

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 01:17:30 pm
content: Well, those "news" spread before elections by a site that is calling itself "Patriot Update". Yepp, but I am sure there are lots of people who actually believe that stuff and switch to Mitt Romney.Thank God...we will be savedHonestly, it is said to build a database and I suggest it would be like everywhere else: You get an ID and that may have an RFID.I am pretty sure that implant thing may not be coming for a while. Pretty sure there would be law conflicts either (privacy, personal health).

author: perfect_disturbance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 01:43:31 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 10, 2012, 10:36:37 pmThere is a dispenser of hand sanitizer at the entrance of my kids cafeteria they are required to sanitize while entering. They also have a pin they use to get their lunch.

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 01:53:12 pm
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on October 11, 2012, 01:43:31 pmAt least someone had a thought there (compared to the palm scanner), but high use of sanitizers make have the effect that the amount of resistant germs and so on is increasing (adaption).So best would be to keep some basic hygienic rules (like don't grab in your neighbors meal/mouth, wash your hands, don't play with dog-shit) and of course by the staff as they serve all.I don't use our cafeteria (prefer to cook on my own), but I know they are just using transponders and serve you the meal. Wasn't a problem until now....We have a mandatory healthcare since decades and it works (but is getting stripped down more and more). Well, you don't have covered that much as before, but the important parts are there. Surgeries, Medical treatments, Therapies and so on.You may shout that it is expensive and so on, but I bet you think otherwise if you need a surgery and can't pay it because it is too expensive.So all in all: A Healthcare system isn't the dumbest idea ever. You may not need it now, but we all get older (at least I hope so).

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 01:55:24 pm
content: My Windows 7 machine has been nagging me for weeks that it could not register, I need to enter a valid product key. So I enter the one THEY EMAILED ME. It tells me it cannot activate, enter a valid product key. I give up and use windows for those few unbearable minutes I need it. Week later, I turn the VM on, same thing. Week later, same story. Finally it tells me I have five days or my computer is going to blow up or something. So I try to use their activation software, it tells me to call a number but doesn't tell me the number. Finally I go to the damn email Microsoft sent me with the product key THEY SENT ME that apparently is invalid, I lie my way through the stupid voice message system and get to talk to some lady in india who likes to talk while I am talking.First she tells me, after getting my first name and my email address, that she has to put me on hold for a minute to help me. I ask her what exactly she is going to do to help me when she has absolutely no information about me or my system. Oh that's right, so what is your product key. So then I have to read this stupid 40 character string of gobbledeygook to her after which she puts me on hold. The she comes back, tells me that IS A VALID KEY and she has no idea why my shit windows won't activate. Then I get to open this applet that gives me an even LONGER string of numbers which I must read off, then she returns me an equally long string of 45 freaking numbers. Finally, she assures me, it is activated. I ask her why I had to do this, she says she doesn't know. I ask her am I going to have to do this every time she says no but I WILL HAVE TO DO IT EVERY YEAR.Most people use this shit software. If they will put up with this nonsense, RFID implants and hand scanners for free lunch are a walk in the park - they're a "convenience."I fucking hate Microsoft's software, and more and more I am hating that anyone tolerates this nonsense. This shit is indoctrinating society into becoming numbers in a vast machine of consumerism.Fuck Windows.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 03:09:59 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 11, 2012, 10:00:48 amNo no no, it's "Communism"!*said in a Texan accent*

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 03:57:05 pm
content: You are welcome to try out our healthcare system..........

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 04:11:25 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 11, 2012, 11:27:00 amDidn't Australia have government run healthcare? I may be wrong but I was thinking they got rid of it because it didn't work! I don't live there so I have no idea.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 04:17:03 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on October 11, 2012, 01:55:24 pmExactly how government healthcare will work. You will die before seeing the doctor. So why have doctors just have someone read your last rites.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 06:55:58 pm
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 11, 2012, 04:17:03 pmYour propaganda shit gets boring.

author: M0BSW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 07:04:20 pm
content: What worries me is that what ever the Americans do 10 years later the sheep in goverment in the UK follow, like little lap dogs, they'll turn us into the mindless Borg.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 07:09:43 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on October 11, 2012, 06:55:58 pmBlock it!

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 07:38:27 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--I looked for the AOL article, but I could not find it, so I do not know if there is anything to this. I usually look for a well known source for any interesting development I find. The quotations from the bill in the Snopes are not fleshed out enough to prove the allegations made, in my opinion, and the comments below mention that this is a version of the legislation that was never passed. So this this stuff about the chip refers only to language in a bill that the Democrats tried to pass, not passed, and so, at most represents intentions, not passed legislation. So I will have to brand this one unproven, and false. There are plenty of reasons to object to a complete Government takeover of the Medical Industry, without this one.--Now, Poptones has said:1) "F****ing neocons will stop at nothing to instill fear. It's the only way they know to lead."2) "I f****ing hate Microsoft's software, and more and more I am hating that anyone tolerates this nonsense. This sh** is indoctrinating society into becoming numbers in a vast machine of consumerism. F**k Windows."--Ah yes, more gibbering spittle flecked hatred instead of reasoned argumentation. Dave and the moderators have no sooner gotten this Blog on an even keel, than a new Troll with more Trollhouse Cookies arises. Poptones has now gone from accusing anyone that points out that UK Wind is performing way below its promised levels, of being Oil Company Shills, to gibbering bite the furniture hatred. He hates Windows. He hates people who "tolerate" Windows, huh. Hatred seem to be a major theme. Now Dave, who provides this Blog free of charge for our enjoyment does not sprinkle his commentary (which is never shy) with profanity, why should anyone else.Now, Dave has said: "Only if you can afford healthcare, otherwise you'll die early."--Under the coming plan, even if you can afford healthcare, if the only source of it ,the Government decides, you are not worth the trouble, you will die early as well, and the Government will not refund any money to your family. My guess would be that under "Obamacare" healthcare will be rationed. The statement that "If you like your Doctor, you will be able to keep him [or her, SIC]" has already been proven false. Likewise with the assertions that it will not cover abortion, and that you will be able to keep your present insurance plan. I just do not think that a wholesale takeover of one sixth of the economy is necessary, but it does hasten the day when the World is just one big institution, and we are it inmates."I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. "Margaret Thatcher 1925 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: gxti
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 07:44:06 pm
content: This is the most insightful, informative and on-topic thread in the history of the universe. Better close it now before it goes downhill.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 08:37:32 pm
content: Exactly how government healthcare will work.Except we ALREADY have government health care - it's called medicaid and Medicare, which covers most retirees and the disabled. No death panels. No one telling you where you can go see a doctor. Unless you count all those who presently can't GET insurance because the corporate INSURANCE COMPANY "death panels" tell you you're going to die or you can find your own way to pay that 100,000 dollar treatment out of your own pocket.The plans are for regulating insurers - again, not government health care... unless you can't afford something else. Then you get... wait for it... medicaid, or you get some assistance to help you pay for one of the same plans as everyone else gets to choose.Not government health care. But a neocon will never admit this. Even Romney claims he wants to appeal obamacare, but all he talks about replacing it with is obamacare with a different label on it.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 08:49:10 pm
content: Obviously you never served in the military. The health care in military is government healthcare and it sucks.When the government controls it....it is government heAlthcare!

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 09:05:02 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Poptones has said, without the profanity this time, that "Unless you count all those who presently can't GET insurance because the corporate INSURANCE COMPANY "death panels" tell you you're going to die..."--Ah yes, those evil Corporate Insurance Companies that will not provide insurance to the dying, or those with pre-existing conditions. That is because they are trying to stay in business so that thier customers will have insurance. Of course it must be admitted that Insurance Companies are "Evil" profit making enterprises owned by "Evil filthy rich stockholders"--You, might also note that the Corporate Insurance Companies will not sell you home insurance that covers your burned down house, after it has burned down, the evil bastards require that you buy insurance before you house burns down. And, similarly for trying to buy insurance to cover a car accident after the accident, these crafty evil profit makers, will stop at nothing to fuel their greed. We should just put them all out of business and let the Government handle the whole mess, and while we are at it the Evil Energy Companies as well. Maybe the list would be shorter if we just listed the Free Market Enterprises the Statists do not want to confiscate."I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled."P. G. Wodehouse 1881 1975Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 10:16:49 pm
content: Fun fact: Last year in the USA, 45,000 deaths were attributable to lack of health insurance. (1)That's almost fourteen 9/11's per year. If the money was directed to healthcare instead of invading countries, funding the military-industrial complex and buying more tanks, I wonder what the effect would be on the population. Heck, it might even improve the economy - after all, people who are unhealthy cannot work, which means less spending, and less jobs. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.We have the NHS in the UK. It is one of the best healthcare systems in the world. It costs around $3,500 per capita to us brits. The USA cost is $7,500 per capita. (2) Which system is more efficient and doesn't leave people to die if they can't afford to pay? Also, I might say that this country has better healthcare quality than the USA ... which came last in a survey on healthcare quality. (3)The good thing about the NHS is you only pay what you can afford. Everyone contributes and for example if you require cancer treatment that might cost hundreds of thousands of pounds you only contribute a small NI payment. You do pay for some things - for example, glasses after age 16 or under age 65 (IIRC), most prescription meds (though heavily subsidised and sometimes free in some cases), and dentistry among others... but in general, it's all freely provided. They completely, over a two year period gave me braces and fixed my teeth, which would have cost a lot more in the good old US of A - I doubt I'd even be able to afford it, despite the great improvement in quality of life it has brought. Oh, and it's virtually impossible to sue a doctor in this country, so they aren't constantly doing pointless tests for fear of missing one small thing then getting sued over it.You're right. Healthcare insurance companies can't afford to sell cover to people who have cancer or other life threatening diseases; and they shouldn't be required to. I don't know how the US got into the situation it is right now. I have no idea what will cure it but I tell you what won't? Doing nothing and making silly political arguments. What needs to happen is free healthcare. It should be a fundamental right. Whether it is mandatory or state-provided insurance or implemented otherwise... I don't know. I'd personally vouch for an NHS-style system, but I know it would essentially mean the entire healthcare business gets turned on its head.Sources:1.http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_(PPP)_per_capita3.http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 10:29:05 pm
content: Quote from: Achilles on October 11, 2012, 01:53:12 pmPut simply you are dumb if you do not have a national universal healthcare system. The US is the only country stupid enough not to have one, because they somehow equate it to being an evil "socialist" thing.And as result people in the US die because they cannot afford health care, it's a disgrace. That does not happen in Australia or any other country with a universal health care system.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 10:36:43 pm
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 11, 2012, 04:11:25 pmNo, we did not get rid of our government run universal health care. It works just fine, like it does in every country that adopted it. As far as I know, no country that has adopted it has abandoned it, because it works.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(Australia)Some things are good and bad with it, like everything, but the fact is no one dies because they cannot afford health care or do not have insurance because they lost their job etc. And that's the whole point of universal health care, if you get sick, you get treated, regardless of your socio-economic status. No one has to worry about their health because they lost their job.If a homeless bum on the street has a heart attack, they will get immediately treated by the best doctors in town.Dave.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 10:37:05 pm
content: Ah yes, those evil Corporate Insurance Companies that will not provide insurance to the dying, or those with pre-existing conditions.What about those evil hospitals? The ones with emergency rooms that are required by law to accept patients they know will likely never pay the bill? We already have "socialized medicine" we pay the bill for it every time we go to the doctor. We also pay the bill for it in the form of Billions in uncollected debt.There's a reason we have LAWS. Sorry if it offends you but the quest for a dollar is not the universal fucking law of nature. We require hospitals t take emergent patients because we, as a society, are saying we will not turn away someone in mortal danger.That is, unless they're dying a slow, miserable death.Or they might.Then, they're on their own.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:05:03 pm
content: One thing that should be mentioned is that those who oppose public healthcare want those who can't afford it to die. They won't admit it, but they want that bum on the street "disappear". They want the riffraff to "go away". They think these people are worthless, that certain minorities, members of certain races, members of the lower classes etc. are worthless and don't deserve medical treatment. They think they themselves will never be ill or will always have enough money to not be one of "those".All this talk about health care quality is just a red herring. It is not about quality. It is about money and getting rid of those they hate.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:11:13 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 10, 2012, 10:36:37 pmNo worse than using a keypad. Most schools you have to put in your school ID before you buy lunch because some kids get reduced priced lunch or free lunch depending on his/her family's economic status. I get neither but I do have money on my lunch account so that I don't have to bring money to school everyday. It's like a bit debit card for lunch.Sure it's gross...but how about every door knob, desk, book, pencil, whatever...it's all gross. Doesn't mean you have to make it more gross..but in the scheme of things, it's whatever.

