backtop


Print 97 comment(s) - last by Spuke.. on Jul 7 at 3:04 PM


Tesla Roadster 2.5  (Source: Tesla Motors)
Extended production sales leads to the electric sports car's makeover

The Tesla Roadster is receiving its fourth major production update with the new Roadster 2.5, a revised version of the electric sports car with a new grille and rear bumper.

The 2011 Tesla Roadster 2.5 received an updated grille that resembles the design of the Model S as well as a new rear bumper with a diffuser element. Other cosmetic changes include more comfortable seats, improved surface finishes and an optional seven inch touchscreen display that includes a backup camera. So far, there are no powertrain changes to the vehicle.

Earlier this year, Tesla planned to stop production of the Roadster and announced in a Form S-1 filing of its preliminary prospectus with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that the company would replace the Roadster with a new model that would be introduced in 2013 at the very soonest. 

But in March of this year, the auto company said they negotiated further with key suppliers and felt they could increase the Roadster's production by 40 percent, extending sales into 2012. Undoubtedly, Tesla's recent success with their initial public offering, which helped the automaker earn over US $226 million from share purchases, has put the company in a better financial place and is helping them stay on track with the 2012 goal. 

Originally, the shares were expected to sell for $14-$16 a piece, but ended up selling for $17. In addition, there was an increase in the number of shares sold. Tesla planned to release 11.1 million shares, but released 13.3 million shares instead, and at a higher cost, which makes this a triumphant success for the auto company. Though, only 17 percent of shares have been sold to the public.

Tesla stocks are now over $21.50 a share, and Tesla is valued at US $1.33 billion. With the IPO's help in bringing Tesla out of a financial crisis, the company's production plan consists of releasing the Roadster 2.5 in 2011 and the Model S in 2012. In addition, the automaker has opened two new Tesla stores in Newport Beach, California and Copenhagen, Denmark. 

No prices on the Roadster 2.5 have been released yet, but the vehicle is available for order and will appear in Tesla stores everywhere "soon."








Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/2/2010 8:30:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Still the crazy bit is I live in the happiest nation in the world. We may pay in big taxes but it all comes back. Education is free, health care is free... if one does the math it is actually not a bad deal.


I would think happiness would be a government that allows you to keep more of your own money, and allows YOU to invest it in the education and health care of your own choosing. Government simply can't spend money more efficiently and wisely than the private sector. Your education and health care isn't "free", you are paying several times more than what you could get on a competitive open market for it.

I don't know how you can be happy with that kind of outright theft. But I wish to keep this civil, so I guess that's as far as I'll go on this.


RE: Government subsidies
By rmlarsen on 7/2/2010 8:56:18 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The United States' Government simply can't spend money more efficiently and wisely than the private sector.

There, fixed it for you. BTW: Your mentioning the private US healthcare system and efficiency in the same paragraph had me rolling on the floor laughing. Good one!


RE: Government subsidies
By eskimospy on 7/2/2010 9:19:12 PM , Rating: 4
The answer is always the same. If private sector/free market systems fail, it's because they weren't free enough. If there's a problem with a deregulated market it wasn't deregulated enough. There is never an admission that sometimes these methods don't produce the best results, the answer is always to burrow deeper and deeper into ultra-right ideology.

As usual with our good friend Reclaimer, conservatism never fails, it is only failed.


RE: Government subsidies
By knutjb on 7/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By shin0bi272 on 7/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By knutjb on 7/5/2010 6:03:09 PM , Rating: 3
Apparently the facts and history aren't well liked or appreciated by those on the left...


RE: Government subsidies
By SPOOFE on 7/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/2010 12:31:42 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah that post was clearly -1 material. Man, I was a rude inflammatory stark raving madman with that post :P


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/3/2010 12:52:53 AM , Rating: 2
I do agree, people abuse the -1 rating, just because they disagree. If we were all the same and had the same opinions this would be a boring world...


RE: Government subsidies
By shin0bi272 on 7/3/2010 10:14:32 AM , Rating: 2
the rating system here should be like the one on toms hardware. There everyone can rate every one's every post (meaning the +/- buttons are on every post), and you can reply without your vote being deleted.

But hey DT has their thing and those of us who dont care so much about being voted up or down but speak the truth just set their threshold to -1 and read everyone's comments and reply accordingly.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 7:21:24 PM , Rating: 1
Reclaimer77 - how do you know someone used multiple accounts to vote you down? I'm sorry but to me that sounds more like you're being a bit paranoid:-)

The internet is what it is and if you call someone stupid or similar then frankly you're one of the people which post comments that deserves the -1. Count to ten and read the comment of yours which I commented on. How would you say it comes across? Open minded and respectful or self righteous and condescending?


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 8:42:14 PM , Rating: 2
Of course we are both entitled to our opinions.

quote:
OH please. How am I condescending and self righteous by saying 120% or whatever car tax is freaking insane?

