|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 17 2014 17:27 oneofthem wrote:
the va isn't a unified system and regional administration may differ. charges of atrocious service are uncontextualized and magnified by some anecdotal examples. you can look at RAND studies on VA quality for a better picture
if we take the VA system's occasional delay of care and compare it with the vast swath of uninsured and untreated cases in the private sector, pretty obvious that VA is still superior compared to no govt presence healthcare.
Yes, because what we have now is no Government presence in healthcare ::rollseyes:: Why do these arguments always come down to the pro-Government side strawmanning? I'm not arguing for, or on behalf of the current abomination. I'm precisely arguing against it and the so-called solutions of the pro-Government Nationalization of healthcare spectra (There's a reason why the Military prefers AD personnel to use non-VA facilities - hence Tricare. Quality of care under the VA is quite frequently either a death sentence or will make your condition worse).
PS: Occasional delay of care...if by occasional you mean widespread, and it is convenient you left out quality of care. Also, RAND is not an unbiased source. It's like if I were to quote Heritage Foundation.
|
On May 17 2014 17:27 oneofthem wrote:
the va isn't a unified system and regional administration may differ. charges of atrocious service are uncontextualized and magnified by some anecdotal examples. you can look at RAND studies on VA quality for a better picture
if we take the VA system's occasional delay of care and compare it with the vast swath of uninsured and untreated cases in the private sector, pretty obvious that VA is still superior compared to no govt presence healthcare. Even articles from last year point out delays in care not mimicked in the private sector. If you're interested in mental health, good luck too! So, no, it's nowhere obvious that there's some kind of a superiority of VA over hospitals, clinics, and private practices.
Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and others are hardly "no govt presence healthcare." And the "vast swath" is always exaggerated to include children (parents wealthy enough to buy for their kids or you're eligible for Medicaid/SCHIP), illegal aliens, and the huge turnover insurance between employers (insured but for gaps). If we're going to frame the argument by calling it "occasional delay of care," at least have a correct picture of the other side.
P.S. The regulatory burden of the government, complex tax treatment of insurance with employment, and the myriad new taxes and mandatory minimums of the ACA are also examples of govt presence in healthcare. In those cases, present and harmful. I wish there was really a comparison in the US for something even marginally close to "no govt presence healthcare" because its burden is certainly present.
|
http://m.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27435856
BJP party wins landslide election in election. Hailed as people's victory. In other news "the people" has been redefined to mean plutocratic business interests. Modi current king of harnessing the aspirational sentiments of the electorate.
|
On May 17 2014 17:27 oneofthem wrote:
the va isn't a unified system and regional administration may differ. charges of atrocious service are uncontextualized and magnified by some anecdotal examples. you can look at RAND studies on VA quality for a better picture
if we take the VA system's occasional delay of care and compare it with the vast swath of uninsured and untreated cases in the private sector, pretty obvious that VA is still superior compared to no govt presence healthcare.
Hrmm, GH says that the VA has been in disrepair for decades and you're claiming the opposite. Both can't be right. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle but it's hard to say given that the VA was recently caught falsifying data.
In either case it sounds like Shinseki deserved the boot.
|
Shinseki doesn't deserve 'the boot'. I don't even want to go into why that is just a dumb idea that doesn't reflect any comprehension of the issue but I had to say it.
The VA means well but good intentions cant always overcome systemic piss poor treatment of veterans by society. Anything going on at the VA now is nothing compared to the first waves of Agent Orange victims.
If you think Shinseki should be canned than there should never be someone at the job because not a single one of them would meet your standard.
|
The EPA will launch the most dramatic anti-pollution regulation in a generation early next month, a sweeping crackdown on carbon that offers President Barack Obama his last real shot at a legacy on climate change — while causing significant political peril for red-state Democrats.
The move could produce a dramatic makeover of the power industry, shifting it away from coal-burning plants toward natural gas, solar and wind. While this is the big move environmentalists have been yearning for, it also has major political implications in November for a president already under fire for what the GOP is branding a job-killing “War on Coal,” and promises to be an election issue in energy-producing states such as West Virginia, Kentucky and Louisiana.
The EPA’s proposed rule is aimed at scaling back carbon emissions from existing power plants, the nation’s largest source of greenhouse gases. It’s scheduled for a public rollout June 2, after months of efforts by the administration to publicize the mounting scientific evidence that rising seas, melting glaciers and worsening storms pose a danger to human society.