author: johnboxall
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:16:19 pm
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 11, 2012, 04:11:25 pmThis is what we have -http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/medicare/medicareOf course you can also have your own private health insurance through a variety of providers, and also use private hospitals at your/their expense. The Federal Government even subsidises PHI (subject to a means test) to try and keep people out of the public system.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:21:00 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Tom66 has said "What needs to happen is free healthcare. It should be a fundamental right."--The notion of "free healthcare" violates the Laws of Thermodynamics and the Free Lunch principle. Hell if its free, lets make everything free. I think what Tom really means is "Lets have the US Government take over the entire industry at taxpayer expense." Lets throw in a free house. If its free then nobody is paying, right? What good is medical care if you have no where to live. Because we all know that the wages of working people are an infinite cornucopia, that is why the USSR is the wealthiest country in the world. Come to the UK, bring all your wives and their children, put them all on welfare, and vote Labor.--Now Dave has said "As far as I know, no country that has adopted it has abandoned it."--Freebies are notoriously hard to revoke, n'est-ce pas?--Dave has also said "If a homeless bum on the street has a heart attack, they will get immediately treated by the best doctors in town."--Here, Dave may have inadvertently left the impression that in the US, street bums are left to die and then the garbage truck is called. In fact this is not the case. An ambulance is called and the heart attack victim is treated at the nearest Hospital qualified to treat heart attacks, that being quicker that searching for the best doctors in town.--I have a friend who is by choice a homeless person. He has no money and no insurance. He may quite possibly soon die of cancer. He has had countless operations and treatments at at state of the art facility (the same one my family goes to).--Poptones has said, profanely and with extreme hostility as usual "Sorry if it offends you but the quest for a dollar is not the universal f***ing law of nature."--Pop just might be wrong about this one. Try hiring workers for no money. And, just where does he think the money for these programs comes from, if not from people who pay taxes with dollars they quested for.BoredAtWork has said "All this talk about health care quality is just a red herring. It is not about quality. It is about money and getting rid of those they hate."--I see, so anytime anybody opposes more growth in government it is just because they are "Evil Genocidal Maniacs" No other possibility exits. Give this man as sidearm and make him a Commisar, he will know what to do. Speaking of extreme spittle flecked gibbering hatred, here we have the latest Trollhouse Cookie.--Good point by FenderBender."He was born ignorant, and has been losing ground ever since."Fred Allen 1894 1956Best RegardsClear Ether

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:24:58 pm
content: Quote from: FenderBender on October 11, 2012, 11:11:13 pmYes, it is. Because almost every single student forms a line and touches the pad in exactly the same way, systematically every day, and right before they eat.You don't get nearly the same result with keyboards, or even door knobs etc.Dave.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:42:46 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 11, 2012, 11:24:58 pmI wouldn't be too sure of that. Schools are disgusting places. I'm not endorsing hand scanners, just saying...kids are nasty, schools are nasty. hand scanner is nasty...but so is the table they sit at, the money they pay with, the books they study with. Perhaps a finger scanner would be better..not as much contact.We have 3,600 kids on our 5 acre campus. It's a health nightmare. I don't think a hand scanner is going to make too much of a difference. It might speed up the lunch line...however, a keypad is equally as easy, so I'm not sure why in the hell they would use a hand scanner...it seems like problems waiting to occur. I agree that hand scanners just seem pointless from a practical standpoint unless they are like 100% accurate the first scan...

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2012, 11:45:42 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 11, 2012, 11:21:00 pmStraw-man argument (you're good at them!) Housing actually is a human right, but at the moment, I agree, it's not something that can be done. Except, it is... mostly. You can get a council house here under certain conditions and most of the rent is covered, I think - I'm not an expert. It's a dire place to live though. Have you ever seen the buildings? About 3% of people are homeless in this country. Anyway, this is not a debate about housing. Leave it on healthcare for now. I would rather be healthy and homeless, than home and ill because I can't afford treatment.I don't suggest the US government take over the healthcare system as that creates a lot of problems. In the UK the NHS is separate from the government - it's funded to the tune of about £96 bn, but run as a separate organisation. That way political influence is limited, and budgeting is run by the individual hospitals. And it doesn't mean no one pays! Of course it doesn't! People pay WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD. That is a fair system. If you earn more, you put more towards the healthcare system. What is the problem with this idea? Is it unfair to richer people? £96 bn funds 60 million people's healthcare at £1,600 per capita (add on costs for prescriptions etc to get £2,200/$3,500 USD.)The UK government has statistics on the number of people travelling abroad for UK healthcare and how much it costs us. Guess how much? 50%? 20%? 10%? Think about three orders of magnitude smaller... 0.03% of the NHS budget. Barely a speck of ink on the accountant's workbook.It's Labour by the way (we use 'u') and they're actually quite centre aligned (leaning left) rather than left like the Democrats.

author: perfect_disturbance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 01:16:24 am
content: Not to distract from this energetic healthcare debate. But what do all the non-americans on this board care. Its funny I never hear people here arguing what the British should do or complaining that the Australian prime minister is stupid. Why are you all so worried about what we are doing? As fas as I'm concerned that's the great thing about their being different countries your happy with how your healthcare system works and I'm happy with mine.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 01:53:13 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on October 12, 2012, 01:16:24 ama) Because I have a lot of Yankee friends. Forgive me for caring and wanting to be part of the debate.b) America is the world leader in bat-shit crazy government, politics, financial excess, and international bullying. And a lot of what America does can have global repercussions that does actually effect us outside the US. And it's morbidly fascinating if anything. Better than reality TV that's for sure. Everyone likes to watch a train wreck in slow motionDave.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:03:31 am
content: Why? Because of the mentality behind it. And the fact that people are actually suffering needlessly as a result. People get thrown out of hospitals and onto the curb, because they can't pay? People unable to admit themselves for consultation, because of credit debt? People unable to afford life saving medication? Shit like that makes my blood boil. I can't believe such of practices are consciously tolerated. I think it's rather sad and pathetic for "modern" country, such as the USA.Here is another reason why: For a healthy, cohesive society to exist, one needs to look beyond the selfish needs of the fortunate. Living in a society means helping one another when there is a need and also allow the individual to flourish. Being charitable and social is about lifting the standards of living and establishing a basic safety net for everyone; because anyone can potentially be in the same position as the underprivileged for a myriad of reasons.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:08:33 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on October 12, 2012, 01:16:24 amThat's because (I would presume) you are:a) employedb) insuredc) likely have no chronic condition making you reliant upon the medical systemDave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:14:30 am
content: FWIT one of the things I don't like about our universal health care, is that everyone pretty much pays tho same, and there is no (financial) incentive to actually live a healthy lifestyle.I like paying for medicare of course, because that's how the system works. But I'm (who lives a healthy livestyle) paying the same as a morbidly obese chain smoker with preventable diabetes etcIt doesn't seem right. But I don't think there is an easy solution for this.Dave.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:25:44 am
content: Our healthcare system is in a poor state right now...we get it.

author: ablacon64
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:27:33 am
content: Healthcare in Brazil is ridiculous also, you're not alone.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:33:51 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on October 12, 2012, 01:16:24 amI agree with you. I'm proud to be an American but that doesn't mean everyone here agrees with what our government does or says. I love what our country stands for. What happens is a different story. No need to tell us what's wrong with our own country. I know this is general chat but damn sometimes it gets old, every time I log on, people are bashing our government or have one of our problems under the microscope. I don't know what people expect of America. We're a great country. We're a world leader. But we aren't perfect and just about every American will admit to that.

author: akcoder
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:49:00 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 12, 2012, 02:14:30 amI try to stay out of politics. I personally think both parties in the US are asshats. But I'll weigh in on this one :-)I'm a registered Republican, but only because I'm a small government kind of guy. That said, my opinion on the health care system in the US is that which we currently have is unsustainable. The private healthcare market is eating working folks alive. I currently pay ~$500 a month for my portion for myself, my wife and two kids. Thats almost 7% of my income. And thats justmyportion.A few years back I got a letter from my employer (a 2000+ person company) telling me that their portion plus my portion of the health insurance was just a tad under $25k / year. And I would not consider the plan that we have a "Cadillac" plan by any stretch.I don't know about you, but I think that is flat unsustainable. The only solution as I see it is universal healthcare with a co-pay. Want to go see the doc for anything other than preventative care? Pony up $25. That will keep people from going to the doctor/hospital to get aspirin/Tylenol/etc. $25 shouldn't be to big a burden, but should be enough to keep people from abusing the system.-dan

author: perfect_disturbance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 02:53:34 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 12, 2012, 02:08:33 amYour right on all 3 counts. But if I were in unemployed I would qualify for Medicaid. If I had no insurance because I couldn't afford it I would also probably qualify for Medicaid. And I have friends and family that have chronic medical conditions and many of them are pleased with their insurance. I don't think it's as bad as many of you think. I've lived here all my life and never heard of someone being thrown out of a hospital because they can't pay. Does our system have flaws yes (for one even if you have insurance it can be pretty expensive.) But Evey system does. My mom is from Canada and I remember my Grandma waiting over a year for a cataract surgery that it would have taken weeks to get here. It's a tradeoff. For me and 52% of Americans we like it better than the way it's heading.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:12:30 am
content: Yes. I think the American media and the world media likes to make us look like shit...because that's what the media does.It's not that bad. It is for some, and it's not right, but it's not as terrible as is perceived. But it's weak. Weak foundation. Yes, right on that. It can't go on forever like this.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:25:54 am
content: If you think the system we have now is working, you need to open your eyes.Unpaid debt is a HUGE problem. Every time you go to the hospital, pay insurance, go to the doctor, buy groceries, get gas, shop at walmart... you pay because of health care. Because every large business has to offer health care coverage which means premiums. So their costs rise, so prices rise. And the reason for all this is that Millions of Americans have unpaid medical debt which they will never be able to cover. The hospiotal has to charge more so those who can actually pay will cover the costs of everyone else. And the insurance companies have to pay the hospitals, and the workers and the companies have to pay the insurance companies... it's a clusterfuck. No, it's a circle jerk and our economy is the pivot man.http://www.thecincinnatiherald.com/news/2012-08-04/News/Majority_of_Ohio_adults_do_not_have_unpaid_medical.htmlThat's the ticket. MOST americans don't have unpaid medical debt. But a large minority do. Not surprisingly, this minority shares many commonalities with most other minorities in our society: poor, under educated, poor credit rating, unable to own property, unable to get good employment, unable to stay in school... This unpaid debt screws their credit score which makes them even less likely to get out of their poverty. So there they remain, getting fatter and sicker off the food they eat because they can't afford vegetables and produce and decent breads and cereals.And we're all paying. Not just in taxes, but in everything we buy and in everything we own.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:26:54 am
content: Quote from: akcoder on October 12, 2012, 02:49:00 amI really don't understand this "registered" thing. How does that work?Here in Oz, you have to vote, you don't/can't "register" for any party, you just turn up and vote for whoever pissed you off the leastQuoteThat is absurd!Only a fool would think that is sustainable in any way.In Oz, if you don't have private health insurance (basic hospital cover is like $30-$40/month or something IIRC) and earn over a certain amount then you pay an extra medicare levy of between 1%-1.5% of your income.Now with Sagan we pay about $150/month for private cover for all of us + obstetrics etc, and that's a top tier plan. Plus as a working person over a certain threshold we pay 1.5% of income a year as a basic Medicare charge. We don't pay the above additional surcharge because we have private cover.So well under $4K/year for our entire family on top tier private cover.http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-privatehealth-consumers-medlevy.htmWe could easily forego private cover and still be protected for everything. It's just a choice of whether you want public or private hospital. And it actually cheaper to have a basic private plan than pay the surcharge for not having it (or it used to be).Dave.