It seems to me you did not catch that I was commenting on your post about the vote issue and not you're original post. In the post I commented on you wrote this:

quote:
So if you're a weak minded poorly informed person, you can influence discussion and speak your opinion without actually having the brains to put them into words, or the guts.


How is that not condescending?

And here is another quote:
quote:
But most -1's here aren't deserved, certainly nothing from me.


I'd say that is pretty much the definition of self righteous :-)

I'm not saying the debates on DT are even close to being constructive all of the time but saying those that vote your posts down are "weak minded poorly informed" and so on do nothing to improving things.


RE: Government subsidies
By juserbogus on 7/5/2010 2:31:30 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
So if you're a weak minded poorly informed person
don't be so hard on yourself.


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/3/2010 12:49:30 AM , Rating: 1
I think the main problem with that is that people dont want to invest it at all, let alone how "you" want to. People in the US complain constantly about paying too much in taxes and fight every increase everywhere, but are not willing to pick up the bill for this stuff on their own. Now I'm not saying that you as an individual aren't willing, but the public in general is not. If you actually do the math (as was suggested in the original post) you will actually see that he is right, it works out to be a good deal (maybe not the BEST deal for every person, but a good deal regardless.) Now true some freedom in choice is lost, but if the government makes good choices (which is very much possible... maybe it doesn't happen much in the US, but that does not mean its a failure of government, merely OUR government) then does it REALLY matter? Can you really say that its that bad to not have a choice if you are given a logically fair deal that works as it is supposed to? What would you rather be able to choose? Think of how much time and effort and money could be spent on other things that should be more important than the name of your college or what health insurance carrier you have? If the end result is the same then who cares? And if having an open market is always the best choice then why can you go to many other countries and receive the same level of health care by doctors who studied in the US in a better furnished hospital with more comforts and more room and a much longer recovery stay than the same EXACT procedure in the US?


RE: Government subsidies
By knutjb on 7/3/2010 2:54:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can you really say that its that bad to not have a choice if you are given a logically fair deal that works as it is supposed to? What would you rather be able to choose? Think of how much time and effort and money could be spent on other things that should be more important than the name of your college or what health insurance carrier you have? If the end result is the same then who cares?
Ok who is choosing for me? Do they really have my best interest? Then you throw in time, effort, and money. This is the slippery slope. Most people are rather benign until you tell them they can't ... When you give up some freedom for whatever do you ever get it back? Sadly no.
quote:
People in the US complain constantly about paying too much in taxes and fight every increase everywhere, but are not willing to pick up the bill for this stuff on their own.
1. We do pay too much in taxes.
2. What bill are you saying we don't want to pick up? We fund more of everything in the world than any other country.
quote:
And if having an open market is always the best choice then why can you go to many other countries and receive the same level of health care by doctors who studied in the US in a better furnished hospital with more comforts and more room and a much longer recovery stay than the same EXACT procedure in the US?
Where is this shangrila of medicine that you speak of? I lived in the UK and the British doctor on base specifically warned me not to use the local hospitals because they had serious issues, i.e. using bedding over without washing, bugs in the ward, and lack of nurses to name a few. A friend experienced all those and more in the local hospital with his wife. You are putting up a lot of misinformation based on BS.

Our system is more expensive because we subsidize most of the drug research by pay full cost while the rest of the world caps those cost by factoring out R&D costs. We also have more advanced diagnostics in our hospitals than most of the world and the latest tech costs money. If someone needs the most advanced procedure they come here, if you want a common procedure for less there are other choices but they come without safe guards. Nothing is free.


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/4/2010 3:46:45 AM , Rating: 2
I apparently cannot post any actual links as my post keeps getting flagged "This comment is apparently spam and we do not allow spam comments" but I will be more than happy to e-mail the links (or if someone knows how to post them without it counting as "spam")
quote:
1. We do pay too much in taxes.

We aren't even in the top twenty in the world for highest taxes per our income. Search the OECD for statistics. If being number 21 is "too high" for being one of the richest countries in the world, where do you think we should be? This just further supports my "complain about paying taxes" argument. Kiplinger also has a "Do Americans Pay Too Much In Taxes" article in their archives that shows we actually pay even less percentage wise than we did 4 years ago.
quote:
2. What bill are you saying we don't want to pick up? We fund more of everything in the world than any other country.

2. If canada offers "free" (actually like 80% paid) health care then how can you say "we fund more of everything in the world than any other country"?
The "bill" is any of things we are talking about that are free in other countries, but we have to pay for ourselves here. I mean that if some poor 18 year old girl down the street with a crappy McD's job cant afford to go to college or go to the doctors for a broken leg, what are her options (in a humane world?) Are you going to pay her bill? I dont see many people in this country helping out. I'm not saying that nobody does, but the majority do not. They all want their money to themselves to go buy more fast food or their premium cars or their oversized houses while complaining about having some of the cheapest gas in the world.


RE: Government subsidies
By SPOOFE on 7/4/2010 3:41:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
We aren't even in the top twenty in the world for highest taxes per our income.

