FICO 08 Still On Hold - At All Of The Big Three

[wmarat]

---

wmarat wrote:

---

MidnightVoice wrote:

---

wmarat wrote:

---

TheNewWorldMan wrote:
Socialism doesn't necessarily equal dictatorship, or misery. It can, and often does, but not invariably. The Nordic nations (most notably Sweden) have systems that could easily be labeled "socialist," yet are generally regarded as democratic (not to mention these nations rate as good places to live, outscoring even the United States in many areas pertaining to quality of life!).

And while I would certainly not laud Cuba as a good place to live, the infant mortality rate (which is considered by demographers to be a key indicator of the efficacy of the health care system) in Cuba is actually slightly lower than America's. Considering that Cuba has a far lower GDP per capita, one must figure it is doing something right to outperform America in that regard, even if Cuba is also doing a lot of things wrong.

Message Edited by TheNewWorldMan on 12-21-2007 08:45 PM

---

Would you go to Cuba for medical treatment?

---

Have you seen Sicko?  

---

Nope

---

Swedens indeed have socialistic and democratic system, but they literally pay very high price for it - up to 70% income tax. The same in Israel, democratic system which is very close to socialistic and up to 50% income tax.

Regarding statistics. Any statistical data, especially international, is very biased. Every country has its own criteria to define infant mortality and each country, esp. countries like Cuba, Russia, N.Korea etc. is prone to manipulate this data, so I would not rely on WHO statistic data.

I have had statistics (medical statistics) during 2 semestrs in University since then my opinion regarding statistics is the same as Lord D'Israeli's: "There are 3 sorts of lie: white, black and statistics".

[haulingthescoreup]

---

@wmarat wrote:
I have had statistics (medical statistics) during 2 semestrs in University since then my opinion regarding statistics is the same as Lord D'Israeli's: "There are 3 sorts of lie: white, black and statistics".

---

This must have been the inspiration for Mark Twain's very American spin: "There are liars, d@mn liars, and statisticians!"

I do medical coding, especially facility diagnostic coding, and I know how easily things can be miscoded, whether out of ignorance, poor documentation, sloppiness, or manipulation. Despite the belief of many of my supervisors, the purpose of coding is for the hospital database, not reimbursement, and I am very skeptical of things that I read in the paper that I know are derived from ICD coding.

[wmarat]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

---

@wmarat wrote:
I have had statistics (medical statistics) during 2 semestrs in University since then my opinion regarding statistics is the same as Lord D'Israeli's: "There are 3 sorts of lie: white, black and statistics".

---

This must have been the inspiration for Mark Twain's very American spin: "There are liars, d@mn liars, and statisticians!"

I do medical coding, especially facility diagnostic coding, and I know how easily things can be miscoded, whether out of ignorance, poor documentation, sloppiness, or manipulation. Despite the belief of many of my supervisors, the purpose of coding is for the hospital database, not reimbursement, and I am very skeptical of things that I read in the paper that I know are derived from ICD coding.

---

Totally agree

[marty56]

Cuban FICO scor buckets:

850: Fidel and his minions

350: Eveyone else.

Socialism score buckets:

Same as now but the government requires you to "donate" points to people who are too lazy to work or manage their credit.

I find it quite ironic that their are people here who have say anything nice about Communism and Socialism this forum.

[wmarat]

---

marty56 wrote:

Cuban FICO scor buckets:

850: Fidel and his minions

350: Eveyone else.

Socialism score buckets:

Same as now but the government requires you to "donate" points to people who are too lazy to work or manage their credit.

I find it quite ironic that their are people here who have say anything nice about Communism and Socialism this forum.

---

A basic idea of communism is highly attractive even today; you work as much as you want and you get as much as you need.

[Anonymous]

---

@wmarat wrote:

---

@marty56 wrote:

Cuban FICO scor buckets:

850: Fidel and his minions

350: Eveyone else.

Socialism score buckets:

Same as now but the government requires you to "donate" points to people who are too lazy to work or manage their credit.

I find it quite ironic that their are people here who have say anything nice about Communism and Socialism this forum.

---

A basic idea of communism is highly attractive even today; you work as much as you want and you get as much as you need.

---

I can't imagine to whom that 'basic idea' would be attractive to. Except a communist. Or a thief.

And you misunderstand the basic concept which is far worse then you state it; it is not about working as much as you 'want', that would be unworkable as most people don't want to work much; communism in it's pure form is slavery of the capable, pure and simple; each gives according to his capability, each recieves according to his needs. This means the best and brightest and most industrious work the hardest and the neediest receive the most. It is at it's core the most simply reprehensible system known to man.

I get chills when someone thinks a system that rewards them with all their needs and requires nothing from them but laziness and incompetence is attractive.

