http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/19/health/cdc...index.html
Remember this?

I am not bad mouthing the CDC many fine individuals work there but they are not perfect but if they can do more or our government can do more why not. Requiring 21 day self monitoring seems appropriate. Only a handful of people would be affected. Banning travel for non U.S. people who have been in these areas seems reasonable. Duncan came here because he knew he was sick.

(10-28-2014 03:54 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 03:38 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 03:32 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 03:25 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  The hospital didn't build the road that leads to the hospital. Nor would the hospital be even as prepared as they were if there wasn't an organization looking over their shoulder to make sure the profit incentive wasn't resulting in poor care. The government has WAY more responsibility than a hospital. The hospital does one thing, healthcare, and they didn't do it right.

So, then by extension of your argument, CDC IS at fault, because they are looking over the shoulder of the hospital and still there were problems. The CDC also screwed up on their Ebola hotline.

BTW, the Texas hospital is a not for profit.

So the government is supposed to be perfect whereas the hospital can make mistakes, simply because you're more directly paying for the one than the other. Okay.

Private industry can screw up royally too. They aren't perfect, nor is the government, nor are you or me.

Nope.

Those on the left look to Washington and the feds as all knowing and the best way to handle so much of our lives.

I know the government is far from perfect. That is why I want less of it. It repeatedly proves how ineffective it is. I don't understand why those on the left want more and more of the nanny state.

You can't say the CDC does a great job and then say, well the hospital screwed up. You are then calling the CDC impotent and ineffective. Which is it?

I agree that in general the government is too large. But all I hear is complaints when the government screws up, but when private industry screws up there's always an excuse (oil spill, anyone?). Both are made up of people, and people make mistakes. It's not a panacea.

I'm not saying the CDC does a great job but the hospital screwed up. I never said that.

(10-28-2014 04:04 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I agree that in general the government is too large. But all I hear is complaints when the government screws up, but when private industry screws up there's always an excuse (oil spill, anyone?). Both are made up of people, and people make mistakes. It's not a panacea.

I'm not saying the CDC does a great job but the hospital screwed up. I never said that.

But, I have choice in most cases with respect to private industry. There is no such motivation/choice on the public side. If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

My "you" is more of a general "you," not a 007 you specifically.

(10-28-2014 12:06 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 10:57 AM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 10:26 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Yes there are Dem governors doing this. And they're idiots or cowards concerned with political posturing so they're caving to the mob's irrational fears. Cuomo and Christie and Quinn all are politically ambitious and want to be seen "doing something", even if it's not supported by science. Thankfully we have a cool headed president who listens to doctors and scientists and isn't afraid to stand up to the scaremongers. Actually I'm thankful he's not on the ballot next week or maybe he'd feel the same pressures as those guys.

Have you been following the Christie story? First he announces a mandatory quarantine. Nurse comes in, they lock her up and detain her for hours and bark questions at her. They take a forehead scan and it shows she has 101 degree temp and rush her to quarantine unit at a hospital. A more reliable thermometer then shows a normal temp. So apparently the first reading was incorrect or she was flushed and upset (as she says). But Christie decides she is "obviously ill" and locks her up in a makeshift tent with nothing but a box to **** in and armed guards outside. The next day he realizes what an idiot he's been and lets her go back to Maine. All this is being done to a woman who is a hero by all rights and is asymptomatic and who all medical experts agree isn't contagious. Do we really not trust this nurse to go to the hospital the minute she isn't feeling well?

No I don't want to be over protective because it's short sighted and dumb. If we treat people who volunteer their time in dangerous conditions like criminals and lock them in a tent for 21 days, nobody is going to want to go to west Africa to fight the disease and it's going to spread out of control to other countries and continents. They're not contagious unless they show symptoms and even once they're contagious, to spread the disease their bodily fluids need to enter someone's mucous membranes.

This has nothing to do with the first patient. That guy had symptoms and the hospital didn't follow protocols. The nurse who flew had a 99.5 degree temperature which may or may not have been feverish. People can get 100 degree temps from being embarrassed so to quarantine somebody with a 99.5 temp is questionable.

so all policy and procedures are operating 100%. We will never ever have another "mistake"? Obama is doing it for political reasons.

FYI, there is talk he wants to start bringing over non American Ebola patients to U.S. for treatment.