Is that because our taxes are low, or because our incomes are so high?

No, you suggest a one dimensional metric. The real gauge is looking at WHAT is being done with the money. An example: Here in California, we've been throwing more and more money at our education system, hiring a ridiculous number of non-teaching personnel and giving raises left and right. And over the years, as education sucks up more and more money, dropout rates have gone up. They're absolutely unacceptable. That's how I can tell taxes are too high: They take more money and produce crappier results.

One percent of the population of California now works for the state gov't. Is it just a coincidence that California is on the verge of insolvency?

quote:
If being number 21 is "too high" for being one of the richest countries in the world, where do you think we should be?

As low on the list as possible, and no lower.

quote:
I mean that if some poor 18 year old girl down the street with a crappy McD's job cant afford to go to college or go to the doctors for a broken leg, what are her options (in a humane world?)

Go to the doctor, get her leg fixed, and let the taxpayer foot the bill; as a people we can't stomach the situation you just described, which is why hospitals can't deny treatment.

Ironically, in Canada, you CAN be denied treatment for such serious injuries, even if you make millions of dollars and could afford the treatment several times over.


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/4/2010 5:22:26 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Is that because our taxes are low, or because our incomes are so high?

It is based as how much money is left over at the end of the year to spend on whatever we want so I would say thats both. If you look at percentage the numbers are similar, I think around 15th based on percentage.
quote:
No, you suggest a one dimensional metric. The real gauge is looking at WHAT is being done with the money. An example: Here in California, we've been throwing more and more money at our education system, hiring a ridiculous number of non-teaching personnel and giving raises left and right. And over the years, as education sucks up more and more money, dropout rates have gone up. They're absolutely unacceptable. That's how I can tell taxes are too high: They take more money and produce crappier results.

The topic was the amount of taxes so the conversation is "one dimensional" not just what I suggest. The topic of how efficient our government is with that money is a different conversation all together. Thats like saying its "too much" to spend $40k on a vehicle when that is way too broad a statement. I know many trucking companies that would kill to buy vehicles for even twice that amount. The problem of the US government efficiently using the money it is given (or takes) is the problem of the US and its citizens, we are talking globally here not just about the US. I am merely commenting from the POV of being a US citizen, and since the only ones defending this (and blindly at that) are US citizens I have to be on the offensive to counter the unfounded assumptions that seem to be pouring out. I also dont mean to imply everything said by everyone has been wrong, but the majority has been merely assumptions by a US citizen that the US is "the best" and they are searching for "reasons" to make that opinion true. It has to be said that in many ways the US is far from the best because we quite simply are not. Now I would love to be wrong about that, but unfortunately the facts support me here. Maybe overall when everything is weighed we are much closer than just "top 20" but we aren't talking about the country as a whole, merely small parts of it, and in regards to those parts we are far from the best
quote:
As low on the list as possible, and no lower.

Again just proves my original point that we dont want to pay taxes regardless of if the country as a whole will improve if we do.
quote:
Go to the doctor, get her leg fixed, and let the taxpayer foot the bill; as a people we can't stomach the situation you just described, which is why hospitals can't deny treatment.

The hospital cannot deny treatment, but will still sue you for the money. Thats why in this country the number one reason for individuals filing bancruptcy is medical bills and expenses. Thats part of what I meant by in a humane world, I dont consider ruining someones credit as a justified reaction to her having a broken leg. I also found absolutly no mention anywhere of Canada being able to deny emergency treatment. Im not saying that they cant (I dont know enough to say that) but if I found not one mention or instance of it then my reasoning is that it cant really be happening much if at all, maybe some loophole in a law somewhere that never actually comes up? I would love to read a source or two if you have one, I find it interesting that the Canadians would tolerate that AND have the health care system they do. I also dont know many people who go to Canada for treatment, usually just to buy the perscription drugs they need. Most people go overseas if they want the best care at the best price.


RE: Government subsidies
By SPOOFE on 7/4/2010 9:10:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is based as how much money is left over at the end of the year to spend on whatever we want so I would say thats both

So, yes, a one dimensional metric that doesn't accurately portray real life.

quote:
The topic was the amount of taxes so the conversation is "one dimensional" not just what I suggest. The topic of how efficient our government is with that money is a different conversation all together.

Efficiency is at the core; if 1% of your money is taken and wasted, that is too much tax compared to 10% of your money taken and used for things that actually benefit you. Tax is inherently tied to result, and if the results are good, then the tax is worth it.

Yes, it's muddy and subjective territory - what is "good" or "worth it", for instance - but that's how it is. You can't describe the complex interactions of various economic forces with a simple direct comparison of sums.

quote:
I am merely commenting from the POV of being a US citizen, and since the only ones defending this (and blindly at that) are US citizens I have to be on the offensive to counter the unfounded assumptions that seem to be pouring out.