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:40:26 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 12, 2012, 03:26:54 amWell you can vote for whoever you like, obviously, just when you register to vote, you can identify yourself as a republican, democrat, other. If you want to vote in a primary for a certain party, sometimes you need to be registered as a member of that party. Doesn't always work like that. Part of it may just be for statistical purposes.

author: perfect_disturbance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:40:56 am
content: Just curious Dave but what's your tax rate like in Aus? If you need a surgery like cataracts or knee surgery what are the wait times? How long are waits in emergency rooms? What are tort laws like in Aus? It definitely sounds like healthcare is more affordable there but as has been pointed out before there is no such thing as a free lunch so I'm curious how the cost is covered. Maybe Drs get paid less or there are less greedy business types taking a cut I'd be curious where the difference is.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:46:24 am
content: The "register" thing is to help keep the two parties as the only parties. There are all sorts of rules including having certain number of registered voters in a party in order to qualify for matching campaign funds. If your party is small and you can't get at least two percent (whoops, they changed the rules after Ross Perot almost made it and now it's five percent) don't vote for your "party" candidate for President then you don't get any matching funds.Some states won't allow you to vote outside your party in primaries. They have repub/dem primaries at differnt times and if you're a repub, you can't nominate a dem for office. Again, it's just another way of making sure those in the middle remain as much an unheard minority as possible.

author: perfect_disturbance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:49:27 am
content: Quote from: FenderBender on October 12, 2012, 03:40:26 amKeep in mind that registering as a republican or democrat is different than registering as a voter although in many cases you do both at the same time.Stating party affiliation is required in some states to vote in a primary this is to keep people from voting in more than one primary to select the other parties weaker candidate.General voter registration is a mechanism to prevent ballot box stuffing or other voter fraud by recording in advance that you intend to vote and where. So someone can't vote at 5 different voting locations and things like that.

author: akcoder
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:53:32 am
content: Quote from: FenderBender on October 12, 2012, 03:40:26 amThat is the only reason I'm registered for any party. I'll actually probably sit out this coming presidential election, but only because IMHO to quote Southpark; my choices are between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

author: akcoder
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 04:05:41 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 12, 2012, 03:26:54 amOnce I started really piecing together how much my health care was costing me, thats when I switched to being in favor of universal coverage. Mind you the amount I pay for health coverage doesn't actually cover anything until I've spent $500 in the year. And then the insurance company will pay for 80% of "usual and customary charges" until I've hit my "out of pocket" limit. Then they cover 100% of "usual and customary charges."And that is why I rarely go to the doctor, even though I have coverage.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 07:05:49 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on October 12, 2012, 03:40:56 amhttp://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.aspx?doc=/content/12333.htmIf you are only in the public system, wait times for elective surgery can be fairly long I believe. In private, it's pretty much straight away.Emergency wait times depend the severity of your issue. It can range from instant, to many hours in a public hospital.I don't know the in's and out's of the differences that make our (and other universal health care systems) systems affordable compared to the US system, but it has a lot to do with corporate greed I'm sure. Most other universal health care system work on similar tax rates and percentages to as our Oz system I believe, so the US must be doing something horribly wrong... I don't think it's any one major thing.I don't know anything about tort laws in Oz, but if mean medical lawsuits etc, then they seem to be very few and far between here. We aren't a very litigious society.Dave.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 09:06:04 am
content: Quote from: perfect_disturbance on October 12, 2012, 01:16:24 amLets ask it the other way around. When has America stopped to tell the rest of the world how things should be run?QuoteYou apparently didn't follow the Julian Assange case very well. Or the discussion in Europe why the British don't start to do anything against the criminals harboring The City.QuoteI think that is pretty much taken care of. Googling "Juliar Giullard stupit" gives approximately 1,270,000 results.People discuss everything everyday. And I am sure one of the upcoming discussions wlil be why the EU didn't deserve the Peace Nobel Price.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 09:31:21 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on October 12, 2012, 09:06:04 amAs much as people think I like to rant about the US government, I can assure you I complain about the Oz government even more!Dave.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 11:32:03 am
content: all governments suck. who can say which is right and which is wrong.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 11:34:59 am
content: Quote from: FenderBender on October 12, 2012, 02:25:44 amYou said it. The problem is nobody knows how to fix it.

author: M0BSW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 01:14:44 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 11, 2012, 10:36:43 pmnot sure how your health scheme works Dave is it similar to ours in the UK NHS,paid out of wages for those who can , but service is free to every UK citizen, I just wonder if yours is the same.

author: M0BSW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 01:20:37 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 12, 2012, 01:53:13 amI personally have a lot of American friends , from the Radio Amateur world, some of which come and visit us & stay a while, I care very much what happens to them, not so keen to visit them in the US, as imigration think every human being is a terroist, and in my experience treat any visitor like bits of crap, and I'm white English born and bred, but that's another thread.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 03:06:00 pm
content: The NHS (National health service) gets a lot of stick from the press but I cant fault it it saved my life. At the end of July 2009 I found myself pissing blood and was diagnosed with renal carcinoma (Kidney cancer) on the first of September I had my right kidney and a piece of liver removed during a seven hour operation, they went in from the front leaving a 14 inch scar due to the size and lay of the tumor. To date I am clear of cancer and have not needed any chemo or radiation therapy, So what ever the nay Sayers do or say I know the public health service works and in many ways is far better than the private health services where the bottom line is profit, my brother in laws brother was enrolled in a private health scheme by the company he worked for, on one of the annual check ups they decided that his prostate was smaller than usual and so he must have an exploratory operation to find out why so he was booked into the local BUPA hospital which is next door to the NHS hospital that I was in for my OP.Well they managed to give him an infection failed to do anything about it as it was the end of the week and the staff was all going away for the weekend, so on Sunday they had to call out the air ambulance to fly him to Adenbrooks hospital in Cambridge but by this time it was too late to save him, if he had been in an NHS hospital there would have been a far higher staffing level and he might well have been saved even more likely is he would not have had an operation to find out why his prostate was smaller than usual as it would not have been deemed as required.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 04:29:52 pm
content: Lucky you have a health system. Here public hospital is BYO everything, from food to bedding to dressings for your stay. They found a body this year of a patient that went missing a few months before.......... New administrator went in last week, left after 3 days for "Personal reasons". Waiting list for "Urgent" can be days, many die in the queue awaiting the few doctors left, to say nothing about the medication they have, basically you get what they have, which could be anything, irrespective of what is wrong with you.Go there for AZT and you get given generic paracetamol, or even birth control pills.

author: ablacon64
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 06:15:57 pm
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 12, 2012, 11:34:59 amLong run, but it can be fixed. First, governments have nothing to give, they don't create, produce or improve anything, they have to take to give. How? Taxes. You'd be better if you managed your own income instead of paying the government to receive back 1% of all it takes from you, if you do get that.In Brazil we work 5 months a year to pay taxes, if the government was not involved in anything I would give a better use for that money. Governments must guarantee only your negative rights, that mean it should take care of your safety only, and give you the right to fully protect your property (in Brazil, if an assassin comes into my house to kill my wife and son, if I kill him first, I go to jail). So I'm a libertarian (do not know the right english word for that).

author: ablacon64
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2012, 07:03:59 pm
content: Interesting video a friend just sent me (audio in English, subtitles in portuguese):That is scary...

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 12:17:48 am
content: A lot of misconceptions here. The US health care system was pretty good before obamacare. All the 'people are dying because they can't get insurance' was typical political BS. In my 40 years of living in the US, I have never heard of anyone being denied medical care. Even when it was several million dollars for a homeless person, the hospitals performed the necessary procedures. Obama care for me did nothing but harm. I lost my primary doctor, he wasn't willing to accept what the government wants him to be paid. My medication cost doubled and now I may be forced to take an insurance plan I do not want.The role of the government needs to be what the founders of the country wanted it to be, as little government as possible. The nanny state is killing the USA, people whining left and right about how they are entitled to something and the government should provide it. Get off your asses and do something besides sitting on the couch and complaining, and no , voting for a president isn't going to do a single thing. People vote , say they have done their part now it is the politicians that will do everything else. News flash.....They will lie, conceal, deceive, pay off whomever they have to to get in office, once elected they can do whatever the hell they please and there is nothing anyone can do about it for 4 years. It is truly a screwed up system , one where the corporations and bankers are in control and the president sits on his throne and moves his lips so that the USA can appear to have a leader and all the sheep that are the american public will follow right along, all the way to off the cliff.If you want to know why medical coverage is outrageously high look back to the 1930's and creation of insurance plans. Originally doctors made no more money than the local tailor. One company who wanted to stand out decided to offer a plan where the company would pay for the medical cost, healthy employees are hard working employees was the mindset. The downside is that some doctors saw this as a way to collect more money so they raised their prices just a small amount, after all they were not dealing with a person now, they were working for a corporation with lots of money. Bankers liked the idea of insurance, something people pay money for , but may never use, they created their own insurance companies. To compete one insurance company offered more services than another, this included getting hospitals to make deals where the hospital would get paid more from one company than another. To cover the cost insurance companies raised prices on premiums. Premiums increased, insurance companies grew larger and the hospitals and doctors started to think that they should be paid even more. The doctors increased their rates, and the insurance companies paid more to keep their customers, and in turn raised their premiums. Before long the whole thing was a self sustaining profit machine. Doctors didn't worry any more about whether one patient could pay, they had the insurance company they could bill.You end up with a cycle of increasing medical cost, increasing pay outs from insurance , increasing premiums. It would be like someone charging you $500 to change the oil in your car. You can't afford that amount of money, but there is an insurance plan that covers it, you pay them just $400 to get what shouldn't have cost $500 in the first place. Insurance companies should be called something else, organized crime, because that is what they really are, they are no different than paying off the local mobster to have access to something you should be allowed to access already without them . You pay one thing to get something else that shouldn't cost that much to begin with, but does because the insurance company exist, the medical establishment knows they exist, and each one feeds the other.How do you fix it, well you really can't in a free society. The free market can charge what it wants, but the consumer can choose NOT to pay it. If everyone refused to pay the high cost of healthcare, companies would be forced to reduce prices, just like every other good or service sold. It is only worth what people are willing to pay.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 12:27:21 am
content: The US health care system was pretty good before obamacare.You're clearly insane. Where the hell do you get your news? FOX?Obamacare hasn't even gone into effect yet save for a tiny part. Most of it doesn't go into effect until 2014.Yes, people are dying because they cannot get insurance and cannot afford care. Just google it you'll find real life examples.http://abcnews.go.com/Health/insurance-24-year-dies-toothache/story?id=14438171

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 12:37:13 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 13, 2012, 12:27:21 amactually the effect of it has been my insurance premiums tripling, my deductibles going up, prescriptions going up or going over the counter so insurance won't pay for it, and YOU ARE RIGHT is hasn't gone into effect yet. So tell me, how bad do you think its goin to be when it does take affect? By then my taxes are so high I can't put food on the table or afford to put gas in the truck to get to work.Do some research and you will find out government health care will destroy this country.Who are you watching? NBC? The only thing they do right is hockey!BYW...I do not want to pay for someone else to get health care because they are too damn lazy to get off the sofa and work. I work two jobs to supply my family with what I can to keep them safe and feed them and still living on reserve. Why should I support a lazy sack of shit too?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 12:45:24 am
content: Umm, no-one dying without healthcare?First the study with 45,000 dying because they are without insurance -http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/Secondly, there are cases like this:http://abcnews.go.com/Health/insurance-24-year-dies-toothache/story?id=14438171#.UHi4hIqPWcEThe role of the government should be (imo) to manage the services required by citizens. I can see it being small being a good thing, so keep healthcare separate, like we do in the UK. NHS is not run by the government - just paid for by it. Funded directly through taxation.Some people can't genuinely afford healthcare as it is. Many people are unemployed, like the man in the ABC news article. Unemployment is 7.8% I think in the US, it hits even the best, it is hard to get a job nowadays. But the NHS would pay for the healthcare of that person in the UK, even if they aren't contributing to the healthcare fund. Thing is, you find pretty quickly you'll run out of money without doing work, so healthcare is usually the first to go. After all, you feel good now, and think that might continue forever (or until you can get a job again.) These people are not simply lazy, they are a result of financial turmoil.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 12:50:24 am
content: Insurance companies are trying the oldest trick in the book - make a last minute grasp at the golden nugget before it ends. Doctors are required to take less money from medicaied patients and many will stop taking them - so what? There are other doctors. Insurance will have limits on it, insurance companies are now trying to jack it up before regulations go into effect. Don't blame obamacare for that, it had to get through the house and senate. Guess who doesn't like regulation?Democrat reforms involve higher insurance rates. Republican reforms involve higher insurance rates. So get rid of the insurance companies... good luck. The houses won't pass a single payer plan because the insurance companies pay everyone off to brainwash the public that single payer is "socialism" and anti american.

author: twbranch
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:03:52 am
content: governments job is to protect the citizens not mother them. I agree healthcare needs to be available to all but for people to pay for others healthcare is absurd. Here in the US the government always passes laws that require people to do things that they should do anyway. what do think people did before insurance?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:05:12 am
content: Quote from: twbranch on October 13, 2012, 01:03:52 amDied because modern medicine didn't exist?

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:05:45 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 13, 2012, 12:27:21 amI don't pay attention to what media says, they are all political shills.QuoteIt has gone into effect with lots of insurance companies, they can't just magically switch to a new policy on the day it starts, it takes time to make the transition and some companies are faster than others and have started to make changes now so they can be ready.Quote"Willis couldn't afford both, sohe chosethe pain medications."That man died for one simple reason, he did like most people , oh it is just antibiotics I can do without those. When he started feeling worse did he return to the ER ? Nope, he chose not to thinking he would be okay. If he had gone back to the ER and they saw it had gotten worse do you think they would have told him, sorry your dying, get out ? The main cause from illness isn't lack of money, it is lack of people willing to care for themselves, to be willing to go get help rather than ignoring symptoms, to take personal responsibility rather than doing the poor me routine.The doctors even said so ""People don't realize that dental disease can cause serious illness," said Dr. Irvin Silverstein, a dentist at the University of California at San Diego. "The problems are not just cosmetic. Many people die from dental disease.""I have seen many people come back to an ER when they couldn't afford the medicine and after speaking with the staff arrangements can be made, they have samples and funds to cover necessary treatment, they just don't offer it to everyone because everyone will take it because it is free. Do you really think any doctor is going to go ' well your going to die without the medicine, sorry you can't get it, now go home and die ?" . Get real, people need to quit blaming everyone else and take personal responsibility for their lives and not complain to the government every time something doesn't go their way. It would be great if everything were free and everyone had everything they ever wanted, but that isn't reality, someone has to pay for all this stuff and that is something people don't want to admit, they rather demonize people that have more than they do , it is easier to complain than to act.It wouldn't matter if everyone had 100% health coverage because the problem isn't they can't afford health care so they are dying from diabetes or heart problems, the problem is they don't and are not willing to take care of themselves. I know probably 10 people who know smoking is unhealthy, they know it causes cancer, but they don't give a damn now because they are healthy now, those people are not going to get check ups no matter how free the care is.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:08:43 am
content: It has gone into effect with lots of insurance companies, they can't just magically switch to a new policy on the day it startsBullshit. You really must be a fox viewer.Payers are ALREADY paying for other's health care. How can you not understand this? It's no differnt than buying something at wal mart: the more shoplifters there are, the more shit costs. This is so increidbly simple how can people be so blinded by "I am not gonna pay for everyone else?"YOU ALREADY DO

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:11:29 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 13, 2012, 01:08:43 amI don't get cable or satellite tv so it is physically impossible. Insults, the last resort of the uneducated.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:13:08 am
content: Well, at least you are smart enough to realize watching FOX news is an insult.I don't have cable por satellite either. In fact, I don't have a TV. So what? FOX doesn't have a website?

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 01:28:01 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 13, 2012, 01:13:08 amDid you even read the Harvard study to see how they determined the numbers ? They interviewed people 1 time and if that person died in the next 14 years they assumed it was from lack of health insurance, that is poor work, but not surprising when you see who funded the work,http://www.pnhp.org/about/about-pnhpDon't just read something off the net and assume it is the honest truth, always look at the source.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 05:27:46 am
content: My dentist is not contracted to my medical aid, so I pay cash. Works out a lot cheaper, and good for both me and him, price wise. Good work, and he has small hands, and a great chairside manner. It would be expensive if I needed specialised dentistry, but an annual checkup will catch problems before they become big, and when the treatment is both low cost and effective.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 06:24:22 am
content: Quote from: M0BSW on October 12, 2012, 01:20:37 pmTrust me, you should make lots of friends with those damn chinese in china, for sure they don't grope your kids or grannies at the immigration checkpoints.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 06:56:38 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Poptones has said to Ptricks "You're clearly insane. Where the hell do you get your news? FOX?"--Ah, yes another Trollhouse Cookie from the latest foul mouthed hater. Why not just make the argument, why the need to insult and curse. Does he not know that unrestrained hatred and hostility, does him more harm than the people he disagrees with. Why does he always make it personal. Thank your lucky stars that if you do not have to work for someone with this kind of respect for others. Just imagine what a living hell it would be to have to work for someone that decided to hate your immortal guts, just because you took the wrong side of a single issue. Yep, he is long on hostility, hatred, cursing, and making it personal, but short on direct answers to challenges, and links to sources."When people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."Isaac Asimov 1920 - 1992

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 07:59:01 am
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 13, 2012, 06:56:38 amSince you asked for it, here you go ...http://www.cbp.gov/custoday/mar2000/bodyscan.htm, pick you choice between body scan orgropingerr.. I mean pat down.If you opted for body scan ....->http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2010/11/16/leaked-images-body-scanners-hit-web/or this ->http://bodyscannertruth.com/?p=1596Something to spark the imagination ->Donna D'Errico in stars and stripesIf you choose to get thegroping(damn.. blame it on my keyboard) , pat down ...->http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/24/2910413/immigration-agent-pleads-guilty.htmlGeezz Sarge, where you've been all this time ? Living in the cave ?

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 08:26:06 am
content: Dear BravoV:--The quote you attribute to me is only partially accurate. I am familiar with all the sources you posted, and I do not disagree with the thrust of your argument. You are responding to a post I made in criticism of of hostility, cursing, and making things personal, to which your answer seems to me to be a complete non sequitur. Please post an accurate quote of what I said that you disagree with, so I can respond appropriately. Or are you going to post some more links that no one disputes, and make every one guess just what it is you are disputing.--And, by the way, I do not think Poptones would approve of you citing the hated Fox News."Happy for you to desoldering, please."Wun Hung Lo 1948 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 13, 2012, 08:31:32 am
content: The insurance company's are going the same way here in the UK but then so are their customers, after the recent flooding in some parts the insurance company's are either refusing to insure some people due to the fact that they are a greater risk and others are raising premiums across the board, the increased premiums is making some people and the media shout about it being unfair they are not in a flood area but their insurance is going up.The whole idea of insurance is that the many pay for the misfortunes of the few, a form of early socialism if you like.It is not you pay a pittance to some company that in the event of some personal disaster must magic up the money to pay for it and neither is a system where the fat cat share holders and bosses of the insurance company charge a huge fee to its customers in order to get massively rich while only paying out a token to the unfortunate one who have to make a claim or even denying the claim on fatuous grounds.The first insurance company's were of course the friendly societies and were run for the benefit of the members but they have been gobbled up by the banks and hedge funds now.I am not one for big government per see but the likes of the banks and hedge funds need bringing down and it takes regulation to do so regulation which over the past 30 years has been relentlessly striped away.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 12:52:05 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 12, 2012, 02:14:30 amBecause it's a slippery slope. Penalize someone for being fat? Then penalize someone for being a slow learner and needing more remedial education. It should be based on income.

author: bullet308
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 01:20:48 am
content: Want to know what a slimy, covered-in-pig-fat slippery slope looks like?Its the one you are standing at the head of when you don't have insurance and its a race between getting a job and loosing everything because you get sick.And dont think it cant happen to you. Because it can.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 01:27:24 am
content: Quote from: MikeK on October 15, 2012, 12:52:05 amNot exactly, but you could reward people for living a healthy lifestyle in some way. I know that sounds just like a wording difference, but the fact is that people whodeliberatelymake poor health lifestyle choicesdocost the economy (and the health system) alotof money.So there is a very valid argument for (financially) encouraging people to live a healthy lifestyle, as then everyone wins.We (in Oz) currently heavily tax smoking for example, and also have no GST on fresh food. So it's already happening.Dave.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 01:44:49 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 15, 2012, 01:27:24 amI don't disagree. But one could argue that you already benefit from a healthy lifestyle. You're healthier. The fat guy pays X dollars and winds up with all sorts of health problems. You pay X dollars and have a much healthier body. Sounds like you have the better deal to me.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 01:54:56 am
content: Quote from: MikeK on October 15, 2012, 01:44:49 amSure, that's the personal aspect to it.The other part of the personal aspect is that it still doesn't feel right when I pay the same medicare levy as the 150kg chain smoker. I already get a discount on my car for having no accidents for example, but the samei s not true for living a healthy lifestyle and never having to go to the doctor.But yes, I'm ultimately the winner either way.Then there is the more important community aspect of it where weallnot only pay more, but also have our health system overloaded with these people who make poor lifestyle health choices. Health system capacity that would be better utilised for the unfortunately sick, the way it should be.I of course support everyone'srightto make those choices if they so want, but when their choices impact impact me and my family (both financially, and possibly medically due to lack of resources), I think that makes the argument valid.Dave.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 01:56:59 am
content: Quote from: bullet308 on October 15, 2012, 01:20:48 amUmm, okay? My words may have come out the wrong way. A slippery slope refers to a possibly poor decision with possibly good intentions that, by its precedence, causes bigger problems than intended. A.k.a. "the thin edge of the wedge."I actually went through a period of a few years without health insurance. It sucks. I'm pro-universal-healthcare. People without health insurance insanely pay more for the same services than the insured.And what most Americans aren't aware of...Hospitals not only charge the uninsured more, but they then SUE them for not being able to pay. Yep, that's right. Happens all the time. Hospitals used to just accept it as part of their service, but not anymore. It's insane.

author: bullet308
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 02:03:10 am
content: My apologies. I have no idea what in the hell I thought I was responding to.Its been a rough week. :-/