There are many prudent things that we can do to protect U.S. citizens. If this nurse does have Ebola (or any other patient cleared), should we charge them with attempted murder if they infect another person?

Yes, her treatment was pathetic. But its GOVERNMENT!!! and you think the federal government has a handle on it? ummm, I don't.

I really try to understand where you are coming from but I find it to be impossible..

He's been deluded to hate everything about government, democrats, LIBERALS, taxes, and anything else FOX tells him.
He's a political hack with an agenda he knows nothing about.

(10-28-2014 04:11 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:04 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I agree that in general the government is too large. But all I hear is complaints when the government screws up, but when private industry screws up there's always an excuse (oil spill, anyone?). Both are made up of people, and people make mistakes. It's not a panacea.

I'm not saying the CDC does a great job but the hospital screwed up. I never said that.

But, I have choice in most cases with respect to private industry. There is no such motivation/choice on the public side. If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

My "you" is more of a general "you," not a 007 you specifically.

Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:11 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:04 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I agree that in general the government is too large. But all I hear is complaints when the government screws up, but when private industry screws up there's always an excuse (oil spill, anyone?). Both are made up of people, and people make mistakes. It's not a panacea.

I'm not saying the CDC does a great job but the hospital screwed up. I never said that.

But, I have choice in most cases with respect to private industry. There is no such motivation/choice on the public side. If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

My "you" is more of a general "you," not a 007 you specifically.

Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

Not true about the rocket blowing up. Stuff happens but when you implement a policy like screening flyers at the airport and within 3 days, someone slips thru the cracks, policy fail. We are just wasting a lot of money for nothing. So for all the money spent so far, we are 0-1

(10-29-2014 01:08 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:11 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:04 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I agree that in general the government is too large. But all I hear is complaints when the government screws up, but when private industry screws up there's always an excuse (oil spill, anyone?). Both are made up of people, and people make mistakes. It's not a panacea.

I'm not saying the CDC does a great job but the hospital screwed up. I never said that.

But, I have choice in most cases with respect to private industry. There is no such motivation/choice on the public side. If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

My "you" is more of a general "you," not a 007 you specifically.

Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

Not true about the rocket blowing up. Stuff happens but when you implement a policy like screening flyers at the airport and within 3 days, someone slips thru the cracks, policy fail. We are just wasting a lot of money for nothing. So for all the money spent so far, we are 0-1

For all the money spent to far the only "spread" of the disease inside the US was limited to 2 nurses...every american to date has been cured(1 still in treatment).

Duncan was not symptomatic when he entered the US.

(10-29-2014 01:39 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:08 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:11 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:04 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I agree that in general the government is too large. But all I hear is complaints when the government screws up, but when private industry screws up there's always an excuse (oil spill, anyone?). Both are made up of people, and people make mistakes. It's not a panacea.

I'm not saying the CDC does a great job but the hospital screwed up. I never said that.

But, I have choice in most cases with respect to private industry. There is no such motivation/choice on the public side. If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

My "you" is more of a general "you," not a 007 you specifically.

Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

Not true about the rocket blowing up. Stuff happens but when you implement a policy like screening flyers at the airport and within 3 days, someone slips thru the cracks, policy fail. We are just wasting a lot of money for nothing. So for all the money spent so far, we are 0-1

For all the money spent to far the only "spread" of the disease inside the US was limited to 2 nurses...every american to date has been cured(1 still in treatment).

Duncan was not symptomatic when he entered the US.

The doctor from NY came into the U.S. after the screening was implemented and he came down with Ebola days later. It was not caught.

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

You need to differentiate between criminal activity versus a company not providing a good service/product. We know Exxon and BP (focus on Valdez and the Gulf spill) paid significant fines.

Arthur Anderson went out of business.

What happened to the perpetrators of the Tuskegee experiment?

BobL Wrote:Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

How much would it have cost to have NASA build that rocket versus Orbital Sciences?

BobL Wrote:Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

So, by extension, you are for a larger military, by numbers, at least. A lot of those efforts started under the Bill Clinton/Al Gore the era of big government is dead efforts. It never made any sense to eliminate the internal position/job and then hire the same people back for the same job at higher rates via a contract? In our state, that is the IDOT method, so they can claim a reduction in headcount. Look at the dollars...