Source
|
On May 18 2014 03:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
Shinseki doesn't deserve 'the boot'. I don't even want to go into why that is just a dumb idea that doesn't reflect any comprehension of the issue but I had to say it.
The VA means well but good intentions cant always overcome systemic piss poor treatment of veterans by society. Anything going on at the VA now is nothing compared to the first waves of Agent Orange victims.
If you think Shinseki should be canned than there should never be someone at the job because not a single one of them would meet your standard.
You're welcome to provide proof that he did a good job.
|
On May 18 2014 03:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2014 03:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
Shinseki doesn't deserve 'the boot'. I don't even want to go into why that is just a dumb idea that doesn't reflect any comprehension of the issue but I had to say it.
The VA means well but good intentions cant always overcome systemic piss poor treatment of veterans by society. Anything going on at the VA now is nothing compared to the first waves of Agent Orange victims.
If you think Shinseki should be canned than there should never be someone at the job because not a single one of them would meet your standard. You're welcome to provide proof that he did a good job.
I would say the proof is in the fact that over the past 2 years the delays that plagued the VA over the past 15+ years have drastically gone down with only hiccup being an spike during the shutdown. It is unfortunate that you can not instantly go from being behind to being caught up but anyone in any business knows that a backlog takes time to work thru and doesn't disappear overnight.
|
On May 18 2014 03:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2014 03:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
Shinseki doesn't deserve 'the boot'. I don't even want to go into why that is just a dumb idea that doesn't reflect any comprehension of the issue but I had to say it.
The VA means well but good intentions cant always overcome systemic piss poor treatment of veterans by society. Anything going on at the VA now is nothing compared to the first waves of Agent Orange victims.
If you think Shinseki should be canned than there should never be someone at the job because not a single one of them would meet your standard. You're welcome to provide proof that he did a good job.
You're welcome to provide proof that anyone has done a 'good job' in your eyes in that position.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the top guy will be gone regardless of involvement. whats troubling is that the particular va system was a closed loop in which there was no effective external monitoring to check performance. without market mechanism such closed systems are not going to end well so real reform seems needed.
the performance of the VA system is assessed in a number of studies. it's pretty much superior to medicaid etc and that is with a pretty heavy patient base.
|
As we were talking about climate change denial a few pages ago. http://www.macleans.ca/politics/america-dumbs-down/
I also noticed that in this thread. Why is it that in the US everything needs to be debated, not matter how clearly it is a scientific established fact? When this Bill Nye vs crazy creationist guy debate came up a month or two ago I was speechless how someone was actually willing to even talk to that guy.
|
On May 19 2014 01:21 Nyxisto wrote:As we were talking about climate change denial a few pages ago. http://www.macleans.ca/politics/america-dumbs-down/I also noticed that in this thread. Why is it that in the US everything needs to be debated, not matter how clearly it is a scientific established fact? When this Bill Nye vs crazy creationist guy debate came up a month or two ago I was speechless how someone was actually willing to even talk to that guy.
Because facts mix with opinions to create political goop.
|
On May 19 2014 01:21 Nyxisto wrote:As we were talking about climate change denial a few pages ago. http://www.macleans.ca/politics/america-dumbs-down/I also noticed that in this thread. Why is it that in the US everything needs to be debated, not matter how clearly it is a scientific established fact? When this Bill Nye vs crazy creationist guy debate came up a month or two ago I was speechless how someone was actually willing to even talk to that guy.
A large part of the problem is just straight up ignorance. People believe blindly in things they can't even begin to understand. For instance the ~9,000 year old earth gag, The Pope and Pat Robertson among several others have already moved on from that patently stupid notion. Yet people who 'claim' to be followers can't agree with their own infallible representative of God...
If just the people who's actual religion teaches that we don't need a ~9,000 year old earth to make sense of our universe could agree with the leaders of their religions we would be down to a minority of people still being brainwashed into that nonsense.
The same could be said for 'Christians' who say they want to refuse to serve gays... The Pope and Jesus would not have refused to serve a member of the gay community and then justified it with their 'faith'
So it's not even just religion that is the problem, but people twisting and manipulating it to fit their agenda. While the outcomes are rarely as violent, (nowadays) the distortion is similar to what we see from Radicals who do the same to Islam.
While many of the other accepted interpretations from religion on the age of the Earth are equally bat-shit insane, but at least they get over a ~6,000-9,000 year old earth...
