Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nadaka]

http://torrentfreak.com/microsofts-bogus-dmca-notices-censor-bbc-cnn-wikipedia-spotify-and-more-121007/

Microsoft has created an automatic copyright infringement algorithm that automatically files false DMCA notices. These are real "I just committed perjury" DMCA notices, not mere legal posturing.

[Reelya]

Unfortunately this notice is not an isolated incident. In another DMCA notice Microsoft asked Google to remove a Spotify.com URL and on several occasions they even asked Google to censor their own search engine Bing.

Wow, microsoft admits truth about bing.com

[scriver]

This is good, ironically. It makes it very easy to demonstrate just how wrong-hitting these laws are.

[Reelya]

Apparently a lot of those DMCA notices were because the URLs referenced the number '45' and that has some connection with Windows 8.

Hey - everyone get your hands of Microsoft's proprietary numerical values!

[GreatJustice]

GreatJustice, you realize that the AMA is a private organization? What method of getting rid of them do you propose which doesn't involve a government crackdown?

Also yelling "AMA" is a total non-sequiter to my point that in a completely private university set-up, only those already wealthy can do those $300,000 courses. Private banks won't loan that kind of money to students because they can't repossess a degree, like they can with a house. High fees excludes many people who would make excellent doctors, but their parents weren't rich.

Ever thought that the massive costs of medical education is why America has to import doctors from everywhere from Canada to India (which have affordable public universities), and what keeps medical bills so high. Apparently those "socialist" trained doctors are good enough for America after all. Canadian doctors can make more in the USA for the same reason selling products in a market with shortages and inflation is highly profitable. A bubble in prices isn't necessarily a sign of great market health.

Getting rid of the AMA fixes this problem exactly how?

Except the AMA is an organization that has monopoly privilege over doctor licensing, granted by the government in 1910. It's rather arbitrary to say that removing its monopoly on licensing would be a "government crackdown".

[Kedly]

Wait? Becoming a doctor in canada is cheap!? (=P)

[Reelya]

Saying the AMA has a monopoly over licensing rather overstates matters by implying that all doctors must join the AMA or else, which simply isn't true.

According to their own figures the AMA membership is declining, it now only represents about 15% of practicing American doctors as it's members (down from 30% a decade ago). 15% isn't a "monopoly" by any stretch. And they specifically DO NOT license doctors to practice medicine in the USA. That's the "United States Medical Licensing Examination" that does that.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Medical_Association

Membership

Published membership figures for the AMA include:

    In 2002, it was reported that the AMA had 278,000 members, among whom were "less than 30% of American physicians."
    By 2007, the AMA had 238,977 members, of which 20.5% were medical students and 9% were residents.
    There were 215,854 members as of December 2010, of which 47,227 (21.9%) were medical students and 31,049 (14.4%) were residents or fellows. The total was a decrease from the 2009 membership of 228,150.
    A 2011 article asserted that "somewhere in the neighborhood of 15% of practicing US doctors now belong to the AMA." Membership total as of Dec 31, 2011 (including residents and students) was 217,490 of approximately 954,000 practicing physicians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Medical_Licensing_Examination

The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) is a multi-part professional exam sponsored by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) and the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME). Physicians with an M.D. degree are required to pass this examination before being permitted to practice medicine in the United States of America; see below for requirements of physicians with a D.O. degree.

That entire article makes zero references to the AMA. They are not involved in licensing doctors, and 5 out of 6 doctors aren't even members. So it's not a "closed shop" and the AMA has nothing to do with licensing doctors. Anyone who focuses on the AMA is just trying to divert your attention away from the HMO's.

The 1910 link seems to be in relation to the Flexner report of 1910. which lead to the situation that "Each state branch of the American Medical Association has oversight over the conventional medical schools located within the state", but that is specifically NOT a monopoly in "doctor licensing".