It is unfounded to recognize a high tax for what it is? I don't think you're going on the offensive, bud; it looks like a defensive tone in your posts. I think you're reading too much into others posts.

quote:
I also dont mean to imply everything said by everyone has been wrong, but the majority has been merely assumptions by a US citizen that the US is "the best" and they are searching for "reasons" to make that opinion true.

I don't see that attitude at all. While it is true that any large enough group of people will have the extremely vocal minority of douchebags that won't listen to reason, the vast majority of opinions from that group will be more reasoned. And while there is some vitriol being used in other posts, I don't see this "US is best" attitude that you seem to observe.

quote:
The hospital cannot deny treatment, but will still sue you for the money. Thats why in this country the number one reason for individuals filing bancruptcy is medical bills and expenses.

Yup, sometimes the choices you need to make to save your life or improve your health are difficult ones. I think it's wonderful that those choices exist, as opposed to some government-supplied health care plans that don't allow for some choices.

quote:
Thats part of what I meant by in a humane world, I dont consider ruining someones credit as a justified reaction to her having a broken leg.

And I think that's exactly why credit exists, for awful unavoidable emergencies. Credit isn't a right; it's an abstraction representing a given person or entity's ability to generate and manage revenue. If someone incurs a major expense or gigantic chunk of debt - even if it's because of some crisis that was not their fault at all - it is an absolute reality of their history. You can't pretend it DIDN'T happen.

That's why we have bankruptcy. It is the recognition that shit does happen. It's not comfortable or pretty, nor should it be. If bankruptcy were easy, it would be heavily abused.

quote:
I also found absolutly no mention anywhere of Canada being able to deny emergency treatment.

I don't know why you'd even look, as I certainly didn't specify "emergency treatment".


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/6/2010 2:28:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Efficiency is at the core; if 1% of your money is taken and wasted, that is too much tax compared to 10% of your money taken and used for things that actually benefit you. Tax is inherently tied to result, and if the results are good, then the tax is worth it.

This is exactly what I said, which was in contrast to the "the lowest possible" comment posted by someone that is not me. I never said to pay as much as possible, and I have stressed efficiency in every post. My argument is not to take all of our money, my argument is (and has been) that it is better to have higher taxes used well to improve the lives of everyone in the country. I totally agree that "good" and "worth it" are subjective and different for everyone, I never said otherwise.
quote:
It is unfounded to recognize a high tax for what it is? I don't think you're going on the offensive, bud; it looks like a defensive tone in your posts. I think you're reading too much into others posts.

Following the quote above "high" is subjective. The original post leading to this was about how "high" taxes are in other countries when they provide more with that money. The arguement was that it was a waste and that started this whole debate in all its glory. I dont consider my position defensive as I have pretty much steered this debate in its entirety. If I was being defensive I would have made a statement and spend the rest of the posts defending it, this has evolved as I saw fit... seems pretty much an offensive IMO.
quote:
I don't see that attitude at all. While it is true that any large enough group of people will have the extremely vocal minority of douchebags that won't listen to reason, the vast majority of opinions from that group will be more reasoned. And while there is some vitriol being used in other posts, I don't see this "US is best" attitude that you seem to observe.

The majority of comments about the cost and price of healthcare as well as our "abilities" in regard to preserving life and mending injuries was not based on anything factual but instead on the belief that the US is number one just because it is. Not one person anywhere at any time here has offered even one source to show me that the United States of America is rating number 1 in anything related to healthcare (aside from being most expensive.) Read through the posts objectively and you will see it, unless you think spouting opinion as fact is valid. In which case we dont need to continue this as my goal is in no way to change your opinions, you can keep them no matter how much the differ from mine... I just dont like to see people saying something is the truth when it clearly is not.
quote:
Yup, sometimes the choices you need to make to save your life or improve your health are difficult ones. I think it's wonderful that those choices exist, as opposed to some government-supplied health care plans that don't allow for some choices.
There are always choices, my arguement is that health choices should not negatively impact your life. If you need to file for bankruptcy because of a medical accident I feel there is something wrong. Credit is meant to show how responsible or not someone is with their finances. If you need a heart operation that results in $150k in bills, how does that mean that you are irresponsible with money? How does that negatively reflect on your normal ability to pay off a car loan? I dont see how those two should be related in any way at all...
quote:
And I think that's exactly why credit exists, for awful unavoidable emergencies.

So your saying that everyone should buy their house with cash? I'm pretty sure credit was established as a way for people to make large purchases while posing as little risk as possible to the ones lending the money. Now credit cards were originally intended to serve in emergencies, but credit was around long before such a thing as credit cards.
quote:
If bankruptcy were easy, it would be heavily abused.

Bankruptcy is very easy btw... as long as you aren't rich I guess.
quote:
I don't know why you'd even look, as I certainly didn't specify "emergency treatment".

Totally my assumption, if we aren't talking about emergency treatment then why are we talking about it. Are you saying that every doctor or dentist in the US HAS to see everyone who comes in? That just isn't true at all, those rules are for emergency treatment, we are no different in that regard. Why would you even point that out? The whole comment makes no sense unless you were talking about emergency treatment.


