Open enrollment increases for 2026

#76
#76
Nice, I can only go by what they have related to me and their experince with the AU HC system hasn't been good and were impressed with how quick their kid was treated.

I would like to know what their definition of "seen" is.

That's the problem with basing your opinions on second-hand anecdotal experience, rather than factual metrics.
 
#78
#78
I still don't know the factual mean of "seen" is.

Also, describing government provided statistics as factual is a huge stretch.

Right, because if you can define "seen" to a meaning that you don't find acceptable, then you can hold on to your erroneous beliefs, and doubly so if you dismiss the source out of hand without any substantial argument for doing so.

 
#79
#79
Right, because if you can define "seen" to a meaning that you don't find acceptable, then you can hold on to your erroneous beliefs, and doubly so if you dismiss the source out of hand without any substantial argument for doing so.

So what is Hog's erroneous belief? Be specific.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol
#80
#80
Right, because if you can define "seen" to a meaning that you don't find acceptable, then you can hold on to your erroneous beliefs, and doubly so if you dismiss the source out of hand without any substantial argument for doing so.


i didn't dismiss the source, I question it.
 
#81
#81
Right, because if you can define "seen" to a meaning that you don't find acceptable, then you can hold on to your erroneous beliefs, and doubly so if you dismiss the source out of hand without any substantial argument for doing so.

😂 UConn.edu
Shakin my head and laughin at you!!!
Bringin some DEI hire philosophy up in here 🫵🏻
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
#84
#84
Assisted suicide is becoming a popular recommendation in Canada and the UK
No.
1761074711566.png

In America we pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and take care of it ourselves by utilizing our 2nd amendment rights.
 
#85
#85
Right, because if you can define "seen" to a meaning that you don't find acceptable, then you can hold on to your erroneous beliefs, and doubly so if you dismiss the source out of hand without any substantial argument for doing so.

You can always “ ask a nurse “ I’m sure we could find one on this board somewhere that could give you a straight answer 😉😂
 
#86
#86
When there are discussions about nationalizing our health care model, there is rarely discussion of rationing of services. It is my understanding that other countries do that outright or accomplish the same with wait times for procedures. I do not know how America could nationalize without needing to ration like other countries do. I don't think Americans are in favor of rationing.
This is really interesting because we already have between 200-400k souls leave this earth every year because of medical malpractice , that we never talk about . I wonder what effect it would have on those numbers when we lower the standard , and increase the wait times ( which will happen in a government ran health care system . Would we accept it if those numbers increased , would they decrease , or just get spread into different stats ?
 
#88
#88
That's the problem with basing your opinions on second-hand anecdotal experience, rather than factual metrics.
you are falsely conflating two different pieces of "factual data".

The Australia link covers wait time.
The American link covers overall visit time. the article on America uses both "visit time" and "wait time" but when you look at the data its overall time in the ER, not time spent waiting to see a doctor/nurse.

your link on America explains a good bit too of why its different without jumping to the conclusion that american healthcare sucks. and lets just pretend like they were actually saying the same thing just for the sake of argument:
-Population density was given as a major driver, with more dense areas generally have longer wait times. Australia's population density is 3.7 per km squared. that would rank 48th in population density in the US, somewhere between North Dakota and Montana. Those states had times of 1hr 50 to 2hrs 7 mins. Australia? 1hr 57 mins. right smack dab in the middle of those two as their population density suggests. when you compare American apples to Australian oranges, of course you get a major difference. you compare American apples to Australian apples, and actually pretty much the exact same.
-Americans also average 10lbs heavier, with less exercise. you put worse "material" into the same system you are going to get worse results. doesn't matter what the system is.
-The Australia link also claims success by breaking down visits based on reason for the visit, the American data doesn't make a similar comparison (more apples and oranges). from first hand experience I know American ERs do the same type of prioritization. So I doubt there is much of a difference there.
 
#89
#89
you are falsely conflating two different pieces of "factual data".