[Kedly]

Isn't part of the reason it is so good because only the rich have access to it? (Semi-serious, allready regretting asking this)

[GreatJustice]

According to their own figures the AMA membership is declining, it now only represents about 15% of practicing American doctors as it's members (down from 30% a decade ago). 15% isn't a "monopoly" by any stretch. And they specifically DO NOT license doctors to practice medicine in the USA. That's the "United States Medical Licensing Examination" that does that.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Medical_Association

Membership

Published membership figures for the AMA include:

    In 2002, it was reported that the AMA had 278,000 members, among whom were "less than 30% of American physicians."
    By 2007, the AMA had 238,977 members, of which 20.5% were medical students and 9% were residents.
    There were 215,854 members as of December 2010, of which 47,227 (21.9%) were medical students and 31,049 (14.4%) were residents or fellows. The total was a decrease from the 2009 membership of 228,150.
    A 2011 article asserted that "somewhere in the neighborhood of 15% of practicing US doctors now belong to the AMA." Membership total as of Dec 31, 2011 (including residents and students) was 217,490 of approximately 954,000 practicing physicians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Medical_Licensing_Examination

The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) is a multi-part professional exam sponsored by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) and the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME). Physicians with an M.D. degree are required to pass this examination before being permitted to practice medicine in the United States of America; see below for requirements of physicians with a D.O. degree.

That entire article makes zero references to the AMA. They are not involved in licensing doctors, and 5 out of 6 doctors aren't even members. So it's not a "closed shop" and the AMA has nothing to do with licensing doctors. Anyone who focuses on the AMA is just trying to divert your attention away from the HMO's.

The 1910 link seems to be in relation to the Flexner report of 1910. which lead to the situation that "Each state branch of the American Medical Association has oversight over the conventional medical schools located within the state", but that is specifically NOT a monopoly in "doctor licensing".

Yet before 1910, the AMA had no influence in licensing whatsoever, whereas after it was effectively at the helm. Furthermore, licensing boards were created at the behest of the AMA in the first place! In fact, prior to the Flexner Report, doctor's were paid quite modestly.

If you would prefer, though, you can blame the Licensing Boards instead. It all adds up to the same thing.

[Reelya]

Also before 1910, there were an abundance of doctor "schools" run by illiterates, which accepted students without even high school educations, and made them "doctors" in only 2 years, and the word "quack" abounded.

The AMA had no influence on licensing before 1910 because there was no such thing as licensing.

Seeing as medical licensing is an integral part of the medical system in America, which you've stated is the world's greatest, what exact elements of the system do you actually like, since you seem to disagree with every specific of how the system is run?

- Canadian doctors going to America for higher wages: you implied this was a failing of the Canadian system, and a sign of success of the American system. Yet, you're also opposed to the higher wages which attracted the Canadian doctors to the USA in the first place, and your now calling it a failing of the American system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html?pagewanted=all

American doctors and hospitals kill patients through surgical and medical mistakes more often than their counterparts in other industrialized nations.

Yeah, i know New York Times isn't unbiased like whichever nameless conservative blog you use as a source, greatjustice. Man, those commie doctors overseas and their "let's not kill the patients" routine.

[GreatJustice]

Erm, what?

   Total Number of All U.S. Registered Hospitals: 5,754
...
Number of State and Local Government Community Hospitals: 1,068
...
Number of Federal Government Hospitals: 213

Those are the major categories of public hospitals I can see in there. Including the ones that are probably public (Psychiatric Hospitals, Long Term Care and Hospital Units of Institutions) you still only get up to 1,837 public hospitals out of those 5,754. I make that 32%, not 90%.

Not really inspiring confidence in the rest of your unreferenced assertions here.

Allow me to reword that. I didn't put that quite right, sorry.

As of 1910, 90% of hospitals were for-profit and non-subsidized. As of 1990, that percentage was 10%, the rest being either government owned, government subsidized and non-profit, and under extremely heavy regulations.

Seeing as medical licensing is an integral part of the medical system in America, which you've stated is the world's greatest, what exact elements of the system do you actually like, since you seem to disagree with every specific of how the system is run?

No. America's system isn't anywhere near the world's greatest. It's certainly not socialized like other countries, but it's a corporatist/fascist system that is arguably worse.

In terms of things I like, I like healthcare paid for out of pocket as of 1960, when insurance wasn't as widespread and Medicare/Medicaid didn't exist. In turn, American healthcare was extremely high quality, and yet the mess of insurance companies, subsidies, regulations on coverage, didn't exist, so it was fairly affordable (a whole discussion if you want to go that way).

Also before 1910, there were an abundance of doctor "schools" run by illiterates, which accepted students without even high school educations, and made them "doctors" in only 2 years, and the word "quack" abounded.

That wasn't the reason provided for closing many of the medical schools, though, and quackery was rapidly on its way out regardless. Not to mention, most people actually hired doctors with a good record and references, rather than Doctor Murphy, Miracle Elixir provider (for example, the high level of quality yet low cost found by mutual aid associations, who were quite discerning in who they hired).