RE: Government subsidies
By juserbogus on 7/5/2010 2:37:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And over the years, as education sucks up more and more money, dropout rates have gone up.

it doesn't seem like you have the facts straight...
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0779196.html


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/4/2010 5:28:12 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The "bill" is any of things we are talking about that are free in other countries, but we have to pay for ourselves here. I mean that if some poor 18 year old girl down the street with a crappy McD's job cant afford to go to college or go to the doctors for a broken leg, what are her options (in a humane world?) Are you going to pay her bill? I dont see many people in this country helping out. I'm not saying that nobody does, but the majority do not. They all want their money to themselves to go buy more fast food or their premium cars or their oversized houses while complaining about having some of the cheapest gas in the world.


Well now I know you're a complete moron and a Marxist.

Yeah you're right dude, people who break their legs in this country are left to wander the streets until they get Gan-green and DIE...

Are you fucking retarded??

And why is keeping your own money a bad thing? You are SUCH a socialist leftist little fuck. God this angers me!! Stop making the productive members of our society out to be bad people!!!

What's funny is you say all this crap, but I bet you haven't done SHIT for other people anyway. Go ahead and list all the charities you donate to. List all the community groups you participate in. How many homeless have you invited to live in your own house?

That's what I thought. You're full of fucking hot air. Go jump off a roof asshole.


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/6/2010 2:47:12 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Well now I know you're a complete moron and a Marxist.

Apparently you know as much about me as you do this topic. I am neither a moron nor a Marxist. Some of my ideals may parallel those of a Marxist, but my ideals parallel many different types of societies. As in many things in life I dont think there is just one "right answer."
quote:
Yeah you're right dude, people who break their legs in this country are left to wander the streets until they get Gan-green and DIE...

I never said or implied anything of the sort, if you want to have a logical debate then you need to learn to read first.
quote:
And why is keeping your own money a bad thing? You are SUCH a socialist leftist little fuck. God this angers me!! Stop making the productive members of our society out to be bad people!!!

I never said that keeping your own money is a bad thing, not at all my point. Im saying that taxes are needed to run a country, its my opinion that if it takes more in taxes to better run a country then thats what it takes. I never said that anyone productive was bad, again you are inventing my argument and totally fail to understand my opinion in even the most basic way. I just want people to be productive to the country as a whole, not JUST their bank accounts. I think if you start a company or invent something you deserve to be rich for it... but you should also help out this country by paying for a few new police cars, or helping pay for the girls broken leg.
quote:
What's funny is you say all this crap, but I bet you haven't done SHIT for other people anyway. Go ahead and list all the charities you donate to. List all the community groups you participate in. How many homeless have you invited to live in your own house?

Again you just invent what you hope is the truth, I donate time, items, and money to Salvation army (money and time), Goodwill (time and items), the local food banks (items), donate money to breast cancer (grandmother had cancer), and money to Aplastic Anemia (my mother). I also volunteer with the cub scouts and the YMCA where my fiancee works. I have never invited a homeless person into my house and will not, I dont know who they are or what they are capable of doing. I have brought many coffee though during the winter. I also give food or gift certificates (like free food coupons) to anyone holding a sign (but never money, too easy to spend it on drugs or alcohol). I am just assuming here, but based on your attitude you do none of those. You strike me as a kid who doesn't listen or care about anything besides yourself.
quote:
That's what I thought. You're full of fucking hot air. Go jump off a roof asshole.

I'm full of hot air with every breath I take, I most certainly will not jump off a roof... but you already knew that (or did you?). This is like arguing with a high school special ed student, at least the others make something resembling a valid point.


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/4/2010 3:50:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Where is this shangrila of medicine that you speak of? I lived in the UK and the British doctor on base specifically warned me not to use the local hospitals because they had serious issues, i.e. using bedding over without washing, bugs in the ward, and lack of nurses to name a few. A friend experienced all those and more in the local hospital with his wife. You are putting up a lot of misinformation based on BS.

Business-in-asia website has a good collection of top medical tourism spots and their cost comparison to the us. You will find we dont come remotely close in cost despite being AT BEST on par with many of them. Or go to wikipedia and search for "medical tourism." Scan through the "destinations" section and you will find that many of them are destinations because of the huge savings in costs compared to the US. While I am not saying to go to every country listed many are much safer than the US in incidence of deaths, infections, and complications. I also dont see how one isolated experience from one friend of yours is a valid argument in really any debate. Now some validated reports of a significant number of people having similar problems then maybe... but even then I never said go to the UK, I merely said not the US. Maybe theirs is really bad? I dont know about the UK. I am full of no BS or opinion (other than the very first part of this post,) just facts, where are your supporting sources?
quote:
Our system is more expensive because we subsidize most of the drug research by pay full cost while the rest of the world caps those cost by factoring out R&D costs. We also have more advanced diagnostics in our hospitals than most of the world and the latest tech costs money. If someone needs the most advanced procedure they come here, if you want a common procedure for less there are other choices but they come without safe guards. Nothing is free