Another part of the problem is discussing it. It's 'offensive' to call out the insanity in 'Christianity.' I for one am done pulling punches on the age of the earth. It's not ~9,000 years old and if you think it is you really should politely excuse yourself from any discussion where that notion has any importance because you're ruining it for sane people. Anyone who calls themselves Christian should also spend some time explaining to their brothers and sisters of the faith that the ~9,000 year old earth myth is propaganda and lunacy. Maybe in a decade we could get it down to less than 33% of people being so ignorant?
If we can't get that number down to a much smaller minority we don't have a chance at competing in a future world.
|
On May 19 2014 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
If we can't get that number down to a much smaller minority we don't have a chance at competing in a future world.
The weirdest part about the US for me is how the country has dozens of top notch universities, is home to the most important tech companies, but still half of the country and half of the GOP still seem to be convinced that vaccinating your children is going to result in a tentacle growing out of their head or something. It's like no matter how absurd any opinion is it seems like the people of the US have come to some kind of secret agreement that at least 40% of the population need to support it. It's like the country is split on anything on principle.
|
On May 19 2014 02:42 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
If we can't get that number down to a much smaller minority we don't have a chance at competing in a future world.
The weirdest part about the US for me is how the country has dozens of top notch universities, is home to the most important tech companies, but still half of the country and half of the GOP still seem to be convinced that vaccinating your children is going to result in a tentacle growing out of their head or something. It's like no matter how absurd any opinion is it seems like the people of the US have come to some kind of secret agreement that at least 40% of the population need to support it. It's like the country is split on anything on principle.
Because while the top of the US education is good the middle and bottom of the schools are a lot worse.
That allows the "weirder" idea's to sustain themselves. Esp when combined with the power of lobbies keeping schools from teaching facts like the age of the earth.
It doesnt matter how good your top education is when the average is bad.
|
On May 19 2014 02:42 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
If we can't get that number down to a much smaller minority we don't have a chance at competing in a future world.
The weirdest part about the US for me is how the country has dozens of top notch universities, is home to the most important tech companies, but still half of the country and half of the GOP still seem to be convinced that vaccinating your children is going to result in a tentacle growing out of their head or something. It's like no matter how absurd any opinion is it seems like the people of the US have come to some kind of secret agreement that at least 40% of the population need to support it. It's like the country is split on anything on principle.
The percent of people who don't trust vaccines is quite small. Here in MA vaccine skepticism is often related to higher levels of education.“It’s a paradox because it’s happening in communities that are well-educated and well-off,” Madoff said. “This is counter to most public health phenomena.” Link
|
On May 19 2014 02:47 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:42 Nyxisto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
If we can't get that number down to a much smaller minority we don't have a chance at competing in a future world.
The weirdest part about the US for me is how the country has dozens of top notch universities, is home to the most important tech companies, but still half of the country and half of the GOP still seem to be convinced that vaccinating your children is going to result in a tentacle growing out of their head or something. It's like no matter how absurd any opinion is it seems like the people of the US have come to some kind of secret agreement that at least 40% of the population need to support it. It's like the country is split on anything on principle. Because while the top of the US education is good the middle and bottom of the schools are a lot worse. That allows the "weirder" idea's to sustain themselves. Esp when combined with the power of lobbies keeping schools from teaching facts like the age of the earth. It doesnt matter how good your top education is when the average is bad.
Yeah the article mentioning how the 8yo girls request was mired in religious nonsense is a pretty good example.
As an 8 year old it becomes really difficult to understand why your state can't have an official fossil like the majority of other states. I feel for the parents who had to try to explain that rancid ignorance to their child.
Add to that the threat of hell or a promise to not be included in heaven if you don't agree with that insanity and you can see how our youth are regularly brainwashed into believing this nonsense long before they can form rational informed opinions of their own.
I have had it describe to me by pretty much everyone who I have met who was raised religious but have moved toward agnosticism. A description of true terror when contemplating leaving their faith. A fear that themselves and the people they love will burn in eternal hellfire for losing their faith... Or that they will never see them again if they go to heaven and the non-believers go to hell...
Personally I find it totally abhorant that we allow people to do such things to their children but it's their religion... We even regularly have debates about whether parents who refuse medical attention for their children should be charged with child abuse. These parents claim that their 'God' will heal them or take them to heaven which is better than medical treatment...