- Canadian doctors going to America for higher wages: you implied this was a failing of the Canadian system, and a sign of success of the American system. Yet, you're also opposed to the higher wages which attracted the Canadian doctors to the USA in the first place, and your now calling it a failing of the American system.

No, no, no. That particular article was in reference to the guy claiming that doctors aren't paid well in the first world, and that they can "barely cover expenses". That was the only reason I brought it up, which I'm pretty sure I mentioned when I posted it.

Isn't part of the reason it is so good because only the rich have access to it? (Semi-serious, allready regretting asking this)

Not sure what you mean by that. Could you elaborate?

[Nadaka]

Erm, what?

   Total Number of All U.S. Registered Hospitals: 5,754
...
Number of State and Local Government Community Hospitals: 1,068
...
Number of Federal Government Hospitals: 213

Those are the major categories of public hospitals I can see in there. Including the ones that are probably public (Psychiatric Hospitals, Long Term Care and Hospital Units of Institutions) you still only get up to 1,837 public hospitals out of those 5,754. I make that 32%, not 90%.

Not really inspiring confidence in the rest of your unreferenced assertions here.

Allow me to reword that. I didn't put that quite right, sorry.

As of 1910, 90% of hospitals were for-profit and non-subsidized. As of 1990, that percentage was 10%, the rest being either government owned, government subsidized and non-profit, and under extremely heavy regulations.

This has already been refuted. Repeating it does mean that we have forgotten.

Seeing as medical licensing is an integral part of the medical system in America, which you've stated is the world's greatest, what exact elements of the system do you actually like, since you seem to disagree with every specific of how the system is run?

No. America's system isn't anywhere near the world's greatest. It's certainly not socialized like other countries, but it's a corporatist/fascist system that is arguably worse.

In terms of things I like, I like healthcare paid for out of pocket as of 1960, when insurance wasn't as widespread and Medicare/Medicaid didn't exist. In turn, American healthcare was extremely high quality, and yet the mess of insurance companies, subsidies, regulations on coverage, didn't exist, so it was fairly affordable (a whole discussion if you want to go that way).

Also before 1910, there were an abundance of doctor "schools" run by illiterates, which accepted students without even high school educations, and made them "doctors" in only 2 years, and the word "quack" abounded.

That wasn't the reason provided for closing many of the medical schools, though, and quackery was rapidly on its way out regardless. Not to mention, most people actually hired doctors with a good record and references, rather than Doctor Murphy, Miracle Elixir provider (for example, the high level of quality yet low cost found by mutual aid associations, who were quite discerning in who they hired).

- Canadian doctors going to America for higher wages: you implied this was a failing of the Canadian system, and a sign of success of the American system. Yet, you're also opposed to the higher wages which attracted the Canadian doctors to the USA in the first place, and your now calling it a failing of the American system.

No, no, no. That particular article was in reference to the guy claiming that doctors aren't paid well in the first world, and that they can "barely cover expenses". That was the only reason I brought it up, which I'm pretty sure I mentioned when I posted it.

And you still have no source for the rest of this conjecture. Yes I remember when you brought it up before.

[GoombaGeek]

I'd stay longer but I have to go wax my cat for the glory of the state.

That's about the most relevant thing I can say now.

[GreatJustice]

This has already been refuted. Repeating it does mean that we have forgotten.

Yet there's a source for this one.

And you still have no source for the rest of this conjecture. Yes I remember when you brought it up before.

Which? The 1960 healthcare costs?

Allow me to re-source everything from the very first time I brought this up:

Sources of healthcare spending (Proving my "largely paid for out of pocket conjecture"):

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Costs of American healthcare in 1960, adjusted for inflation (Proving the "affordable conjecture"):

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

http://www.clearpictureonline.com/1960-US%20State%20Health.html

Mutual Aid Associations (indirect and takes a bit of work to sift through) (Proving the "MAA's generally received high quality healthcare alongside low costs through discernment conjecture"):

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

http://www.amazon.com/Immigrant-Associations-American-Identity-1880-1939/dp/0674444175

(NOTE: Other sources, less direct but more specific, can be provided on request)

That covers... most of the things that aren't easily found with a google search or common sense.

[Darvi]

common sense.

NOOOOOOOO MY ONE TRUE WEAKNESS.

Actually I'm only being halfway facetious here.