Moonlight Graham Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) The US federal government spends 20% on its military and we spend about 3%. I thought we spend about 8% on our military. where did you get the 3% number? US also spends 2.5% of GDP on its military, less than the UK. Canada is at 1.4%. edit: US actually spends 4.7% of its gdp on its military (misread my own link! lol) Edited October 9, 2012 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
punked Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) I thought we spend about 8% on our military. where did you get the 3% number? US also spends 2.5% of GDP on its military, less than the UK. Canada is at 1.4%. Your link says the US spends 5 percent and that world average is 2.5 percent of GDP. It seems according to your chart is the most in the world by far amongst the top senders with the exception of of middle east dictators. This why I love citations I like to read them and educate myself. I read almost every link posted. Edited October 8, 2012 by punked Quote
Guest Derek L Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 I thought we spend about 8% on our military. where did you get the 3% number? US also spends 2.5% of GDP on its military, less than the UK. Canada is at 1.4%. Read your link again.......United States = 4.7% of GDP.... Quote
Bonam Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 I thought we spend about 8% on our military. where did you get the 3% number? US also spends 2.5% of GDP on its military, less than the UK. Canada is at 1.4%. Not sure how you can link to a list of figures and get the very first number wrong. Your link says US spends 4.7% of GDP on its military. The listed figure also doesn't include the costs of the ongoing wars, which are counted as extra. Quote
punked Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 Not sure how you can link to a list of figures and get the very first number wrong. Your link says US spends 4.7% of GDP on its military. The listed figure also doesn't include the costs of the ongoing wars, which are counted as extra. I forgot about that. What is also off the books is all the drones the US uses because those are ru, by the CIA which is classified as a domestic program and not counted I military spending. Quote
Argus Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 I have a bigger question for you: the US can have a centralized State health system (Obamacare) or it can have a sophisticated military system. But it can't have both. Why not? It's current health care system costs considerably more than any other nation on earth spends, yet it gets no better results for all that spending. Logically, if they just converted to our system (with all its flaws) they'd save a third of the money and still get the same outcomes. Of course, you'll say our military is not sophisticated, despite recent spending, but the US has ten times as much money available. Furthermore, our taxation level is considerably higher than theirs. Yet we have a small deficit. Therefore, they ought to be able to increase taxes quite a bit. Blaming their huge deficit on health care is far too simplistic. It's like all those people who insist that returning to the taxation levels they had in previous years would gut the economy. If that were so how was the economy able to thrive in previous times? How is it the economies in other high tax areas, such as Canada, the nordic countries or Germany are able to perform better than the US? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) Waiting lines in hospitals? Maybe in Quebec, but not here... I don't know where "here" is but there are very long waiting lines in hospitals in Ontario too, though not as bad as Quebec. I believe that is also the case in BC. Edited October 8, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
GostHacked Posted October 8, 2012 Author Report Posted October 8, 2012 That's another lie. Read the reports about how much malpractice insurance costs doctors and then get back to me. Maybe we need better doctors. Quote
Smallc Posted October 8, 2012 Report Posted October 8, 2012 I don't know where "here" is but there are very long waiting lines in hospitals in Ontario too, though not as bad as Quebec. I believe that is also the case in BC. Lines? Lists, maybe, but lines? Necessary procedures have no waits anywhere (generally of course) as you and August both know. Quote
Shady Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Necessary procedures have no waits anywhere That's a load of bull plop. Quote
Shady Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Maybe we need better doctors. Sure I guess. But when you have a system where a doctor can be sued for not ordering every single test under the sun, costs are going to soar. Because doctor's, not wanting to be in legal jeopardy, will order said tests, even though most of them may not be at all necessary. Quote
Smallc Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 That's a load of bull plop. If you're in danger of dying, you don't wait. It's that simple. Emergency and emergent cases have no wait, and urgent cases have very little wait. That's not a load of anything. Quote
Pliny Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 If you're in danger of dying, you don't wait. It's that simple. Emergency and emergent cases have no wait, and urgent cases have very little wait. That's not a load of anything. That may be true but they have to determine if you are an emergency or emergent case first. If they don't see you to make that determination then you may die before they do. It happens. Or if you are in emergency during a busy flu season and you show up with flu-like symptoms your burst appendix may go undiagnosed and you may die. It happens. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Smallc Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Well, that kind of thing happens anywhere. Quote
Bonam Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Why not? It's current health care system costs considerably more than any other nation on earth spends, yet it gets no better results for all that spending. Are you sure? Healthcare related stats for the US are usually skewed to the negative side by the portion of the population without access to good healthcare. But what of the people in the US that do have good insurance coverage and/or plenty of money. If you are in the upper middle class or higher, how does the US healthcare system compare to that of other nations? Further, one must consider that a large portion of the world's innovation in health care science, technology, and procedures occurs in the US, and this has a real cost, one that is passed on to healthcare customers by the pharmaceutical companies, technology companies, and hospitals that undertake such research and development. Logically, if they just converted to our system (with all its flaws) they'd save a third of the money and still get the same outcomes. How is that "logical"? You know that there are many factors to consider in any given country, and just because a certain system works relatively well in one, doesn't guarantee it will work as well in another. Quote
Pliny Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Yes but none of your points have anything to do with how we decide how to publicly fund something. If I want to cut say Military spending and you want to increase it we both go out to the public and make our arguments. Then the people vote on that platform and whoever wins get to say they have a mandate from the people to do that thing. Welcome to Democracy 101. ????? Why do you think that addresses what I said? Democracy is about voting on what role your government plays in society even if conservatives do not like that thing. Your argument is Conservatives is right and should be how we make every decision no matter what the majority wants, my argument is democracy is how we should make our decisions regardless of left wing or right wing thoughts. Basically, the nation's constitution decides what role your government plays in society. My argument is that the national government should not expand its mandate beyond what it is defined to be in the nation's constitution. Your argument is that it has a mandate to provide you with whatever entitlements you feel it should, even to the degree of what entertainment choices should be made available to you. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Pliny Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Well, that kind of thing happens anywhere. Yes, but the point is that the longer the wait lines, the less attendant the system can be and the greater the risk of these things happening. Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
Argus Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Lines? Lists, maybe, but lines? Necessary procedures have no waits anywhere (generally of course) as you and August both know. There are long lines for ER visits, and long lists for any number of procedures, including diagnostic tests. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Moonlight Graham Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Your link says the US spends 5 percent and that world average is 2.5 percent of GDP. It seems according to your chart is the most in the world by far amongst the top senders with the exception of of middle east dictators. This why I love citations I like to read them and educate myself. I read almost every link posted. thanks, I incorrectly read the world average as the US's contribution, sorry. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
GostHacked Posted October 9, 2012 Author Report Posted October 9, 2012 Sure I guess. But when you have a system where a doctor can be sued for not ordering every single test under the sun, costs are going to soar. Because doctor's, not wanting to be in legal jeopardy, will order said tests, even though most of them may not be at all necessary. Better doctors will be able to diagnose better with less tests. Instead of every test under the sun, select the tests that may show what you suspect is happening to the patient. All that stems from the need for better doctors that have the patients best interest at the core. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Lines? Lists, maybe, but lines? Necessary procedures have no waits anywhere (generally of course) as you and August both know. Not according to this article: http://www.carp.ca/2...-time-alliance/ July 27, 2012 – Wait times for critical medical procedures has not improved since last year, according to the Wait Time Alliance (WTA) 2012 national report card on provincial wait time performance. The report focuses on the five essential areas identified in the 2004 Health Accord: cancer (radiation therapy), heart (bypass surgery), joint replacement (hip and knee), sight restoration (cataract), and diagnostic imaging (CT and MRI). [...] CARP has heard our members express concern about the undue hardship due to long wait times for treatment and necessary procedures. It is disappointing that the results of the 2012 WTA report card show Canada regressing in its wait time performance. Moreover, the national benchmark wait times appear to be very generous, yet we are still not meeting some of them. Quote
jacee Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 (edited) Occupy Sesame Street! Edited October 9, 2012 by jacee Quote
cybercoma Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 There are long lines for ER visits, and long lists for any number of procedures, including diagnostic tests. ERs are triaged. You don't wait at an ER if you have a serious condition. Quote
cybercoma Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 Not according to this article: http://www.carp.ca/2...-time-alliance/ July 27, 2012 – Wait times for critical medical procedures has not improved since last year, according to the Wait Time Alliance (WTA) 2012 national report card on provincial wait time performance. The report focuses on the five essential areas identified in the 2004 Health Accord: cancer (radiation therapy), heart (bypass surgery), joint replacement (hip and knee), sight restoration (cataract), and diagnostic imaging (CT and MRI). [...] CARP has heard our members express concern about the undue hardship due to long wait times for treatment and necessary procedures. It is disappointing that the results of the 2012 WTA report card show Canada regressing in its wait time performance. Moreover, the national benchmark wait times appear to be very generous, yet we are still not meeting some of them. 80-100% of patients received radiation treatments within 6 months and heart bypass surgeries within 1 month. 70-79% of patients received hip replacement surgeries within 6 months and cataracts surgeries within 4 months. These are non life-threatening issues, although they do affect one's quality of life. 60-69% of patients received knee replacement surgeries within 6 months. Again a non life-threatening issue, which also is put off a lot of times by doctors when a patient is too young. Knee replacements wear away at the bones in the legs. If they're put in too early in a person's life, they will have to be replaced, forcing the person to undergo subsequent surgery for the same thing. This may be one of the reasons for the delays. Another thing you didn't consider when you dug up these statistics from a second-hand source (which happens to be the association for retired persons, making their interpretation less than neutral) was the distribution of grades between the provinces vis-a-vis population distribution. One of the best performing provinces is Ontario which has almost 40% of the country's entire population. The worst performing province, which is the one that brought the figures down, was Manitoba which has less than 4% of the country's population. Moreover, Manitoba has a large aboriginal community, whose health care services are not handled in the same way as other citizens. Their care is covered by the federal government, rather than the provinces. These are all issues that people fail to consider when they're generalizing from the Wait Time Alliance numbers to report on the experiences of all Canadians. They don't weight the experiences by population distributions, rather they give the experiences of 40% of the population in Ontario the same weight as 4% of the population in Manitoba. It's not a very accurate picture. Quote
Argus Posted October 9, 2012 Report Posted October 9, 2012 ERs are triaged. You don't wait at an ER if you have a serious condition. Most people consider broken bones to be serious... Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.