BobL Wrote:Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

So, those that run or work in government agencies have no incentive for shortcuts, or deceptive efforts to protect their funding/jobs?

(10-29-2014 01:46 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

You need to differentiate between criminal activity versus a company not providing a good service/product. We know Exxon and BP (focus on Valdez and the Gulf spill) paid significant fines.

Arthur Anderson went out of business.

What happened to the perpetrators of the Tuskegee experiment?

BobL Wrote:Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

How much would it have cost to have NASA build that rocket versus Orbital Sciences?

BobL Wrote:Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

So, by extension, you are for a larger military, by numbers, at least. A lot of those efforts started under the Bill Clinton/Al Gore the era of big government is dead efforts. It never made any sense to eliminate the internal position/job and then hire the same people back for the same job at higher rates via a contract? In our state, that is the IDOT method, so they can claim a reduction in headcount. Look at the dollars...

BobL Wrote:Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

So, those that run or work in government agencies have no incentive for shortcuts, or deceptive efforts to protect their funding/jobs?

VA scandal ring a bell?

(10-29-2014 01:44 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:39 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:08 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-28-2014 04:11 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  But, I have choice in most cases with respect to private industry. There is no such motivation/choice on the public side. If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

My "you" is more of a general "you," not a 007 you specifically.

Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

Not true about the rocket blowing up. Stuff happens but when you implement a policy like screening flyers at the airport and within 3 days, someone slips thru the cracks, policy fail. We are just wasting a lot of money for nothing. So for all the money spent so far, we are 0-1

For all the money spent to far the only "spread" of the disease inside the US was limited to 2 nurses...every american to date has been cured(1 still in treatment).

Duncan was not symptomatic when he entered the US.

The doctor from NY came into the U.S. after the screening was implemented and he came down with Ebola days later. It was not caught.

He was not symptomatic either...come man...he arrived on the 17th did not display symptoms until the 21st.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/24/health/new...index.html

(10-29-2014 03:49 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:44 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:39 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:08 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

Not true about the rocket blowing up. Stuff happens but when you implement a policy like screening flyers at the airport and within 3 days, someone slips thru the cracks, policy fail. We are just wasting a lot of money for nothing. So for all the money spent so far, we are 0-1

For all the money spent to far the only "spread" of the disease inside the US was limited to 2 nurses...every american to date has been cured(1 still in treatment).

Duncan was not symptomatic when he entered the US.

The doctor from NY came into the U.S. after the screening was implemented and he came down with Ebola days later. It was not caught.

He was not symptomatic either...come man...he arrived on the 17th did not display symptoms until the 21st.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/24/health/new...index.html

Then why have screening if it failed? It is a waste of money. We should have quarantine areas in Africa where people wanting to come back to the U.S. have to wait 21 days before being flown out on chartered plans.

(10-29-2014 03:51 PM)klake87 Wrote:  Then why have screening if it failed? It is a waste of money. We should have quarantine areas in Africa where people wanting to come back to the U.S. have to wait 21 days before being flown out on chartered plans.

Because you can catch people that ARE showing signs and thus are contagious? *shrug* Just gonna guess.

(10-29-2014 03:56 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 03:51 PM)klake87 Wrote:  Then why have screening if it failed? It is a waste of money. We should have quarantine areas in Africa where people wanting to come back to the U.S. have to wait 21 days before being flown out on chartered plans.

Because you can catch people that ARE showing signs and thus are contagious? *shrug* Just gonna guess.

Duncan wouldn't have been caught either. he was showing no signs.

If we implemented a travel ban, non prison like quarantine coupled with testing at the airports, we would achieve a better result then just screening at the airport.

(10-29-2014 01:46 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 12:50 PM)BobL Wrote:  Exxon, BP, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Phillips 66. To my knowledge these disasters did not out any one of them out of business. Sure some of them were bought out...but none when under.

You need to differentiate between criminal activity versus a company not providing a good service/product. We know Exxon and BP (focus on Valdez and the Gulf spill) paid significant fines.

Arthur Anderson went out of business.

What happened to the perpetrators of the Tuskegee experiment?

BobL Wrote:Just yesterday Orbital Sciences had a rocket blow up...outsourced by NASA..Had it been NASA that attempted the launch everyone would be in an uproar, talking about reducing funding.

How much would it have cost to have NASA build that rocket versus Orbital Sciences?