The Australia link covers wait time.
The American link covers overall visit time. the article on America uses both "visit time" and "wait time" but when you look at the data its overall time in the ER, not time spent waiting to see a doctor/nurse.

your link on America explains a good bit too of why its different without jumping to the conclusion that american healthcare sucks. and lets just pretend like they were actually saying the same thing just for the sake of argument:
-Population density was given as a major driver, with more dense areas generally have longer wait times. Australia's population density is 3.7 per km squared. that would rank 48th in population density in the US, somewhere between North Dakota and Montana. Those states had times of 1hr 50 to 2hrs 7 mins. Australia? 1hr 57 mins. right smack dab in the middle of those two as their population density suggests. when you compare American apples to Australian oranges, of course you get a major difference. you compare American apples to Australian apples, and actually pretty much the exact same.
-Americans also average 10lbs heavier, with less exercise. you put worse "material" into the same system you are going to get worse results. doesn't matter what the system is.
-The Australia link also claims success by breaking down visits based on reason for the visit, the American data doesn't make a similar comparison (more apples and oranges). from first hand experience I know American ERs do the same type of prioritization. So I doubt there is much of a difference there.
Just when I think your only value is being beautiful, you post something like this and show your brains have value, too.

Good work. Have a cookie.
 
Last edited:
#90
#90
Just when I think your only value is being beautiful, you post something like this and show your brains have value, too.

Good work. Have a cookie.
@LouderVol has shown us precisely why most "data analysis" done is total ********. My job is actually pretty involved in this stuff, and unfortunately the overwhelming majority of people (I mean like 90%+, including high-paid consultants that should know better) don't take the few minutes to understand where the data comes from, how it was collected, what biases the collectors may have, what errors are likely present, and in the end what it's actually saying. Everyone wants a dashboard-esque view of everything but most of the time that just doesn't work.
 
#91
#91
@LouderVol has shown us precisely why most "data analysis" done is total ********. My job is actually pretty involved in this stuff, and unfortunately the overwhelming majority of people (I mean like 90%+, including high-paid consultants that should know better) don't take the few minutes to understand where the data comes from, how it was collected, what biases the collectors may have, what errors are likely present, and in the end what it's actually saying. Everyone wants a dashboard-esque view of everything but most of the time that just doesn't work.
Ok, fine.

You're not just another pretty face, too. You have value because of your intelligence just like Louder.

Feel better? 😘
 
#94
#94
What does that have to do with healthcare? You saying we can't afford universal healthcare?

Almost $40 trillion in debt and you believe that we as a country can afford universal healthcare?

When this thread was created by a poster that represents a large portion of Americans that are wondering if health insurance is even worth the cost as 30-40 something year old.

A healthy person who only visits the doctor maybe once or twice a year should opt for a catastrophic medical plan.

You're fine paying insurance companies 800 a month for familly coverage but draw the line if it's less than half the amount to the government.

If the affordable care act has taught us anything then it should be that the government should stay out of healthcare. The affordable care act is anything but affordable.

I can’t think of anything that the government does well except spend money and blame each side.
 
#97
#97
I still remember our Aussie friends being amazed at how quick their kid was seen in the ER on one of their trips here.

I didn’t take you for the type that has friends.

But in all seriousness.

Did your friends elaborate on the wait times?

I know a lot of folks praise the Canadian healthcare system, but if you ever have the chance to speak with someone intelligent from Canada they will tell you it’s a disaster.
 
#98
#98
Lol, sure, if you considers "I can't afford healthcare so I didn't purchase it" to be a "choice".

treating it as such does serve the purpose of allowing you to continue to turn a blind eye to the broken system, so there's at least that.

So are we finally admitting that the ACA was a mistake? And it didn’t make health insurance affordable?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
#99
#99
I didn’t take you for the type that has friends.

But in all seriousness.

Did your friends elaborate on the wait times?

I know a lot of folks praise the Canadian healthcare system, but if you ever have the chance to speak with someone intelligent from Canada they will tell you it’s a disaster.

It works when the friends are on another continent... We'll see how long we stay friends once they move here.

No, just that they couldn't believe how quick they were in and out here. It's been a few years, can't remember if this visit was for the broken arm or stitches.
 
So are we finally admitting that the ACA was a mistake? And it didn’t make health insurance affordable?

Go down to red Georgia and tell your fellow MAGAs that those ACA subsidies were a mistake, and that it they just bootstrap harder, then they'll be fine.

The still won't be able to afford their insurance premiums, but who cares, right?

Then when all those uninsured people start going to the ER for primary care again, the rest of us who can afford our premiums can watch them increase further when hospital systems pass on the increased operating costs.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top