US Universal Healthcare

More
15 Mar 2019 07:55 - 15 Mar 2019 08:00 #335677 by Adder
Replied by Adder on topic US Universal Healthcare

Eugene wrote: I am not saying that we should "ditch" the air force, nor am I saying that we "shouldn't" develop batter defensive system's in which to defend our nation; what I'm saying, is that we can not field an aircraft to take on multiple "specific" roles which it can not handle.

To define what I mean let us look to nature. The peregrine falcon evolved to "dive" at there target clocking in at over 200 mph, the harpy eagle evolved to "dodge" between tree's on it's hunt in the amazon; and then the penguin, evolved to torpedo thru the ocean at over 20 mph.

Each evolved for max efficiency in a specific "way" of hunting, and that is what we should emulate. the F 35/joint strike fighter is thus inefficient for what it's worth, and we can put that money else where.


I disagree, for its not really a money saving effort but a money saving opportunity - for its not a loss of capability, just appropriate design. Specialization still exists where its needed, but its not needed everywhere. I decided to spoiler the rest of my reply because its way off topic :whistle:

Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]

File Attachment:
Temple Security Officer ~ Jedi Knight ~ Seminarian
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu

Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med
'The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed.'
Last edit: 15 Mar 2019 08:00 by Adder.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
15 Mar 2019 09:27 #335686 by JamesSand
Replied by JamesSand on topic US Universal Healthcare
You can have the best plane in the world, but it ain't much use if the pilot has the flu :dry: :lol: :silly:


Back onto healthcare - I have no idea of the mysteries of the US economy, but the Australian system (sort of) works (after a fashion)

Adders statement of "What does it cost for the public system.... 2% taxation on income." is not being completely honest.
Tax payers who earn a certain income are required to contribute that in order to access healthcare, (over or under a given threshold changes your contribution) but it only covers you for a certain range of services (of note, dental is not covered) and you better rather hope you're not in a hurry, because there is a bit of a wait for many things.

hence where private insurance comes in (which saves the G-man a bit of coin, so they'll actually give you some money BACK for buying private insurance....although this is obviously well known to the private insurance providers, so who knows if they just calculate some more into their premium so you feel like you're getting a rebate, but it ain't going into your pocket) and private insurance is in the business of making money, so they only cover you "up to" a certain figure (unlike a car, you're not covered for total write-off, that's a different insurance again :P ) - and doctors (and the other services involved - generally whoever owns the surgery/hospital, and anaesthetists etc) can charge whatever they want. So if a total head transplant is calculated to cost (say) $5000, but the doctor, surgery, rehab, etc etc bill runs to $10,000, you're still out $5k (plus your premium, plus your excess)

It's a bit hinky really, but if you're the sort of person who likes regular dental care, wears glasses, and enjoys regular upkeep on your flimsy, squishy husk, then the couple of grand it costs you a year is a necessary evil.

(There's other contributors as well, for example all employers are required to pay "Workers Compensation" - another hinky system that is hell to navigate if you actually intend to use it, but in theory means that your employer has to pay for any injuries or illnesses that occur due to your occupation (self employed people have to buy their own insurance) - however the regulations for this vary by state and many people simply can't be arsed utilising it unless it is a major injury, so it's just free money for the insurance providers.


So back to maintaining happy, healthy, and loyal citizens - cost of acquisition and maintenance of the platform itself aside - what does it cost to make and keep a pilot? (or a servicing technician?)

is it cheaper to look after the people you've got, or to keep building new ones?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
15 Mar 2019 15:09 #335694 by Kyrin Wyldstar

Eugene wrote: I am not saying that we should "ditch" the air force, nor am I saying that we "shouldn't" develop batter defensive system's in which to defend our nation; what I'm saying, is that we can not field an aircraft to take on multiple "specific" roles which it can not handle.

To define what I mean let us look to nature. The peregrine falcon evolved to "dive" at there target clocking in at over 200 mph, the harpy eagle evolved to "dodge" between tree's on it's hunt in the amazon; and then the penguin, evolved to torpedo thru the ocean at over 20 mph.

Each evolved for max efficiency in a specific "way" of hunting, and that is what we should emulate. the F 35/joint strike fighter is thus inefficient for what it's worth, and we can put that money else where.



Are you some sort of expert on this? Have you ever served in the military? Are you an aeronautical engineer or is this just uninformed opinion?