[Anonymous]

---

@wmarat wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:
Socialism doesn't necessarily equal dictatorship, or misery. It can, and often does, but not invariably. The Nordic nations (most notably Sweden) have systems that could easily be labeled "socialist," yet are generally regarded as democratic (not to mention these nations rate as good places to live, outscoring even the United States in many areas pertaining to quality of life!).

And while I would certainly not laud Cuba as a good place to live, the infant mortality rate (which is considered by demographers to be a key indicator of the efficacy of the health care system) in Cuba is actually slightly lower than America's. Considering that Cuba has a far lower GDP per capita, one must figure it is doing something right to outperform America in that regard, even if Cuba is also doing a lot of things wrong.

Message Edited by TheNewWorldMan on 12-21-2007 08:45 PM

---

Would you go to Cuba for medical treatment?

---

Depends. If I was rich or middle-class, and had decent health insurance, no. If I was one of the millions of poor, uninsured people in America, I would.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@wmarat wrote:

---

@marty56 wrote:

Cuban FICO scor buckets:

850: Fidel and his minions

350: Eveyone else.

Socialism score buckets:

Same as now but the government requires you to "donate" points to people who are too lazy to work or manage their credit.

I find it quite ironic that their are people here who have say anything nice about Communism and Socialism this forum.

---

A basic idea of communism is highly attractive even today; you work as much as you want and you get as much as you need.

---

I can't imagine to whom that 'basic idea' would be attractive to. Except a communist. Or a thief.

And you misunderstand the basic concept which is far worse then you state it; it is not about working as much as you 'want', that would be unworkable as most people don't want to work much; communism in it's pure form is slavery of the capable, pure and simple; each gives according to his capability, each recieves according to his needs. This means the best and brightest and most industrious work the hardest and the neediest receive the most. It is at it's core the most simply reprehensible system known to man.

I get chills when someone thinks a system that rewards them with all their needs and requires nothing from them but laziness and incompetence is attractive.

---

One of the great lessons of the 20th century was that both pure communism and lassiez-faire capitalism are failures. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" sounds great until you consider basic human nature. Humans being as we are, under such a system, people inevitably become less able and more needy, since it is need rather than ability that is rewarded.

At the other extreme, allowing the extremely able (and, in many cases, people who were just in the right place at the right time) to own everything and everybody didn't work out so well either. Generally such unfettered capitalism led to misery, suffering...and revolutions that resulted in bloody communism.

The 20th century showed that a middle ground was best. Yes, reward ingenuity, hard work, and ability...handsomely, in some cases. But also have checks and balances. Have a progressive income tax--not a confiscatory tax that aims to have people who earn $20,000 a year and $20 million end up with the same amount, but a progressive tax. Make sure there are rights for workers, as well as social welfare programs designed to help citizens cope with disaster and misfortune even as the programs encourage and ultimately require self-sufficiency.

Message Edited by TheNewWorldMan on 12-25-2007 06:32 PM

[wmarat]

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@wmarat wrote:

---

@marty56 wrote:

Cuban FICO scor buckets:

850: Fidel and his minions

350: Eveyone else.

Socialism score buckets:

Same as now but the government requires you to "donate" points to people who are too lazy to work or manage their credit.

I find it quite ironic that their are people here who have say anything nice about Communism and Socialism this forum.

---

A basic idea of communism is highly attractive even today; you work as much as you want and you get as much as you need.

---

I can't imagine to whom that 'basic idea' would be attractive to. Except a communist. Or a thief.

At the end of 19th beginning of 20th century thousands of people were facsinted by the idea of communism. Very few were communists some of them were thieves. At the end of 20th century neither communists nor thieves believed in this idea at least in Soviet Russia.
And you misunderstand the basic concept which is far worse then you state it; it is not about working as much as you 'want', that would be unworkable as most people don't want to work much; communism in it's pure form is slavery of the capable, pure and simple; each gives according to his capability, each recieves according to his needs. This means the best and brightest and most industrious work the hardest and the neediest receive the most. It is at it's core the most simply reprehensible system known to man.

I do not misunderstand basic concept of communism. All this depends on who washed your brain. My brain was washed by Soviet teachers and I got intrepretation of Marxism Leninism which came along with official version. I have been never taught about Trostkism or Maoism or Christian Communism.

You probably have got another extreme intrpretation of communism. The truth probably somwhere in the middle between extreme intrpretations

I get chills when someone thinks a system that rewards them with all their needs and requires nothing from them but laziness and incompetence is attractive.

Message Edited by wmarat on 12-25-2007 06:59 PM

[marty56]

A basic idea of communism is highly attractive even today; you work as much as you want and you get as much as you need.

If we lived in a Star Trek Universe I might buy it but we dont.  Many people have a funny idea of what a good work ethic is and there will always people people who will abuse or exploit the system.

Everyone in this forum is working to improve their FICO score.  Some had a good head start and