If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 20:39:30 +0000, "Paul J. Adam" wrote:
In message , Alan Minyard writes On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 01:09:56 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" bbolsoy@ nospam.nospam wrote: Which particular european nations and medical care system are you refering to? All of them. They are decades behind the US Medical Care system. Provided you're adequately insured, US healthcare is by all accounts very good. One great benefit of living in the UK is that I don't have to worry about my insurers causing me harm to save money, or refusing to cover my treatment. We have laws (particularly one called COBRA) that prevents any hospital from refusing treatment on the basis of ability to pay. The vast majority of hospitals in the US write off millions of dollars a year as uncollectable debts. Al Minyard |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 20:49:56 +0000, "Paul J. Adam" wrote:
In message , Alan Minyard writes On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 08:04:26 GMT, "Bjørnar" wrote: In war-time you would shoot first and ask later if your're not 100% certain. For some, though, the issue is blurred. I am a very qualified pistol shot, trained in combat shooting. Shooting me "dead" from anything other than an ambush would be rather difficult. Dreadfully easy, Al. I match your pistol and raise you a section of troops with scoped rifles and support weapons, and the firefight starts at two hundred yards. I'll even let you fire first. (If it's wartime then "fighting fair" is for the survivors on the losing side to console themselves with) No one said anything about war or troops. If you want to go to a war scenario I really do not think that you would want to mess with the US The way to kill an alert armed man is to deceive rather than to outshoot. Don't leap out, wild-eyed and frantic, shouting "Die, American pig-dog-scum!"; but (for example) man a tidy, disciplined vehicle check point and politely ask to see identification and travel documents (the "Excuse Me, Meester?" ploy). Not how street thugs operate. There's a _reason_ pistols are considered to be self-defence weapons of last resort by most militaries, however entertaining they are to shoot for sport and even to train with. Of course, especially the nearly useless 9mm rounds. I carry a .45 Colt. I also have several rifles that will greatly out shoot the 5,6mm. If you expected to fight, you should have brought a rifle: US helicopter pilots in Desert Storm and Somalia fully grasped that concept (the USMC have complained about a AH-1 modification, because they stored two M-16s on the inner door of the ammunition bay in case they were forced down and the modification precluded that... the Marines understood full well that if you're being pursued by angry men with rifles, a rifle of your own will at least slow the pursuit down in a way a pistol never can) Once again, we were (at least I thought we were) discussing crime, not war. For europe, everything is "blurred" Less so than you might think. Al Minyard |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 23:17:34 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote:
Alan Minyard wrote in : On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 01:09:56 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote: Which particular european nations and medical care system are you refering to? Regards... All of them. They are decades behind the US Medical Care system. Well, how exactly? Regards... They do not have the requisite number of MRIs CTs etc. They do not have adequate ambulance services (I am talking about the equipment, not the Paramedics). They still have hospitals with open wards (nearly all of the hospitals in the US are private rooms only). It is a matter of adequate resources, research, surgical techniques etc. It is not an accident the twins co-joined at the head/brain come to the US from all over the world to be separated (at no cost to the parents). Al Minyard |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Alan Minyard wrote: "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote: Alan Minyard wrote: All of them. They are decades behind the US Medical Care system. Well, how exactly? They do not have the requisite number of MRIs CTs etc. For example, there are supposedly more MRI machines in Orlando, Florida than there are in all of England - the place they were invented. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
They do not have the requisite number of MRIs CTs etc.
They do not have adequate ambulance services (I am talking about the equipment, not the Paramedics). They still have hospitals with open wards (nearly all of the hospitals in the US are private rooms only). It is a matter of adequate resources, research, surgical techniques etc. It is not an accident the twins co-joined at the head/brain come to the US from all over the world to be separated (at no cost to the parents). It would be interesting to see some actual figures of the efficiency of medical systems around the world. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
In message , Marcus
Andersson writes "NEMO ME IMPUNE" wrote in message ... How many Aircraft carriers in Finland? (since when does this thread have anything to do with aircraft carriers? Besides, I don't have a clue what this thread has to do in the rec.aviation.military group.) That being said, Finland does have around 60 F-18 Hornets, so I guess they must have a couple of aircraft carriers too. I mean, why else would they have carrier-planes? It is worth bearing in mind that Finland has a smaller population than several US cities, and how many of them can boast that sort of defence? -- Julian Barker "Many battles have been fought and won by soldiers nourished on beer,and the King does not believe that coffee-drinking soldiers can be relied upon to endure hardships in case of another war." Frederick the Great, 1777 |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Alan Minyard wrote in
: On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 23:17:34 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote: Alan Minyard wrote in m: On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 01:09:56 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote: Which particular european nations and medical care system are you refering to? Regards... All of them. They are decades behind the US Medical Care system. Well, how exactly? Regards... They do not have the requisite number of MRIs CTs etc. They do not have adequate ambulance services (I am talking about the equipment, not the Paramedics). They still have hospitals with open wards (nearly all of the hospitals in the US are private rooms only). Are these personal assertions, or what sources you base these numbers on? What does this say about a countrys health service in general? There are other factors involved. It is a matter of adequate resources, research, surgical techniques etc. It is not an accident the twins co-joined at the head/brain come to the US from all over the world to be separated (at no cost to the parents). Al Minyard Well, I guess some of this is true, but Europe is about 40 nations with a great deal of variation in both quality, high-tech gadgetory and service. It seems to me you treat Europe as a one common unity, which to me seems at least as silly (pardon the french) as treating the US as one great state with common laws and practise. Many European countries have a fully modern health service, not at least free medical care for everyone (like here in Norway). Regards... |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
"Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote Many European countries have a fully modern health service, not at least free medical care for everyone (like here in Norway). Unless hospitals spring up out of thin air, and doctors and nurses work gratis, there is no *free*. The payment you make is merely called something different. Pete |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
"Pete" wrote in
: "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote Many European countries have a fully modern health service, not at least free medical care for everyone (like here in Norway). Unless hospitals spring up out of thin air, and doctors and nurses work gratis, there is no *free*. The payment you make is merely called something different. The crucial difference is that it's baked into the normal taxes and that medicare is given to anyone whom needs it, nomatter what taxpaying status. It means if you have an accident, you don't have to worry. In many cases you will also get a social refund if you have direct expenses connected with treatment, for instance for medicine or physioteraphy treatment due to an overstrained back or arm. If the hospital can't treat you, you're transfered to one that can. In some cases even overseas. One negative effect, of course, is capasity, the waiting queues can be long for certain kinds of treatment. Typically the more severe ones which require complex treatment. But private clinics are of course an alternative too. Regards... |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote:
"Pete" wrote in : "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote Many European countries have a fully modern health service, not at least free medical care for everyone (like here in Norway). Unless hospitals spring up out of thin air, and doctors and nurses work gratis, there is no *free*. The payment you make is merely called something different. The crucial difference is that it's baked into the normal taxes and that medicare is given to anyone whom needs it, nomatter what taxpaying status. It means if you have an accident, you don't have to worry. In many cases you will also get a social refund if you have direct expenses connected with treatment, for instance for medicine or physioteraphy treatment due to an overstrained back or arm. If the hospital can't treat you, you're transfered to one that can. In some cases even overseas. One negative effect, of course, is capasity, the waiting queues can be long for certain kinds of treatment. Typically the more severe ones which require complex treatment. But private clinics are of course an alternative too. Regards... Sounds like Canada's system... -- -Gord. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|