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
15 Mar 2019 20:25 #335711 by Eugene
Replied by Eugene on topic US Universal Healthcare

Adder wrote:

Eugene wrote: I am not saying that we should "ditch" the air force, nor am I saying that we "shouldn't" develop batter defensive system's in which to defend our nation; what I'm saying, is that we can not field an aircraft to take on multiple "specific" roles which it can not handle.

To define what I mean let us look to nature. The peregrine falcon evolved to "dive" at there target clocking in at over 200 mph, the harpy eagle evolved to "dodge" between tree's on it's hunt in the amazon; and then the penguin, evolved to torpedo thru the ocean at over 20 mph.

Each evolved for max efficiency in a specific "way" of hunting, and that is what we should emulate. the F 35/joint strike fighter is thus inefficient for what it's worth, and we can put that money else where.


I disagree, for its not really a money saving effort but a money saving opportunity - for its not a loss of capability, just appropriate design. Specialization still exists where its needed, but its not needed everywhere. I decided to spoiler the rest of my reply because its way off topic :whistle:

Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]




You note that it's meant to excel over the F16 and 18's, my beef with it is that it's meant to also replace the A-10 warthog in close air support. 1 You can't just lob a missile to do the job when there's troops not 10 yards from the target, you need a slower aircraft to get and keep your cross hairs on target. 2 Due to it's fighter plane platform it's meant to go in then get out, it's not meant to stay in the air for longer then 2 hours waiting for a call to assist. And 3, I don't know what the F35's survivability is, but the A-10 could lose one of every thing minus the fuselage yet still land safely.

Love, is the life blood of the living force; to not embrace it, to scorn it, is only to harm thy self.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
15 Mar 2019 22:41 - 15 Mar 2019 23:00 #335713 by Adder
Replied by Adder on topic US Universal Healthcare
They were just examples. It''s the same for close air support. Why would you do something down low when you can do it more safely up higher.

The A10 was not designed for close air support as its primary role, rather battlefield air interdiction against Soviet armored columns at low levels. In the absence of that is also is a great platform for close air support - but less so in high intensity conflict and future war. Low level is getting too dangerous for manned platforms, and weapons and sensors are good enough now that it is not needed. Close air support is something which is not designed into a ground mission if it can be avoided... things like indirect fire support are much more preferred. And close air support is a really expensive way to get a round on a target! What CAS is meant to be is a capability which is on call when required, so the F35 can be planned to be on station if no other more suitable asset - for if suitability is sensors and weapons, it can be AC130 or even B52's which have longer loiter times. It''s just now that it can be delivered from mid and hi levels because the sensors and weapons (and over all employment) have matured enough. Ya gotta consider the future changes as well, things like directed energy weapons will come online in the near future, which will make low level a no-go zone for manned platforms. Not to mention cheap drones can take down a helicopter these days easily enough.

Anyway, its smart spending which enables funds to go to other areas of the economy.... but it depends on where the priorities are within each area, and a governments commitment to balancing those areas. These decisions are all then made with some measure of effort to predict what will be needed over the next 30-50 years - and things change fast, just not evenly across all areas which can create the sensation of things being stagnant.

File Attachment:
Temple Security Officer ~ Jedi Knight ~ Seminarian
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu

Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med
'The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed.'
Last edit: 15 Mar 2019 23:00 by Adder.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
16 Mar 2019 01:40 #335726 by Eugene
Replied by Eugene on topic US Universal Healthcare

Adder wrote: Anyway, its smart spending which enables funds to go to other areas of the economy.... but it depends on where the priorities are within each area, and a governments commitment to balancing those areas. These decisions are all then made with some measure of effort to predict what will be needed over the next 30-50 years - and things change fast, just not evenly across all areas which can create the sensation of things being stagnant.


And on that last bit I can agree with you. Now let us go forth in peace and with hope that congress starts working on plans that should have been implemented two decades ago, first and fore most, the green new deal.

Love, is the life blood of the living force; to not embrace it, to scorn it, is only to harm thy self.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
16 Mar 2019 07:22 #335742 by Kyrin Wyldstar

Eugene wrote: Now let us go forth in peace and with hope that congress starts working on plans that should have been implemented two decades ago, first and fore most, the green new deal.


Peacefully is not the way any of this idiotic deal will be implemented.

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.