Of the top 8 major drug companies in the world only 2 are US companies and one of those is Johnson & Johnson who contributes very little to the pharmaceutical industry compared to the others. I dont see how "R&D costs" have anything to do with the fact that health care in the US is often times up to 1000% higher than comparable countries when many more contries are paying these "R&D costs."
As for the tech aspect we actually aren't even near the top of the non-3rd world countries. We are in the top about 80% but that is very far from "We also have more advanced diagnostics in our hospitals than most of the world and the latest tech costs money." I guess if you ignore 20% of the world then yeah we beat most. The HealthAffairs website has a list of the countries and how much high tech medical equipment is available per 100k people who live there, we aren't even close to the top unless you include 3rd world countries, then we dont look THAT bad... but we are not even close to the top. The PBS website from "July-Dec09" has a general comparison of how much health care costs each person in many big countries. We dont lead in any catagory except being the most expensive... that is it. I'm not sure where you are getting any of your information but I would love to read a few of your sources... talk about spouting BS and misinformation. Please do some research before you try to call someone out about something you obviously have no real knowledge about, you are just regurgitating what the government and drug companies told you (talk about biased sources).


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/4/2010 4:42:53 PM , Rating: 2
Where are your objective sources that prove that the statistics are slanted? I find that comparing apples to apples provides a pretty objective view. Comparing how much something costs in american dollars compared to how much something costs in american dollars seems to be pretty straight forward in my experiences. I prefer debates that use facts, not just your opinion. Anyone can say "your wrong because I said so" so step up and show some factual basis for what you are saying.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/4/10, Rating: -1
RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/6/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/6/2010 3:52:04 PM , Rating: 1
I dont know why I cannot post links, this is just stupid. I see others post comments but when i try I get a "This comment is apparently spam and we do not allow spam comments" and it wont let me post. If you actually want to know I can e-mail you the links for the facts that I stated.


RE: Government subsidies
By Dewey115 on 7/6/10, Rating: 0
RE: Government subsidies
By Paj on 7/3/2010 4:20:06 AM , Rating: 3
It's good that you know what makes you happy. It's worth noting, though, that the populations of Denmark and other scandinavian countries consistently come out towards the top of happiness and quality of life studies. Maybe theyre the ones who have got it right? After all, what is life but the pursuit of happiness?


RE: Government subsidies
By TSS on 7/3/2010 8:39:15 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
After all, what is life but the pursuit of happiness?

In our world, the pursuit of more stuff.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/2010 8:55:56 AM , Rating: 2
Just curious, but how do you measure the "happiness" of an entire population accurately? And what factors are used to determine said "happiness"?

Can you show me links to these studies or something with the methodology also provided?


RE: Government subsidies
By shin0bi272 on 7/3/2010 9:58:15 AM , Rating: 2
well the UN is the one doing the study so its a TAD biased. They measure things like cost of health care (meaning if the country has government run health care it scores higher), cost of energy, population density, number of cars per household, distance between certain things like hospitals and schools, availability of union jobs, etc. So the most socialist countries always come out on top.

Of course this is also the group that has Iran, Libya, and Cuba on its human rights commission and allowed saddam hussein to buy weapons with their oil for food program. So take these "studies" with a grain of salt.

Also when's the last time you heard anything truly positive (fawning over obama excluded) from the media? They only report the doom and gloom stuff so it gets people in the mood to complain here in the usa.


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 7:06:03 PM , Rating: 1
Here is a couple of links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5224306.stm

http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/05/world-happiest-pl...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/14/60minute...

The finding is not from just one survey but multiple different ones and over several years. Saying the UN is behind as is done some other place here is totally wrong.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/2010 7:44:03 PM , Rating: 1
ok cool. thank you.

(happy now?)


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 8:45:30 PM , Rating: 1
Pretty much :-)

I forgot to mention that the OECD is behind some of the studies. Plus that we are not just happy but also the third most friendly place to do business trailing only you guys and Switzerland.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/2010 8:54:01 PM , Rating: 1
LOL well I doubt we're very high up on the list anymore. Given the blatant anti-business agenda of our President and Congressional leaders.


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 9:39:32 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe - maybe not.

Remember we have socialism and still manage to stay in the #3 position :-)

For instance over time the public health care reform could lead to a work force being less afraid of losing their jobs. That again could mean a work force demanding more of their leaders (not just money but influence and more) but also making good companies stronger.

I think your current President has done much for the US in making the world see the US in a more positive light and I'm sure that makes a difference when US companies want to make business importing and exporting.

The growing focus on green thinking is also something which I think will benefit in the long run. There simply is no getting around the fact that oil will run out in a not to distant future so moving towards oil independence is necessary both political and financially.

Right now we, Denmark, is the world leader in making Windmills thanks in part to a few decades of Government support for the industry. It is fast growing industry so there is a ongoing battle for market shares. The Chinese are moving into this market and there are also some US players which will be helped a lot by the increased focus on green thinking. In fact the Danish wind mill companies have all started up production in the US which is good for us but certainly also for the US.