WHEN GOD DOESN'T ANSWER: THE CASUALTIES OF FAITH-HEALING
It is estimated that around a dozen U.S. children die in faith-healing cases each year, a handful of which spawn criminal charges, according to experts.
The First Century Gospel Church of Philadelphia’s teachings has clashed with authorities in the past.
In 1991, eight children died in a measles outbreak. All the parents were members of either First Century Gospel Church or the nearby Faith Tabernacle of Nicetown which also preaches faith-healing.
In 2011, Dale and Shannon Hickman of Oregon were sentenced to 75 months in prison after turning to faith healing to say their premature newborn, which was born in a family home, died from complications that could have easily been averted with medical care.
Also in Oregon, Jeff and Marci Beagley, were sentenced to 16 months in 2010 for the death of their 16-year-old son. The couple refused to use medicine for their son Neil, who was suffering from a preventable urinary tract blockage. Instead, they prayed and used anointing oils in the hope of divine intervention.
'Too many children have died unnecessarily - a graveyard full,' Judge Steven Maurer said at their sentencing. 'This has to stop.'
Oregon has since banned faith healing as a defense against murder charges.
Source
|
On May 19 2014 03:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:42 Nyxisto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
If we can't get that number down to a much smaller minority we don't have a chance at competing in a future world.
The weirdest part about the US for me is how the country has dozens of top notch universities, is home to the most important tech companies, but still half of the country and half of the GOP still seem to be convinced that vaccinating your children is going to result in a tentacle growing out of their head or something. It's like no matter how absurd any opinion is it seems like the people of the US have come to some kind of secret agreement that at least 40% of the population need to support it. It's like the country is split on anything on principle. The percent of people who don't trust vaccines is quite small. Here in MA vaccine skepticism is often related to higher levels of education. Show nested quote +“It’s a paradox because it’s happening in communities that are well-educated and well-off,” Madoff said. “This is counter to most public health phenomena.” Link One theory that I've heard is that when people get more educated they have a better ability to see through simple messaging and so become skeptical of it.
The numbers on Vaccines are just slightly different than the Tea party, would you call the Tea Party 'quite small' also?
I think the more commonly accepted explanation is that the higher levels of education makes people more proficient at ignoring conflicting evidence.
“A lot of it has to do with the sense of being empowered to question authority, which is a good thing in general, but it can go way too far when people question experts who know about things you don’t,” said Snyder. “It’s a common theme that we see parents questioning scientific facts in the same way they would debate a political topic.”
|
On May 19 2014 03:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
One theory that I've heard is that when people get more educated they have a better ability to see through simple messaging and so become skeptical of it.
Regarding the more educated people that are science skeptical, I guess that's more like a hippie/new age thing like gluten free food. Like the stereotypical mom that graduated in sociology and only shops in vegan stores and does yoga in her free time. That kind of anti-science stance is probably more lifestyle based than on actual belief.
Because while the top of the US education is good the middle and bottom of the schools are a lot worse.
That allows the "weirder" idea's to sustain themselves. Esp when combined with the power of lobbies keeping schools from teaching facts like the age of the earth.
I'm not sure this is the reason . After all college graduation rates overall are still way higher in the US than in many other places. I think it has more to do with the "anything goes" mentality that seems to be dominant in the US. Like how 'hate speech' seems to fall under free speech which may give people the impression that saying racist nonsense is actually just another opinion.
|
On May 19 2014 03:19 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 03:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
One theory that I've heard is that when people get more educated they have a better ability to see through simple messaging and so become skeptical of it. Regarding the more educated people that are science skeptical, I guess that's more like a hippie/new age thing like gluten free food. Like the stereotypical mom that graduated in sociology and only shops in vegan stores and does yoga in her free time. That kind of anti-science stance is probably more lifestyle based than on actual belief.
That sounds like a west coast liberal stereotype 
Bear in mind that as you move beyond high school you have fewer simple 'correct' answers in the back of the book. Hard facts are harder to come by and skepticism and critical analysis are valuable... to a point. It's only when people allow their skepticism and critiques to become unyielding that you really have a problem.
As an example, if you look at global warming there's nothing wrong with starting out skeptical of the conclusions. But as data presents itself you need to yield your position when appropriate. That's often hard because it is (wrongly in my opinion) associated with being incorrect, which leaves you feeling bad or opening yourself up to ridicule. In turn, that can cause people to dig their heels in and try harder and harder to prove that they are right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