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 10:25:09 am
content: the fact is that people who deliberately make poor health lifestyle choices do cost the economy (and the health system) a lot of moneyBut that's the American way. It's what drives the economy. It's not in the doctor's interest for their patients to be healthy because then they never get paid. It's not in the hospital's interest. It's not even in the insurance company's, because they get to drop you when you go over your limit or you become a risk.Obesity is what drives our economy. Bigger cars, bigger meals selling more food, corporate farms that use more fertilizer to grow more food so we can buy bigger portions, then buy drugs and lipsuction and gym memberships and stomach stapling to get the weight off. more sugar, more fat.. MORE BEANS!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 10:39:48 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 15, 2012, 10:25:09 amAnd that folks, is why hospitals (and health care) should be not-for-profit publicly funded and owned.Oops, sorry, that's socialism isn't it?Dave.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 11:07:21 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 15, 2012, 01:27:24 amWell, addictions are not a lifestyle choice and are not easily reverted. It is no longer the addict's choice. Medicine has nor real cure for addictions, so what is left is to treat the symptoms.The right ones to blame are the alcohol, tobacco, and if you like, the fast food industry. Instead of just taxing them, I would send every alcohol or smoking related health bill their way and make them pay through their nose for every damage they are doing. Further I would let them, and not society, pay for any anti-alcohol, anti-smoking campaign. The same, by the way, should happen for dangerous sports. Those benefiting from it should pay for the damage.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 11:38:46 am
content: All addictions start with a lifestyle choice. Same is being drunk, the number of times I have seen court reports where the mitigation has been the perpetrator was drunk or under the influence of whatever, the person had a choice to take that first drink or drug that led to the downward spiral,People are responsible for their actions.The fast food outlets should certainly be made to pay higher local taxes/rates due to the extra amount of rubbish that they produce and all alcohol outlets and producers should be made to pay for the damage they cause to society.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 11:54:14 am
content: In orgeon, virginia and washington spirits are taxed over 20 bucks a gallon. Here in AZ they're taxed at 3 a gallon. Most places seem to have them less than five, but it appears every state has a spirits tax. And most states except those where tobacco is produced have at least a 2 buck a pack tax. That's state taxes, no idea what feds chargeI have a huge weight problem, have most of my life. I was a sick kid until tonsils removed, then basically doubled in weight by the time I was in 2nd grade and it's been a struggle ever since. A couple times I smoked for a few months but I usually got over that pretty quick. Don't drink at all really, once or twice a year but I usually have some beer on hand for cooking. My cousin who's a couple years older than me once told me quite emphatically he was going to outlive me even while being a smoker because I am fat. Meanwhile I don't have diabetes or heart disease and he has had four heart attacks.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 12:23:40 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on October 15, 2012, 11:07:21 amThey are fully a lifestyle choice at the start.I don't think that blame goes away when you get addicted (which is well known/demonstrated will happen before you make the choice).QuotePlease define "dangerous sports". More people die or get wheelchair bound every year in car, motorcycle, and pedestrian accidents than every adventure sport combined.If it's legal, you should be covered like everyone else for doing ordinary things. "Dangerous sports" accidents are so far down in the cost noise it's not even worth thinking about, and they are just that, "accidents".I think there is a big difference between a "dangerous sport" and a bad lifestyle choice like smoking or morbid obesity. One is people actually living a fulfilling life when accidents happen (and stats show the accidents rates are very low). The other has concrete evidence that you almost certainly will live a shorter life and ultimately require a lot of medical care as a direct result.A friend of mine compressed half the vertebrae in his spine and spent a year in a wheelchair and a decade more in rehab. What was he doing? Gardening in his backyard and tripped over!Dave.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 02:04:35 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 15, 2012, 12:23:40 pmThis is a broad generalization that is simply not true. E.g. peer pressure among youth to pick up smoking or drinking is a decision to be a member of the group - not to be a drinker or smoker. A general acceptance in the society that drinking when done responsible is OK, although the line when it gets irresponsible is blurred. Drinking as a way to deal with anxiety. The sad reality that the poor can often not afford healthy foot, but fat foot is dirt cheap. Psychological conditions and psychological conditioning in early childhood, i.e. early role models showing / claiming that drinking" helps", or usage of sweet fat food used as a pacifier.QuoteDrinking is also legal, and a much more ordinary thing. Your argument is in fact a classic "everything I like should be covered, everything I don't like should not".

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2012, 02:58:17 pm
content: Oxygen is of course both toxic and habit forming so I guess we had better tax it along with its use.

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2012, 01:35:25 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 15, 2012, 01:27:24 amThe problem is who decides what is healthy ? You have some people who think exercising 15 minutes a day is fine while others think a 10 mile run is what everyone should be doing.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2012, 03:12:27 pm
content: When my 14 year old niece had her first baby, her mother refused to "let" her breast feed. I still do not understand the logic to this, but she was adamant about it. So they fed the baby formula and worked cereal into her diet a little at a time. The baby put on weight quickly, in no small part because to boost her caloric intake they replaced the breast milk she should have been getting with - I'm not lying here - sugar water. Pure sugar water. She'd get a bottle or two a day, especially if she was "whiny" or ill tempered. By the time she was six months old her eyes were too close together for her face from all the fat, yet her grandmother (the 14 year old momma's mother) thought she looked great and was so proud of how "healthy" the baby looked.Yes, we have a weight problem in this country. And that child, now having added all those fat cells early in life, will be plagued by weight issues the entire rest of her life. So don't call it for a minute a lifestyle choice - the choice was not hers to make.

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 12:16:28 pm
content: @poptones: Well, you have to find the middle.... I think every "developed" country suffers from that issue. I have recently seen an article about Chinese people getting fat and risings in heart-attacks....My cousin quite the opposite. Normal food wasn't good for her child she thought and gave him just nice organic stuff (mostly vegetables) which was cooked without oil or steamed. No sweets at all, but maybe some rice crackers from time to time.Well, worked out well as he entered the Kindergarten and got ill if somebody said hallo to him. In the age of four he was diagnosed with a severe diabetes and today (with eight years on his tachometer) he has the fine immune-systeme of a card-house.........so a lot of people tend to use extremes and mess it up pretty much

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 12:27:23 pm
content: An increase of early deaths among the Chinese might be considered a good thing for the worlds environmental health. Particularly if that is predominantly wall wart manufacturers.

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 01:16:42 pm
content: Sounds a bit rough, but I do get your pointWell, and we should stop selling our old factories and plants to China as well.BTW: to the fun/action sports stuff. It may be a higher risk (downhill mountainbiking, base jumping or whatever), but I think there is more impact because of people which are stupid enough not to care or take safety precautions.Example: My brother had been a semi-professional MTBer (downhill) for years and NEVER had a severe accident. He was riding on a daily basis, so there were much chances.Today he is working in marketing and was ill for three weeks, because he cut his hand with a saw. Last accident before that was a burn because he wasn't wearing proper gloves when he was welding........and well, nope...he's not doing that stuff daily

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 04:48:43 pm
content: I really don't believe the thing about diabetes. I had a friend who was a juvenile diabetic. I weigh 400lbs and don't have diabetes and am 50 years old (yeah, I know). Three of my cousins, all of the same father, all had heart attacks in their forties even though all were avid outdoorsmen and in good shape, meanwhile I weigh 400lbs and have never had a heart attack at 50.I suspect the thing with the child is more to have a genetic predisposition to being diabetic and not because he was somehow deprived of sweets. The theory (and not at all soundly proven) is that eating too much or too much sugar causes diabetes - not getting too little.On the other hand, it is well proven that adults do not add fat cells. It's imposible. As we age our bodies lose the ability to add fat cells, so if you are a lean child you'll be a lean adult unless you really screw it up. But children HAVE to be able to add fat cells - it's how the brain develops, because the brain is fat cells. So in children it's a tricky balance between overdoing it and depriving them of brain development. But making a baby obese is not making them "smarter" it's just making them fat - for the rest of their lives. In my opinion, it's fucking child abuse.

author: Dago
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 05:12:28 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on October 17, 2012, 04:48:43 pmYou do realize this is anecdotal evidence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence) and doesn't really mean anything? Someone might weigh a thousand pounds and live to a hundred years old, doesn't mean being obese is not unhealthy.Quote from: poptones on October 17, 2012, 04:48:43 pmAt least the first source I dug up says otherwise: "If excess weight is gained as an adult, fat cells increase in size about fourfold before dividing and increasing the absolute number of fat cells present."

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 06:02:30 pm
content: Genetics play a big role. Fat northern European males and fat Indian subcontinental males have a massive life expectancy difference despite having similar diets and lifestyles. Life insurers have this data in their tables as part of the risk profile. All that can be said is that changing to an Americanised lifestyle is bad for you. worst place to eat is Crappy D or any of the other franchises.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 09:27:48 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on October 15, 2012, 02:04:35 pmAgain, a lifestyle choice.You know that smoking and drinking can be bad for your health, but you chose to ignore that to be in the group. And these decisions are usually made at an age when you are quite capable of reasoning and making your own decisions.This does not absolve you of personal responsibility.QuoteYes, and that's a crime the governments and corporations should be held accountable for.We as a society should demand that be fixed.BTW, as an aside, it may come as a surprise to people, but I lived on a high saturated fat and high suger junk food diet for breakfast, lunch and dinner for my entire life until I was in my early-mid 20's. Almost nothing healthy at all.Yet I was skinniest weediest nerd in the playground. Why? Because I did not over eat.A lot of people forget this simple fact when they talk about obesity et.al.QuoteI might appear like that on the surface, but you are wrong. Fact is "dangerous sports" arebetterthan drinking or smoking. Because "dangerous sports" are 100% a healthy lifestyle until a (rare)accidenthappens.Drinking and smoking et.al areprovento be detrimental to your health and our medical system, and to a vast swath of society.You still have not said what you consider these "dangerous sports" to be that you want not covered.Dave.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2012, 09:42:47 pm
content: Quote from: Dago on October 17, 2012, 05:12:28 pmYou don't need to link me to a damn dictionary I'm not illiterate.I didn't say otherwise. What I DID say is that genetics means far more than people generally give credit. I don't know how many times I've heard people say "don't eat so much sugar you'll get diabetes." My mom put so much sugar in her coffee there was mud in the cup when she finished and she was a) always skinny and b) not diabetic. And before you feel the need to link me to yet another damn dictionary entry I will AGAIN remind you these are not "anecdotes" but in fact cases illustrating my POINT that genetics plays a large role in these things. Do I have to say "I didn't say ONLY genetics?" Because I'm just sure if I leave one little thing out you're going to feel the need to link me to some other entry, like "strawman" or "ad hominem."QuoteThe first source? OK even if I give you this whole "first source" thing I'll back away and YET AGAIN illustrate my point for you more clearly, since finding the point doesn't seem to be your strong suit. That point being (Here it is, are you ready?) that fat cells ARE ABSOLUTELY added in childhood. The child's body is made for this, it will even cannibalize itself in the attempt to put on fat to help brain development and to prepare for adolescence. This is another reason kids need exercise, so they can develop "the right kind" of fat without becoming obese. But by adding MORE, needless fat cells early in life you are sentencing that child to a lifelong predilection to obesity. It's little different than chopping off a foot, or starving the child so badly it develops retardation. It's criminal.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 18, 2012, 12:58:02 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Now Dave has said that if you do not have Universal Health Care you are stupid. Lets assume for a moment that that is true. That does not mean and any plan whatsoever is a good idea. See below for a link to an article, from The Nations Restaurant News about how restaurants (and other retail businesses) are going to have to cut hours to stay profitable.http://nrn.com/article/restaurants-mitigate-health-care-costs-cutting-hours"Specifically, two parts of the PPACA [Patient Protection and Affordable Care] may raise costs for restaurant chains: The definition of full-time employees as those who work 30 or more hours per week, rather than the traditional 37-40 hours per week, and the fact that the law applies to any business with more than 50 employees — a number some say will discourage franchise growth."--Now, before you blame retail business, keep in mind that this part of the PPACA is intended to get Insurance Companies out of the healthcare business, so that the Government can become the sole supplier. This outcome is part of the strategic calculus. The reason it was done this way was because they could not get Single Payer (Government) passed all in one go, because the disclosed costs would have killed too many votes. So they decided on a two step approach.In the first few years the fines for not having insurance will be much less than the cost of insurance. Only in 2017, in Hillary Clinton's first term after two successful Obama terms, do all the chickens come home to roost. Then the claims that you can keep your doctor and your plan, will be out the window.--So, at first some retail workers are going to have their hours cut. But eventually the Government will be the only Insurer standing, and all will be well. As the Russians say "When you are cutting down the forest, chips fly.""Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it."Milton Friedman 1912 - 2006Best RegardsClear Ether

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2012, 04:04:32 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 17, 2012, 09:42:47 pmIt is actually a factual statement, the amount of sugar that will do damage varies with the person. There is no lack of scientific data that shows that a good portion of the health problems occurring now like juvenile diabetes are linked to excessive sugar consumption . You might jump to thinking , oh it is the high fructose corn syrup thing, nope, it is ANY sugar in ANY form. The world consumes about 15X the amount of sugar per person as 100 years ago. Everyone went on the low fat craze, take away the fat and you will be healthy, but it didn't work because fat wasn't the problem, it is the sugar. Everything has tons of sugar in it now, way more than in years past and the rate of cardiac, diabetic, overweight cases are all related to it. You can't even buy baby food now without it being packed with sugar. A few years ago I found a video on youtube that explained it so well , the chemistry gets a bit deep but he gets the point across well. The video is titled sugar the bitter truth, a lecture that a doctor at a children's hospital in California gave. He goes through how the liver has such a hard time with sugar and why that becomes fat, basically the liver doesn't know what the hell to do with the amount of sugar we consume now, it basically treats it like alcohol except you don't get the mental effects. There are people who are getting liver disease that resembles alcoholism but who never drank alcohol caused by excessive sugar consumption. After I cut the sugar way back I was no longer type 2 diabetic, my energy went through the roof and the odd headaches I was having went away and I lost 28 lbs in just 2 months. I didn't need to take any special vitamins, pills, or odd diets, just check everything I consumed for the sugar amount and use it sparingly. Just take 1 day and write down the amount of sugar in what you eat, you might be as shocked as I was.Link to the video:

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2012, 09:51:53 pm
content: It is actually a factual statement, the amount of sugar that will do damage varies with the person.Like I said (third time now) it's genetics.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 12:15:34 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--If you do not have national healthcare your are stupid? New program soon coming to your government run hospital. Kill them, save money, and earn bonus!http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223286/Hospitals-bribed-patients-pathway-death-Cash-incentive-NHS-trusts-meet-targets-Liverpool-Care-Pathway.html"Hospitals bribed to put patients on pathway to death: Cash incentive for NHS trusts that meet targets on Liverpool Care Pathway. Some hospitals set target of two thirds of all deaths should be on LCP. At least £30m in extra money handed to hospitals to achieve these goals.--So much for letting the doctors decide.“For neither good nor evil can last for ever; and so it follows that as evil has lasted a long time, good must now be close at hand.” from Don QuixoteMiguel de Cervantes Saavedra 1547 - 1616Best RegardsClear Etherhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223286/Hospitals-bribed-patients-pathway-death-Cash-incentive-NHS-trusts-meet-targets-Liverpool-Care-Pathway.html

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 12:45:48 pm
content: Please, the Daily Mail? Can't you find a more.. umm... reputable source? Even the Telegraph would be more suitable. The NHS is among the top six healthcare corporations (if it can be called that.) USA no where near the list. There was a case a few months ago about assisted suicide - the courts decided not to allow it. And a cash incentive does not imply malice -- "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 01:34:12 pm
content: Dear Tom66:--Your reply would seem to indicate that although you grant the truth of the article, you hate the source. Perhaps you would be willing to supply a source for this information that you approve of? No matter how much you complain, I rather doubt people are going to restrict themselves to publications you approve of. The solution to speech you disagree with is more speech.--You are correct no malice is indicated, merely murderously callous disregard. If you are going to kill someone in a hospital, would not a couple of injections be preferable to withdrawing food and water?"Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher level."Enrico Fermi 1901 1954Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 03:50:22 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 26, 2012, 01:34:12 pmI do not like the Daily Mail. It is a tabloid newspaper, like the Sun, or the US's New York Post. The journalism is sensationalist and often disagrees with factual information. Sales are far more important than accuracy or validity - so if they can print "NHS Kills Patients" or some similar headline, they will.Yes, here is the source for the ranking (ignore my top six comment, I probably got mixed up with another study):http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8877412/NHS-among-best-health-care-systems-in-the-world.htmlHuh, will you look at that. It is indeed from the Telegraph - a conservative-leaning newspaper. One which I can actually believe, as they are not a tabloid but a serious newspaper. I might not agree with everything they say, but the information is generally accurate.Quote from: SgtRock on October 26, 2012, 01:34:12 pmYes -- and no. It would be definitely my preference, if it were my choice, to die quickly. However, many doctors -do not want- to have this right. It places far too much stress on them (imagine killing a patient, then finding out in the autopsy it was a simple cure, or something like that) and many of them disagree with even the concept because it does not fit with the Hippocratic Oath - of doing no harm -even- if it might be better in the end.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 05:09:11 pm
content: Dear Tom66:--A couple of points. Yes, I already understood that you do not like the newspaper in question. Do you have a source for the information mentioned in the article that is not the Daily Mail? If I thought that the information was untrue or inaccurate I would not have cited it. I rely on my friends in the gentle opposition to provide sources which disprove any inaccurate facts.--You said "imagine killing a patient, then finding out in the autopsy it was a simple cure, or something like that". Am I to understand that your assertion is that denying food and water to a patient, is not killing them? Does not compute, alarm, alarm alarm..."The problem with socialism is, eventually you run out of other peoples money."Margaret Thatcher 1925 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 05:27:22 pm
content: It has long been the case that patients are allowed to die both in hospital and care homes and their own homes, this hardly news. At some point in treatment it becomes futile to try to continue life at all cost, there is also the point reached in many cases where either you try to control pain or you don't,the choice is either the next dose of pain control is insufficient to control the pain or it is large enough to do so but it will kill the patient, this is exactly what happened with my brother in law when he died from prostate cancer.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 05:43:03 pm
content: In the case of old age it is, I am told my more than one care worker,commonfor them to denythemselvesfood and water. And I know this is true for I have seen it with my grandfather when I was a child, and with my own father not three years ago. I was called and told he had refused to eat or drink for two days, that the end was certainly near. Wanting ot have a last beer with my dad I felt sure he would, at least, take this last little bit of sustenance - nope. I had to give the beer I had smuggled in to the nurse so she could dispose of it, as it was clear my dad was having none of it.You may not agree with it, but when someone decides for themselves they're done with food and water you have to respect that. Hooking them up to an iv in order to prolong their now miserable life would be a disgusting cruelty.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 05:52:32 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on October 26, 2012, 05:43:03 pmExactly! I have no time for the life at all cost brigade. And those who try to force that belief on every one else. When its time to go, its time to go.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 07:06:11 pm
content: Dear G7PSK:--My condolences on your recent losses. I think many of us probably have had experieces of this kind. I think I can agree with your remarks, in the main. My contention was that the doctors should be making these kinds of decisions, and that government bean counters should not be paying bonuses based on croak quotas. And, if you are going to kill someone, would it not be better done painlessly?--Of course, if the person has a living will saying they want their life prolonged as long a possible, and they have provided a funding source, then they should not be killed, till the money runs out. But of course, the idea that someone who saved their money rather than spending it all on booze and drugs, should be allowed to use it to prolong their life, would offend socialist sensibilities, no doubt. When private property is allowed these kinds of moral conundrums are bound to arise.--I think I would much prefer to deal with a Dr. Jack when the time comes, rather than the government. It would be quicker and less painful."If it were done when 'tis done, then t'were well. It were done quickly."William Shakespeare 1564 - 1616Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 07:14:12 pm
content: Are you suggesting someone with more money has more entitlement to a longer life? That's a rather bold statement, if I'm reading you correctly.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 07:28:19 pm
content: I had an uncle who was an alcoholic, and who developed gangrene. When he was at the hips his doctor gave him 6 months of morphine at a time and a syringe to inject for the pain, He went through 2 years worth in the last 3 months.Dad could not stand the morphine, he preferred the pain to the nausea he had from it. 1 Feb 2007.........Friend of mine his mother was in a NHS unit, where they would pump it in if she moaned at any time. Not awake the last 3 weeks, but given IV fluid and glucose all the time.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 07:35:33 pm
content: Dear Tom66:--What I am saying is that I am in favor of private property. If someone wants to use their legally obtained money to prolong their life, they should not be robbed and murdered by socialist looters. If you can prevent people from using their own money for private health care, then you can prevent them doing anything whatsoever with it. Hello Brave New World, unless you plan on outlawing private medicine, and successfully preventing back alley clinics.--Are you saying that a family that works, and earns, and saves, should not be able to buy a better house, than the people on the dole, whom they support, with their taxes.“I do not think that the wireless waves I have discovered will have any practical application”Heinrich Rudolf Hertz 1857 1894Best RegardsClear Ether

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 08:20:24 pm
content: My father was a vet, in a vet center at the time of his death. He was on social security and had a retirement that paid for his stay - it was all money he had earned and saved. They took good care of him there and would have stuck an iv in him had I wanted it. When a man is over 90 years old and decides he wants to die, it is evil to stop him. He had always said he wanted to be kept alive as long as possible, so should I have taken him at his word when he was "in his right mind" and instead forced him to stay alive?I don't care if he was a Billionaire, he would have been allowed to die. So that makes me a murderer I guess.This newspaper article is sensationalistic bullshit. People at the end often choose to not eat. The article makes it sound like doctors respecting their wishes are murderers. They show an elderly couple sitting there on the edge of the bed having a nice conversation just waiting for the killer nurses to start witholding food and water. That's absolute bullshit, the end for most looks nothing like the picture. I had a cousin who dropped dead of a heart attack one morning while walking to the shower. He was lucky.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 09:21:39 pm
content: Dear EEVBees:--Poptones has said "So that makes me a murderer I guess."--I cannot help but get the feeling that Poptones is deliberately misconstrueing my remarks, in the most sensationalistic B.S. way possible. Really, now I am accusing him of murdering his own father. Please. If any of you happen to be the competent family representative in an end of life situation, then of course you would be the one to make the difficult decisions, and you would have my approval and sympathy. We all lose people. It is not a solipsistic universe, I hope. Tom66 on the other hand does not think that you and/or your loved one be been allowed to spend your own money to prolong life. Logan's Run, anyone?--I will try to restate my point once again. If socialist looters were to prevent someone and/or the family from paying for life prolonging healthcare, using their own money, then to my mind that would clearly be murder.--Enough with the straw men. I never said everyone should be kept alive against their will, or the will of the family. And yes I have seen more that one Veteran pass away in a Veterans Hospital. I am an elderly veteran myself. I have a living will, which allows my brother to make any decision he sees fit with regard to end of life, when the time comes, providing headache #44 does not get me first.--Either the facts as related in the article are true (I.E. not B.S.) or they are not. I welcome any facts that are dispositive with regard to this matter."We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."Benjamin Franklin 1706 - 1790Best RegardsClear Ether

author: baljemmett
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 09:59:02 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 26, 2012, 09:21:39 pmSomething about geese and ganders comes to mind, for some reason.QuoteIt's utter tripe, at least as far a friend of mine (who happens to be an nurse at a highly-regarded cardiac hospital) is concerned. A similar article written by one of the Mail's complement of rabble-rousers earlier in the week had her absolutely spitting features; it turns out that people working at the sharp end of healthcare find the suggestion that they use care pathways as anything other than a way to help their patients rather offensive, to put it mildly.Not that that counts as a 'fact', of course, but as someone who lives in this country and understands our stable of actual and alleged newspapers, I tend to treat anything printed in the Mail as 'not a fact' too until it's picked up by an outlet that isn't just a cheap, sensationalist gossip rag pandering to the easily outraged. C'est la vie.

author: andyturk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 10:06:57 pm
content: "Will americans be required to have microchips?"No, but we have a right to bear ARMs.rimshotQuote from: EEVblog on October 11, 2012, 10:29:05 pmPeople here don't know *how* to evaluate the alternatives. It's much easier to adopt an opinion one saw on TV. But what we lack in thoughtfulness, we make up in rabid political loyalty.Quote from: Bored@Work on October 11, 2012, 11:05:03 pmIt's not about hate. The privileged don't want to make poor people disappear, they simply don't give two shakes. If you don't have compassion for a poor person on another continent, why should you care about the people who live under freeways closer to home? Geography doesn't figure in moral issues anyway, right?You are correct though when you say that the privileged assume they won't become poor themselves. Some folks are surprised when reality comes knocking.Quote from: ptricks on October 13, 2012, 12:17:48 amYup. The problem is that people (well, Americans) don't have much if any choice at the moment. Your employer decides which healthcare plans you have access too and usually what your percentage of the cost is. It's almost impossible to shop around for health insurance as an individual.Health insurance companies *hate* individual customers. Their risk models prefer large populations where the costs are more predictable.Contrast this with the process for purchasing auto, property or just about any other kind of insurance. There's a wide variety of providers and plans and it's up to the consumer to go with a cut-rate plan or pay up and have everything taken care of.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2012, 11:01:21 pm
content: If socialist looters were to prevent someone and/or the family from paying for life prolonging healthcare, using their own money, then to my mind that would clearly be murder.--Enough with the straw men. I never said everyone should be kept alive against their will, or the will of the family.You just said it again, so don't pretend the high road of how you never said it. My father, when his mind was better, clearly said again and again he wanted great measures to be taken to extend his life. He was not religious and died of alzheimer's, which as you may or may not know destroys the mind and its abilities for critical thought. His choice in the end could easily be construed as due to madness.What difference does motive make in "murder?" This is not manslaughter we are talking about, or even accidental death. This is one person deciding to end the life of another. By your argument I am every bit the murder those "socialistic" doctors.Your arguments, as usual, are hype and bullshit based on more hype and bullshit. You make Rush Limbaugh and Bill Oreilly look like reasonable men.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 27, 2012, 12:31:01 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--The latest from Poptones is "You just said it again, so don't pretend the high road of how you never said it. My father, when his mind was better, clearly said again and again he wanted great measures to be taken to extend his life. He was not religious and died of alzheimer's, which as you may or may not know destroys the mind and its abilities for critical thought. His choice in the end could easily be construed as due to madness."--He provided a redacted quote by me, which omitted my statement that:"If any of you happen to be the competent family representative in an end of life situation, then of course you would be the one to make the difficult decisions, and you would have my approval and sympathy."--I cannot help but wonder why he left that statement out. A rather glaring omission, no?--I am still waiting for any citation indication that NHS did not offer cash incentives as indicated.--An this the latest:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/lizhunt/6322738/Pathway-for-the-elderly-that-leads-to-legal-execution.html"The Daily Telegraph reported two cases this week. Hazel Fenton, an 80-year-old from Sussex, was admitted to hospital in January with pneumonia and put on the Pathway regimen. Her daughter, Christine Ball, fought to stop her mother from being left to "starve and dehydrate to death". Nine months on, Hazel is doing well and is "happy", Christine says. Jack Jones, a cancer patient from Merseyside, wasn't so lucky. Doctors did not treat the 76-year-old's pneumonia because they claimed his cancer was spreading aggressively. A post-mortem examination found otherwise. His wife has never managed to confirm that Jack was on the Pathway, but she has no doubt he was denied precious time with his family."--And from the BBC:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-19956955"Relatives of a cancer patient denied fluids at a Norfolk hospital have made an official complaint he was not given care he needed at the end of his life.Andy Flanagan, 48, was being treated for pancreatic cancer at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in King's Lynn. After a cardiac arrest staff stopped giving him fluids and wrote on his medical records "do not resuscitate. The family said they only discovered this when he came round during a visit. The hospital said it could not comment."--So, I guess the Beeb is now "making it up", eh?--I understand that NHS cannot write a blank check for all end of life situtations. But they should at least, keep the family informed of "do not resuscitate" orders, yes? Clearly this story is not going away."An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field."Niels Bohr 1885 - 1962Best RegardsClear Ether

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2012, 10:26:42 am
content: The QE2 in Kings Lynn Norfolk is where I had a kidney removed due to cancer, I can vouch first hand that there is nothing wrong with the treatment there, I am sure that if they thought the patient had no chance that is exactly how it was, When I had my op. I was told that they would only do it if they thought that there was a chance of a cure. I understand that the survival rate for renal carcinoma is less than 15% over a five year period, so far I am totally clear 3 years on.A lot of what you see in the press is either people hoping to get a cash pay out (what you could call winning the health lottery) or relatives of the keep auntie Joan alive at all cost or at least until we have found the will. Where there is a will there is a disgruntled relative.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 01:30:00 am
content: Quote from: andyturk on October 26, 2012, 10:06:57 pmOr is it because we're prevented from having a discussion? We get a few people offering their opinions and we have to choose between them. No discussion. Is that any way to solve problems? And political debates are NOT discussion forums.We need to have discussions about what works. Does giving tax breaks to wealthy people actually improve the economy? What has happened in the past when we've done it? Is it fair to have everyone pay the same tax rate? Is it fair for wealthy people to pay a lower tax rate than the middle class? Do rich people actually create jobs? Or is it the middle class that does it? Should we penalize poor people for being born poor? Do everyone have the right to decent healthcare? Should some people be denied it? What was the tax structure like during the 40's, 50's, and 60's? Was it different than we have today?We should be able to discuss these things. But we can't. We're prevented from doing it. The business/ruling class absolutely does not want it to happen. What did the Romans call it?..."Bread and circuses"? Don't let the poor people know how much they really are shit on.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 03:15:58 am
content: Well, according to this "non employee" small businesses (that's like mine and maybe Dave) accounts in the US for nearly a Trillion of the GDP and over 21 Million jobs. I'd say that counts as a significant employer. Most of those are less than half a Million a year. That means there are about 20 Million middle class citizens making their own jobs outside the corporate circle. That's about 1% of the adult population and probably more than 2% of working adults.http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html#EmpSizeThe largest single group in terms of dollars in wages is the group over 10,000 employees with 1.6T. The second largest group is self employed people who account for almost a Trillion in sales. You can't assume that's all salary of course, but it does represent employment and GDP. That means, with less than 3% of the total population, small businesses are the second largest single group of employers in terms of annual GDP. Looks to me like the middle class are better at making jobs than the Billionaires.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 06:35:24 am
content: Quote from: FenderBender on October 12, 2012, 02:33:51 amhaha.. you're plain shit my friend.. not you, but the empire is going down.. then we will have a laugh about how some of us think they're king.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 06:52:01 am
content: The US has the single largest GDP of any country on earth by a factor of 2. The EU has a larger GDP but that's a conglomerate of nations. Second to the US is China. Between the US and China we command a third of the earth's GDP.The naysayers don't like to look at the big picture, because the big picture isn't as scary as they need it to be to remain in control.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 07:36:25 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 28, 2012, 06:52:01 amThe US has the largest dept of any nation, a sum of some 7 trilion dolars, mainly achievied by theDELETEDbankers (who run america) by printing money without having it covered by any real value. What you have for sale America except bullshit ?Quote from: poptones on October 28, 2012, 06:52:01 amFirst of all, America is a conglomerate of states, and from a history point of view, they're criminals taking the lands of indians. EU is just an attempt to create a super police state, which will fail quite soon.China is #1 at any economic point you want it to compare: financial stability, economic results. Look at the belowed Apple computer .. just to give you an example. And it was not European who formed queues to buy overpriced computers with bite of evil pandora kind of simbology on them, made of course, by a "genious" only experienced in robbing people by means of marketing, which is the whole point regarding US. good marketing, form without consistency, propaganda and "war for peace", a country where that last standing president was killed in open view and where the next commers are fraudulent, liars and war criminals.Cheers

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 08:02:19 am
content: Criminals? Need I remind you that the US was "settled" by Spanish, French, British... so who's the "criminals?"Europe has fought wars over territories for centuries. The EU is made of "states" like the moon is made of cheese.Apple computer is a US company and alone is responsible for nearly one percent of our GDP. They pay China pennies on the dollar for a premium product sold worldwide. Our debt to China is a little over a Trillion dollars. Meanwhile, Apple computer is worth half that. Our five largest companies are worth more than our debt to China. I'd never own an Apple, but I gotta love what they're able to do.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 08:42:33 am
content: I fully agree that Europe was the place fiiled with crimes in the first place. So why pretending either of these places are better ? Human race is destructive, stupid ... but saying America is in some way leader or .. give me a break. America is in for big troubles as the big brother society (helped by electronist hobbist and engineers) develops.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 09:04:07 am
content: apple, microsoft, google, facebook are all faces of the same ..don't know how to call it: agenda for invading intimacy, population control. not impressed at all of what the technology can do and how it is actually used by the monkey mentality and criminal government that runs US.I often think on what benefits tehnology brought to us. In what ways electronics for instance improuved our lives ? Egh ?.1. medical ?-> your really think that allopathy (world medical mafia) is better than yeaaaaaaars old practice of shamans or aborigens or indian ayur veda? Try some questions to your doctor. See the reactions. Meassuring things around does not provide integrated view. More over, modern medicine views the human body as a system, consisting off smallers system: circulatory, respiratory, whatever. That does not inter-link causes and efects or transients from a system ot another. Not to mention that this medicine is a a reactive model. Does not prevent. Does not care about health. It is about wealth.2. military ?- are we really living in a more secure, more peacefull world ? In what ways America helped bring peace? Invading peaceful countries and stilling their resources? Sick of this "i'm proud to be american". Proud of what exacly ?3. education ?4. space exploration ? politic correct lies on how the appolo put a man to the moon .. ? total hoax. now we are on mars. Maybe we are, but appolo was a blatant deceiving event who help bring US ahead economicaly.5. transportation:transportation speed actually decreased having so many cars produced in such a speed. speed, quality and all these are not necesarly optimals for balance, specialy when you got so many assholes floating around.We all sit and wait in trafic jams in some metalic cans on wheels breathing smoke. VERY SMART indeed.6. spiritualy:god is internet, internet is god. no book readings, no art creativity. just profiles on facebook. even now, there is this new job: "professional video blogger". what the f** that means anyway? . there's a guy with a child (?!), who needs some money right ? so he delivers industry biased oppinions towards happy crowds while we are softened by the "openness and unique style" which by itself does not need a motto, or publicity. Beeing "normal" in a anormal society kind of message.maybe i missed something...

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 09:21:11 am
content: Quote from: poptones on October 28, 2012, 08:02:19 am..hardly and endorsment for succes. A country which has 50% incomes from a fraud .. that tells something.They pay China pennies on the dollar for a premium product sold worldwide.Quote from: poptones on October 28, 2012, 08:02:19 amQuote from: poptones on October 28, 2012, 08:02:19 amWhat is in there so fantastic? I don't get it. Putting together a computer, selling marketing crap, paying a "penny" to the slave labour who do not have any other option. Really? please enlight me.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 09:33:44 am
content: So you seem to pretty much hate everything and everyone including electronics. Why the hell are you here? Isn't this place an embodiment of everything you were just bitching about?I have no interst in such negativity. Is there anything you do like... besides bitching?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 10:11:38 am
content: Quote from: elektronicks on October 28, 2012, 09:04:07 amWhy are you even on an electronics forum?QuoteWe have ourselves a live one here folks!QuoteIt means I make a full time living making informative and entertaining videos for, in this case, a niche market.What did you think it means?QuoteToo much wacky weed today?Dave.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 10:18:36 am
content: i was addressing intelects with higher iq.everybody is not america. eectronics is not dave and certainly you missed a lot of things.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 11:01:10 am
content: Quote from: elektronicks on October 28, 2012, 10:18:36 amThat statement makes absolutely zero sense.Dave.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 11:23:15 am
content: ok. I'll answer the questions:I was building some synthesizers for my own use when i accidentaly watched a video of yours about arduino. I dislike up until today your atitudine towards laughing at any names, languages. examples: arduino <- idiots. or "chinglish". I'm neither chinese, nor italian, but i know for sure they do speak english, while you and all the others have to attend long hours of chineese just to say hello, which of course, you do not require as this derives from the self confident established status qvo.Then i was looking for informative videos like you might call them tutorials and then I thought, why the hell learning anything from watching a video and not pickup books or attent a university, a thing you might also consider to suggest to your audience since some of them want to get good education. We really do no care about you beeing a cat / non cat admirative, or having the child speaking about "private lives" we do have.You also might say: don't like it .. skip it. This is something I will probably consider given the loads of crap coming from the statements like: "I'm proud to be an american", a statement which also fail to answer the question: how is that relating to any electronic matters, you ofcouse, beeing supposed to moderate these things, as you have an audience from all over the world. ain't that right ?Ok, I had no intention to start a hot debate here, but since it happened, let's consider the involvement of engineers in this subject we are posting here: microchiping the population. Was this even possible should the engineers have a strong moral standing ? Or if they were more informed in other matters than the one derived from: "you have to be on electronic forum only if you are interested in electronics" How norrow is that ?

author: GeoffS
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 11:32:22 am
content: Narrow.If you're not interested in electronics, then there really isn't much point in being here, being that this is an electronics forum.Can't make it clearer than that.Sure, occasionally a thread pops up on a non electronics subject, or like the micro chipping America, marginally electronics related. If you're here purely for these sorts of topics, you're going to get pretty bored while we talk about electronics, this being an electronics forum.

author: Mediarocker
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 01:24:45 pm
content: Quote from: elektronicks on October 28, 2012, 10:18:36 amBefore you attempt to address "high IQ intellects," you must first possess the required IQ of whom you are attempting to address.A lone transistor cannot decipher C++ on it's own.