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 9:24:26 AM , Rating: 1
For sure the formula to happiness is not a easy one and it also it not like we all want the same.

Part of what helps people here be happy is that safety in all aspects of life is ensured. It may sound a bit dull if you're young and immortal but I'm very certain anyone being a parent or at an age where ones own parents are retired will agree that safety is important.

If you loose your job there is no worries on what if you or a family member gets ill. If you should have the rare misfortune of having a child with a severe disability the you can choose to stay home with that child and the government will cover your normal salary till the child is 18.

If you are unemployed you are ensured money to make a decent living. There may not be money for nice holidays every year or nice designer clothes but you will have money for food and an okay place to live and so on. A system like this means a few people will become free loaders but it is a minority and for sure it is worth something knowing that your fellow man will never have to live on the street.

We have crime but very little. Corruption is pretty much none-existing and our democracy is transparent.


RE: Government subsidies
By shin0bi272 on 7/3/2010 9:51:42 AM , Rating: 1
The russians were pretty happy with their communist revolution too for a few decades.


RE: Government subsidies
By knutjb on 7/3/2010 11:25:59 AM , Rating: 2
Then they ran out bourgeois to blame/kill then they picked on the land owners, aka farmers. After killing off a whole bunch of farmers a whole bunch dies of self inflicted starvation, Stalin later repeated this in the Ukraine to fix a problem with those who did not agree with his ways.

Yep happy or else...


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 8:14:01 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry but I think you faith in the private sector is flawed. A private company will always have a #1 priority which is to make money for it's owner.

For example if the private sector is so great then why is it medical supplies in the US are so expensive?

As for the free education, health care and so on I of course know it is payed by our taxes. But that does not change the fact that our system essentially makes us all more free. For example a young person is able to chose his education based on personal ambitions and abilities even if the parents are holding minimum pay jobs.

I know socialism is a dirty word for many in the US but from where I sit it is much more complicated than that. Socialism in the way we have it here does not stop people from being able to get rich or anything like that what it does is only to ensure that nobody is really poor.

There are factors that makes it easy for us in Denmark as opposed to the US. For one we are around 5,5 million people so the distance between each individual and the government is much smaller. Also we do not have a de-facto two party system so whatever your views are it's much more likely you will have representation in the government.

I get the point of having direct control over as much as possible of your personal income but there is great satisfaction in living in a country that makes sure everyone here can have a good life. Money does not make you happy what makes you happy is so much more.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/3/2010 8:38:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm sorry but I think you faith in the private sector is flawed. A private company will always have a #1 priority which is to make money for it's owner.


First off, there are many many private companies where the owners have a genuine passion for their product and what they are doing.

Second off, so what? That company is producing something or selling a service that others need/want. In turn, he needs employees to make this happen. This is something called "economic growth". It builds wealth for MANY more people besides the owner.

People running around demonizing private industry, screaming about "greed" and so forth, are idiots. They refuse to realize the world for what it is. Corporations are made up of people, and there is nothing innately evil about them.

I'm NOT calling you an idiot. But someone who lives in a country where apparently most of the population is outright paid by the government, calling faith in a private sector "flawed", isn't really credible. Maybe your faith in Government is flawed?

quote:
There are factors that makes it easy for us in Denmark as opposed to the US. For one we are around 5,5 million people


With respect, I offer that this is the LARGEST factor. Your government is socialist, and I don't mean that as an insult, but that's what it is. The larger the population, the larger a Socialists government becomes. The larger the Government, the more waste, corruption, and inefficiency becomes.


RE: Government subsidies
By shin0bi272 on 7/3/2010 9:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
Another thing that you didnt mention is that socialism isnt always the evil system that it is under communist and/or fascist rule (we'll call it totalitarian)... there are countries that vote in communists like spain (whos economy is crumbling btw) and there are ones that have a constitutional socialism where they were a democratic country and then they became a "democratic" country.

Sort of like England... they had true and actual socialism for 6 years then they went to whatever it is they have now... its not evil but its very controlling. Like for instance they have a highspeed lane on the highway that people are allowed to drive in if they buy a specific card... sounds great right up until there's a slowpoke on the highway in front of you in the "high speed lane" who's just driving in that lane to avoid the traffic. Rather than allow all lanes open to all people they require you to pay 10 pounds or so to drive in a special lane.

Its a micromanaging socialism, a smiley face socialism if you will... where they dont kill you for speaking out against the government but they will make up a story to refute what youve said or something like that. Socialism also works better when you have less people involved and a country with few natural resources. The fewer the number of people you have to control/brainwash (depending on the severity of the totalitarian state) the easier it is to convince these people that your centrally planned government will work. Its not evil its just misguided. The fewer the natural resources you have the more you can charge for electricity etc. But eventually even the nicest socialist country will have to become more and more capitalist to avoid going bankrupt (i.e. china... not that their nice or anything).