BobL Wrote:Look what happened when the military outsourced...we have the Blackwater mess.

So, by extension, you are for a larger military, by numbers, at least. A lot of those efforts started under the Bill Clinton/Al Gore the era of big government is dead efforts. It never made any sense to eliminate the internal position/job and then hire the same people back for the same job at higher rates via a contract? In our state, that is the IDOT method, so they can claim a reduction in headcount. Look at the dollars...

BobL Wrote:Its fine and appropriate to say that profit can stem innovation...but the quest for profit also provides incentive for shortcuts, putting workers and consumers in danger.

So, those that run or work in government agencies have no incentive for shortcuts, or deceptive efforts to protect their funding/jobs?

Please dont put words into my mouth..my point was simple and valid.

you said:

Quote:If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

You said if the CDC screws up they dont go out of business...I provided examples of private business's that screwed up and remained in business.

You said profit motive is good. I agreed to a point and provided scenarios where it is not.

I said nothing more.

As to the VA klake, one could argue it was the pursuit of "profit" that instigated the whole mess. Bonus structure that provided the incentive for them to take "shortcuts".

(10-29-2014 04:00 PM)klake87 Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 03:56 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 03:51 PM)klake87 Wrote:  Then why have screening if it failed? It is a waste of money. We should have quarantine areas in Africa where people wanting to come back to the U.S. have to wait 21 days before being flown out on chartered plans.

Because you can catch people that ARE showing signs and thus are contagious? *shrug* Just gonna guess.

Duncan wouldn't have been caught either. he was showing no signs.

If we implemented a travel ban, non prison like quarantine coupled with testing at the airports, we would achieve a better result then just screening at the airport.

a better result than what Klake? to date 2 people have come into the country, one arriving from Belgium, displaying no symptoms when they left nor when they arrived, who developed Ebola. No American has died! It has spread to two nurses who were uneducated and untrained in the required protocols.

So your answer is quarantine everyone who originates from a west African country for 21 days in a "non prison like quarantine".... talk about overkill...

(10-29-2014 04:04 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 01:46 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  So, those that run or work in government agencies have no incentive for shortcuts, or deceptive efforts to protect their funding/jobs?

Please dont put words into my mouth..my point was simple and valid.

you said:

Quote:If the CDC screws up, they don't go out of business. They complain about being underfunded. And, profit motive is good. That is what makes our system work, and motivates people to produce/innovate.

You said if the CDC screws up they dont go out of business...I provided examples of private business's that screwed up and remained in business.

You said profit motive is good. I agreed to a point and provided scenarios where it is not.

I said nothing more.

I am doing no such thing. You have clearly implied that the CDC, and those that run it, are acting in the best interest of the public because they don't operate with a profit motive. Again, when does the CDC go out of business? And, explain the Tuskegee experiment to me.

You calling out business that are still afloat ignores the thousands, if not millions that no longer exist because they did their function poorly.

BobL Wrote:As to the VA klake, one could argue it was the pursuit of "profit" that instigated the whole mess. Bonus structure that provided the incentive for them to take "shortcuts".

Being lazy also provides incentive for shortcuts. Fudging your numbers so your agency gets more funding (and more $$$ for your salary) next year provides incentive for shortcuts too.

BobL its called greed. also can you tell me how many of those federal employyes who defrauded the public of tax dllars have been fired. less then the number of ebola cases in U.S.

Yes, I do believe that today the CDC is acting in the bets interests of the public.

I believe that the vast majority of people work hard and perform their duties in a proper manner due to personal accountability. This holds true in the public and private sectors.

I also believe that there are people who manipulate the system, take shortcuts, etc. all in the name of making an extra buck. This also holds true in the public and private sectors.

(10-30-2014 08:08 AM)BobL Wrote:  Yes, I do believe that today the CDC is acting in the bets interests of the public.

I believe that the vast majority of people work hard and perform their duties in a proper manner due to personal accountability. This holds true in the public and private sectors.

I also believe that there are people who manipulate the system, take shortcuts, etc. all in the name of making an extra buck. This also holds true in the public and private sectors.

But people in government are not allowed to report or do things that go against the wishes of the leaders of the party in charge. Look at the Generals in the Military. I am sure they feel the best way to beat ISIS is to have SOME boots on the ground but cant say a word because Obama and his cronies would not like that.