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 01:33:07 pm
content: all the americans here: gather up! There has been an alternative view intrusion people. Let's kill the bastard. And where is the GLOBAL moderator? This is something you call "terrorists" so you feel atacked.) The interesting thing, there is some TRUTH in it. This is why you feel attacked. So .. was that inteligent enough transistor boy ?

author: elektronicks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 01:42:05 pm
content: guys look. I will not continue this. I was just filling pasionally attached to some ideas of freedom and ideals which if you have a good look at the world as it is and compare it to the idiotic blogs, forums, and how internet changed in a negative way the way we used to read, feel or even love (dave finds that quite interesting to provide ways of pickup up girls online - i find it a disgrace).Nobody really knows what will be next, and how far this lunatic industry continue to provide means of control to some other lunatics. I'm in a quite small and insignificant country with no real chance to compete with any of you - this gives me the nothing to loose bit so I have a view from a stakeless position.As far as I'm concerned I will seek proper education should I decide to learn electronics. Entertainment after.one transistor out.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2012, 01:49:17 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on October 28, 2012, 03:15:58 amActually, it's ONLY the middle class that creates jobs. When a big chain whatnot opens another store it's because of middle class demand. If the middle class wasn't buying stuff that store would shut down overnight. Economies have been demand based, since forever. Rich people largely don't spend their income. The middle class spends almost all of their income. The opinion that rich people are job creators is wrong.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2012, 05:32:55 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--And here is the latest from the NHS. Go figure.--http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9639090/Cystic-Fibrosis-sufferer-denied-chance-of-life-drug-by-NHS.html"Cystic Fibrosis sufferer is being refused a "chance of life" drug by the NHS despite the manufacturer offering it to her for free."--Now, if someone in you family has suffered from this terrible disease, please know that what ever the family decides is fine by me. And please do not waste your efforts trying to cobble together some half baked fantasy that I am accusing you of murdering your loved one, as happened earlier when I plainly stated ""If any of you happen to be the competent family representative in an end of life situation, then of course you would be the one to make the difficult decisions, and you would have my approval and sympathy."--Most of us have lost loved ones, and many of us have faced some rather difficult circumstances in this regard. So please so not think that the fact that you have lost someone, means that you know better than everyone else."Don't give up the ship"Captain James Lawrence USN 1781 - 1813Best RegardsClear Ether

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2012, 05:37:52 am
content: Whoopee, so what else is new. The same thing happens in the US, we call it the DEA and if they don't bless it no one gets it no matter how promising it might be.So, I'm assuming this would mean you would support decriminalizing the potions and herbs we decide to put into our own bodies?

author: mariush
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2012, 06:56:20 am
content: He's also ignoring the fact that :* the company received $75 million dollars in donations from a CF foundation to make the drug* the company offered it only on a temporary basis (no guarantee it would give it a year from now)* they're selling the drug for $300k a year. How much markup do you think it's in that price, especially since only 5% of the people sick with CF can actually use the drug?Basically it's just a PR move, marketing, to put pressure on NHS to approve the drug. Once NHS approves the drug, free healthcare and all that, the company gets 300 patients x $300k a year doing nothing.India has the right idea about medicine, and more countries are taking advantage of international treaties to produce cheap medicine :http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120523/03175119032/generics-drive-down-drug-prices-india-tpp-trying-to-stop-that.shtmlQuote

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2012, 06:37:53 pm
content: The link on cystic fibrosis seems to be broken, but we are continually seeing this sort of headline as people who are terminally ill grab at any straws in order to try and stay alive for a few more days. We have an organization here called NICE, national institute for clinical excellence. Their job is to look at all drugs and make a decision as to whether they give value for money and or work as the manufacturers claim and to what extent they work. Any heath system has to draw a line somewhere as to cost and efficacy, there are many drugs around that will extend the life of some patients but who it is can be a lottery and cost tens of thousands for a few days.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 29, 2012, 10:49:49 pm
content: Dear G7PSK:--In this case the drug is being offered for free. So even if it is only for a year, I think it would probably be worth doing. Of course I do not have all the facts and am basing my opinion on what facts I can obtain. Certainly, the explanation provided by the NHS is bureaucratic double speak of the highest order.--I am very well aware that the NHS cannot, and should not spend hundreds of thousand per year for courses of drugs. On the other hand if you have or can raise the money from volunteers, and spend it to prolong your life, you should be allowed to do so. You can bet your bottom dollar that the nomenclatura that run these socialist governments are going to do so for themselves and at your expense. The companies that makes these drugs should be allowed to sell them and to and make a profit doing so.--And yes I am well aware that the looters are after the Pharmaceutical companies, as well as the Oil Companies, Coal Companies, Insurance Companies, Corporations, Billionaires, Rich People, Stock Holders, etc. It would be very much less work to just make a list of what they do not want to loot, it their quest to become the next USSR, Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina, etc.--When I recommend the story of The Goose That Laid The Golden Egg, to people to illustrate why just confiscating things will not work, I am told that I just want to kill people. Its as if they think that arithmetic is a capitalist plot.--Finally Poptones has said "So, I'm assuming this would mean you would support decriminalizing the potions and herbs we decide to put into our own bodies?"To which my answer would be, as a general matter yes, of course. As a general principle I am in favor of Liberty, and I am not sitting here full of envious hatred, plotting ways to run peoples lives, or to confiscate their property. If we all try to use government power against each other, we will become state vassals. I would welcome a fuller discussion of the DEA and the Drug War, but this is not my thread, so I will leave it at that."The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money."Margaret Thatcher 1925 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2012, 11:40:41 pm
content: Quote from: SgtRock on October 29, 2012, 10:49:49 pmBut you have to take into the account is it OK to give someone false hope? For example, say it gives them a good life for a year. They might expect, perhaps even demand that it continue. It is manipulation of the highest order. But it is a sticky situation, very difficult to decide. And $300k/yr is outrageous. I understand drugs cost quite a bit of money to develop, but that pricing is ridiculous.Quote from: SgtRock on October 29, 2012, 10:49:49 pmPrivate healthcare is available in the UK and you may use it by paying for it. If there is a $300k/yr drug, and you have $300k/yr, you may spend it on that drug.Quote from: SgtRock on October 29, 2012, 10:49:49 pmI do not speak for everyone but my opinions certainly do not cover "looting" these companies of their profits. However, I do consider some practices they employ to be anti-competitive and anti-consumer, and would prefer that they are regulated, which improves competition between companies, and eventually results in better prices and products for consumers.As for rich people, everyone should pay their share to keep society running and people more able to pay more should do so.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2012, 01:02:47 am
content: Dear Tom:--Thank you for a well thought out and reasoned response. You may have, however, have put the cat among the pigeons, with your statement about not wanting to loot companies. The looters are not going to like that one. I am glad to hear that private healthcare is still available in the UK. Bonus! It is under threat in the US, at least with regard to private insurance plans. The "Single Payer" plan is the eventual goal, and Insurance Companies are already being told what they must cover.--You stated "But you have to take into the account is it OK to give someone false hope? For example, say it gives them a good life for a year. They might expect, perhaps even demand that it continue. It is manipulation of the highest order. But it is a sticky situation, very difficult to decide. And $300k/yr is outrageous. I understand drugs cost quite a bit of money to develop, but that pricing is ridiculous."--The young lady no doubt is probably thinking that another year or so false hope, is probably is just the thing, if the drug can be obtained at no cost. Note that the drug is useful only to 5% of Cystic Fibrosis sufferers who have a certain gene mutation. The company in question may, perhaps foolishly, have decided to develop this drug for a rather limited customer base, at a cost of perhaps billions, and hence the high price. Eventually the drug will be available as a generic, as with many, at first expensive, life saving drugs. Kill the Goose, and no more golden eggs.--I agree with you about the role of government in providing a fair playing field, in order to promote competition. Competition is what eventually brings things to market at fair prices. You cannot very well keep selling your green peppers at the farmers market for 2 dollars, when the guy in the next stall is selling them for for 1. Unfortunately governments rarely undertake regulation merely to promote competition, and redistrubutionist "Social Policy" creeps in, obviating the fair competition principle. Often governments force insurance companies to cover things. This allows the governments to put the costs of these programs, somewhere other than the budget, where taxpayers could see them.--You also said "As for rich people, everyone should pay their share to keep society running and people more able to pay more should do so."--"Their share" always turns out to be more and more. Lets just see how France does with that one. Perhaps you are correct, also perhaps not."If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."Ronald Reagan 1911 - 2004Best RegardsClear Ether

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2012, 12:48:10 pm
content: The other problem is liability the drug may be free but is it approved in the UK if not can a doctor be liable for the administration of such a drug.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2012, 09:16:16 pm
content: What idiocy. The US has had single payer health insurance for decades and no one has been told they cannot buy private health insurance. The UK has had it for some time and, I believe, this is what they have in Canada as well. In the US it's called medicare and it's doubly ironic that most of the people who are ON medicare don't realize that it is single payer insurance and, more crazily, do not even support it when asked. "I will do everything I can to stand against single payer health insurance, but don't touch my medicare!"This is just perverse. Talk about the haves wanting to stick it to the have-nots...

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 30, 2012, 11:50:45 pm
content: Dear EEVBees:--Poptones has said "What idiocy" to the assertion that under the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (Obamacare) insurance companies will cease to exist. As per usual the comments are long on accusations of "idiocy" and "the haves wanting to stick it to the have-nots" but short on links to dispositive information. The tone has mellowed somewhat from his previous accusation that I was accusing him of murdering his father, pointedly ignoring that I has said "If any of you happen to be the competent family representative in an end of life situation, then of course you would be the one to make the difficult decisions, and you would have my approval and sympathy."--Now it seems this "idiocy" has spread to the NY Times Opinionator Blog where an opinion piece by Emanual and Liebman, both advisers to the Obama Administration on the healthcare bill, lay out just how the government is going to make the insurance companies "unnecessary". See link below.--http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/the-end-of-health-insurance-companies/?comments#permid=7"The End of Health Insurance Companies - Here’s a bold prediction for the new year. By 2020, the American health insurance industry will be extinct."--So there you have it folks. Two, shall I say liberal, advisers to the Obama Administration on the 1000 page healthcare bill, that had to be passed so we could find out what was in it, joyously predict the disappearance of health insurance companies in the NY Times blog, and people who think that there might just be something to it are accused of idiocy.--And now for our next act, dancing his renowned Shilly Shally the famous ..."Facts are stubborn things."Ronald Reagan 1911 - 2004Best RegardsClear Ether

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 12:21:47 am
content: ROTFL. So you need "sources" to "prove" that medicare is single payer insurance? How about a fucking ENCYCLOPEDIA sarge? But I'm sure you don't have such a thing, it not having a public forum where every right wing nutcase can espouse his own elitist view of what freedoms really mean "free" and what freedoms are really just a "priviledge" taken for granted by those anti-American "liberals." Oh wait, we do have that - it's called wikipedia... and even there, where one can occasionally find page after page of the single word "penis," you won't find such nonsense. Medicare is single payer, and that payer is the government. By definition. For half a century. And yet "the government will be lousy at providing health insurance."Amazing. My dad had Medicare. He also had Blue Cross AND Veteran's health insurance. And in spite of having TWO government run, single payer insurance plans, he still found enough value in Blue Cross to keep up his union dues.50 years of civilian single payer health insurance, and we still have insurance companies.Must have been a miracle. Aren't we lucky.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 12:57:17 am
content: Oh, I cannot wait until the election is over, even as a Briton. i just want it to end. I don't care who wins any more.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 01:07:36 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--I do not recall mentioning Medicare. I did however contend that the ACA would drive insurance companies out of the healthcare business. Once again the answer was profane, disgusting, hostile, hateful, and personal, but it did not address the question of the government replacing all health care insurance companies with a one size fits all Single Payer government program. It just pretended I had mentioned Medicare and then attacked that straw man.--Narry a mention of the two Obama Health Care Advisers predicting the extinction of health care insurance in the NY Times blog. Uh, lets just pretend we did not see that one, kind of like Benghazi.--Yes, ladies and gentlemen that was indeed an amazing dance of the Shilly Shally, order some more drinks, and soon PeeTee will be right back out to dance the dance of the Seven Veils. And if you are lucky you will get to experience some more scabrous evacuations. Bonus!--And someone please quit holding down Tom66 and making him read the 12th page of a thread he is not interested in."All I wants of you, Cap'n Simmons, is plain seevility, and that of the commonest goddamndest kind!"Zeph W. PeaseBest RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2012, 01:11:48 am
content: I am glued to this thread (not against my will though); I like seeing the arguments between the two sides, it keeps me informed about absolutely nothing, but it is interesting to read nonetheless.