Socialists in western europe always make me want to yell BAKA! at them... which is the japanese slang term taken from a chinese proverb that says "to point at a deer and call it a horse"... or "someone who knowingly hides the truth"... what you and I would call a liar. They arent evil they are sneaky or disingenuous... either way they just want more power and control over their people. That might not be horrible if you have a benevolent leader like Lars Rasmussen of Denmark but should he be replaced with someone like hitler he would already posses all the power over the people he would need to start world war 3. Not saying that will happen but its like the pump is already primed for a dictator when the country is run by the government.


RE: Government subsidies
By alanore on 7/4/2010 2:21:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Like for instance they have a highspeed lane on the highway that people are allowed to drive in if they buy a specific card...


Where? I heard the idea of implementing a US style "Lexus lane" but never thought they had actually gone through with it.

Its a pretty stupid idea giving the hard shoulder as the slow lane and then sticking in a "premium lane" Partly because these were planned for congested motorways, which means the cars in the lane with have to cut a minimum of two lanes to get off the motorway. Which will mean cars waiting to pull out will probably block the lane. Although the biggest reason is probably the fact that hard shoulders are important. We're having to pay well over the odds to add a hard shoulders to the M80 (widening bridges, overpasses) because it was cheaper to only put in two lanes at the time. I would much prefer to have a Auto Bahn hard shoulder system, that allows it to be used as a lane, but if there is a breakdown convert it back to a hard shoulder.

I don't agree that a "socialist" government have any more control over their citizens than a right wing government. "Socialist" governments of Europe tend to be a lot more popular initially as they tend to be knee jerk reactions to repressive governments, so citizens are more willing to go along with them. But if we actually look at the power a citizen has to influence policy I don't think they have much in any system. If we look at the ultimate form of control, prison and military then it seems right wing governments tend to have much more of stick approach rather than the carrot. Naturally in politics there are exceptions to every rule, like most countries with a dictator like leader will tend to take the stick approach.

You're point about Hitler isn't valid. Hitler didn't just inherit his power, he gain popularity of the people even before he was in power, and then he corrupted the German democracy until he was an iron fist dictator, he gained popularity with preaching Socialist ideologies, but then gained power and turned Nazi.

quote:
Sort of like England... they had true and actual socialism for 6 years

When did our right-wing German Monarchy not have not have full control if they wanted to exercise it?

(I'm taking a pop at the monarchy, not you. But when was this 6 years? If its the post WW2 then it's not "true and actual socialism")


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/5/2010 8:44:45 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Like for instance they have a highspeed lane on the highway that people are allowed to drive in if they buy a specific card... sounds great right up until there's a slowpoke on the highway in front of you in the "high speed lane" who's just driving in that lane to avoid the traffic. Rather than allow all lanes open to all people they require you to pay 10 pounds or so to drive in a special lane.


Can you document this?

To me it sounds like something which would never fly in the UK. As I understand there is a bus lane on some motorways but that is something very different from what you are suggesting.


RE: Government subsidies
By Reclaimer77 on 7/5/2010 10:52:55 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
To me it sounds like something which would never fly in the UK.


To me it sounds like something which would ONLY fly in the UK.


RE: Government subsidies
By BZDTemp on 7/3/2010 9:17:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
First off, there are many many private companies where the owners have a genuine passion for their product and what they are doing.


There most certainly are and I have great respect for that. Still a business needs to make money else it will close so there is no way around that #1 priority. However it is certainly so that most business care for not only the money but also for their employees, the community, their customers and so on.

I have worked in both big and small companies and right now I work for a Government owned organization. I think that I have some experience to build on when I say that companies can be just as inefficient as organizations in the public sector and vice versa. Also what some companies do may not really be for the best of other than their owners.

Take a look at the mess BP has made in the Gulf. Now some may want to put the blame on MMS (The government office meant to control their doings - I hope I got the acronym right) but if the private sector was perfect then BP would have made sure there was no spill. And how about Enron, Fannie Mae and the others!

quote:
With respect, I offer that this is the LARGEST factor.

It could be only there are several other nations on the globe with similar systems and of similar population size so there is more to it. The big question to me is cause and effect.

quote:
Your government is socialist, and I don't mean that as an insult, but that's what it is.

None taken. Even though I do know many in the US will mean it like that:-)

quote:
The larger the population, the larger a Socialists government becomes. The larger the Government, the more waste, corruption, and inefficiency becomes.

I'd say this goes for all sorts of Government and for companies as well. As soon as the leadership and the people/workforce becomes separated by to many organizational layers then sense of common direction, purpose and responsibility gets lost.


RE: Government subsidies
By Spuke on 7/7/2010 3:04:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And how about Enron, Fannie Mae and the others!
Fannie Mae is not entirely private sector so I would be inclined to remove them from your short list.


RE: Government subsidies
By juserbogus on 7/5/2010 2:06:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your education and health care isn't "free", you are paying several times more than what you could get on a competitive open market for it.

prove it...


"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki