Sta
Sta

Sta

Are
Are

Are

Jamesness
Jamesness

Jamesness

Checked Out
Checked Out

Checked Out

Check Out
Check Out

Check Out

Bolting
Bolting

Bolting

Htine
Htine

Htine

I Have An Idea
I Have An Idea

I Have An Idea

I Dont Want To
I Dont Want To

I Dont Want To

Bufferer
Bufferer

Bufferer

🔥 | Latest

commonwealth: Attention Commonwealth
commonwealth: Attention Commonwealth

Attention Commonwealth

commonwealth: 31 WinCalendar Email Bookmark Search 2018 Calendar Quick Ref Click month for Holidays Start Mon 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Jan 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2018 2 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Feb 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2018 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 23 4 5 6 78 9 10 Mar 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Commonwealth Day Commonwealth Day Quick Facts Hashtags: commonwhealth 2018 Date: #commonwealthday, 12 March, 2018 11 March, 2019 2019 Date: 2018 Holidays & Dates Canada Canadian & Common Holidays Misc. & Int'l. Observances Commonwealth Day Commonwealth Day in 2018 2018 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 2 Christian Holidays Apr 20 2478 15 1 17 18 19 20 21 Jewish Holidays Muslim Holidays Monday, Mar 12 Days to go: 16 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 May 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2018 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 January February + March 1 Purim (Start) 8 Intl. Women's Day 8 World Kidney Day Jun 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2018 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2019 Mar 13 Mar 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 <p><a href="http://lol-coaster.tumblr.com/post/171242651287/december-2018-calendar-with-holidays-canada" class="tumblr_blog">lol-coaster</a>:</p><blockquote><p><b><a href="https://www.wincalendar.com/Calendar-Canada/2018"> December 2018 Calendar with Holidays - Canada</a><br/></b> <br/></p></blockquote>
commonwealth: 31 WinCalendar
 Email
 Bookmark
 Search
 2018 Calendar Quick Ref
 Click month for Holidays Start Mon
 31 1 2 3 4 5 6
 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
 Jan 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
 2018 2 22 23 24 25 26 27
 28 29 30 31 1 2 3
 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 Feb 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
 2018 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
 25 26 27 28 1 23
 4 5 6 78 9 10
 Mar 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
 Commonwealth Day
 Commonwealth Day Quick Facts
 Hashtags: commonwhealth
 2018 Date:
 #commonwealthday,
 12 March, 2018
 11 March, 2019
 2019 Date:
 2018 Holidays & Dates
 Canada
 Canadian & Common Holidays
 Misc. & Int'l. Observances
 Commonwealth Day
 Commonwealth Day in
 2018
 2018 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
 2 Christian Holidays
 Apr
 20
 2478 15 1 17 18 19 20 21
 Jewish Holidays
 Muslim Holidays
 Monday, Mar 12
 Days to go: 16
 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
 29 30 12 3 4 5
 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
 May 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
 2018 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
 27 28 29 30 31 1 2
 January
 February +
 March
 1 Purim (Start)
 8 Intl. Women's Day
 8 World Kidney Day
 Jun 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
 2018 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
 2019
 Mar 13
 Mar 11
 1 2 3 4 5 6
<p><a href="http://lol-coaster.tumblr.com/post/171242651287/december-2018-calendar-with-holidays-canada" class="tumblr_blog">lol-coaster</a>:</p><blockquote><p><b><a href="https://www.wincalendar.com/Calendar-Canada/2018">

December 2018 Calendar with Holidays - Canada</a><br/></b>

<br/></p></blockquote>

<p><a href="http://lol-coaster.tumblr.com/post/171242651287/december-2018-calendar-with-holidays-canada" class="tumblr_blog">lol-coaster<...

commonwealth: commonwealth-compliments: humorous: This gif has the same power level as
commonwealth: commonwealth-compliments:

humorous:

This gif has the same power level as

commonwealth-compliments: humorous: This gif has the same power level as

commonwealth: commonwealth-compliments: humorous: This gif has the same power level as
commonwealth: commonwealth-compliments:
humorous:

This gif has the same power level as

commonwealth-compliments: humorous: This gif has the same power level as

commonwealth: JAY-Z Provided Fat Joe with a Plane to Fill with Supplies for Puerto Rico Relief @17thsoulja5 🇺🇸🛫🇵🇷"Since government aid to PuertoRico is moving at a snail's pace, it looks like it's up to the community to lend a helping hand. The U.S. commonwealth is reeling in the wake of HurricaneMaria. For a week, residents there have been struggling without electricity, food, gas, and water. FatJoe is teaming up with JAY-Z, Tidal, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. to send supplies to Puerto Rico. In a video posted on social media, the Puerto Rican rapper says he will be collecting supplies like batteries, women's products, water, toothpaste, soap and canned food. This will be taking place on Saturday, September 30th at the Jacob Javits Center in midtown, Manhattan. JAY-Z is supplying the airplane that the Bronx native will fly into Puerto Rico. There, he will meet Reggaeton star Daddy Yankee to distribute the items. Fat Joe's goal is to collect 200,000 lbs. of goods. There are several locations throughout the state and New York City that will also be accepting donations on Saturday. They include the Shirley A. Chisholm State Office Building in Brooklyn and the Jamaica Street Armory in Queens. There are also two locations in the Bronx accepting goods, Roberto Clemente State Park and the Department of Motor Vehicles on Fordham Road. For those who cannot get to those locations but would like to make a monetary donation, you can do so at tidal.com-PuertoRico." 17thsoulja BlackIg17th Repost @17thsoulja5
commonwealth: JAY-Z Provided Fat Joe with a Plane
 to Fill with Supplies for Puerto Rico
 Relief
 @17thsoulja5
🇺🇸🛫🇵🇷"Since government aid to PuertoRico is moving at a snail's pace, it looks like it's up to the community to lend a helping hand. The U.S. commonwealth is reeling in the wake of HurricaneMaria. For a week, residents there have been struggling without electricity, food, gas, and water. FatJoe is teaming up with JAY-Z, Tidal, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. to send supplies to Puerto Rico. In a video posted on social media, the Puerto Rican rapper says he will be collecting supplies like batteries, women's products, water, toothpaste, soap and canned food. This will be taking place on Saturday, September 30th at the Jacob Javits Center in midtown, Manhattan. JAY-Z is supplying the airplane that the Bronx native will fly into Puerto Rico. There, he will meet Reggaeton star Daddy Yankee to distribute the items. Fat Joe's goal is to collect 200,000 lbs. of goods. There are several locations throughout the state and New York City that will also be accepting donations on Saturday. They include the Shirley A. Chisholm State Office Building in Brooklyn and the Jamaica Street Armory in Queens. There are also two locations in the Bronx accepting goods, Roberto Clemente State Park and the Department of Motor Vehicles on Fordham Road. For those who cannot get to those locations but would like to make a monetary donation, you can do so at tidal.com-PuertoRico." 17thsoulja BlackIg17th Repost @17thsoulja5

🇺🇸🛫🇵🇷"Since government aid to PuertoRico is moving at a snail's pace, it looks like it's up to the community to lend a helping hand. The...

commonwealth: ITS EASY TO FORGET THAT FOR DECADES THE U.S. HAD A HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT WAS THE ENVY OF THE WORLD. WE HAD THE FINEST DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS, PATIENTS RECEIVED HIGH QUALITY, AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE, AND THOUSANDS OF PRIVATELY FUNDED CHARITIES PROVIDED HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE PO0 RON PAUL TURNING POINT USA <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://bushmeat.tumblr.com/" title="bushmeat">bushmeat</a> said:</p><blockquote><p>When they tell you how ghastly socialised healthcare is, remember what they are saying is absolute bullshit <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253</a></p></blockquote><p>If I had a nickel every time some leftist moron linked to a World Healthcare Organization or Commonwealth Fund study, well, I would have a shitload of nickels.</p><p>Since my previous source’s website is currently down–<a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/142352613032/that-red-guy-montypla-weaselwonderworld">which I’ve used in the past</a> to slap this idiotic notion that other countries’ healthcare systems are somehow superior the US’s private system–I’ll instead point to this <a href="https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf">other great explanation</a> by the folks over at CATO on why this pathetic claim is always made by these left-wing think-tanks:</p><blockquote><p><i> The debate over how to reform America’s health care sector often involves comparisons between the United States and other countries, and with good reason. Looking at other countries can help us learn which policies, if any, to emulate, and which to avoid. </i></p><p><i>There have been many attempts at international health care system comparisons.Among the most influential are the World Health Report 2000 published by the World Health Organization, several studies published by the Commonwealth Fund, and individual measures such as infant mortality and “mortality amenable to health care.” Generally in these studies, the United States performs poorly in comparison to Europe, Australia, and Japan. Therefore, scholars often use the studies to argue for adding even more government regulations to our already highly regulated health care system. </i></p><p><i>However, these studies suffer from several problems. First, they often rely on unadjusted aggregate data—such as life expectancy, or mortality from heart disease—that can be affected by many non–health care factors, including nutrition, exercise, and even crime rates. Second,they often use process measures, such as how many patients have received a pap smear or mammogram in the past three years. Process measures tell us what doctors do, but provide only an indirect measure of doctors’ productivity. Third, some of these studies inappropriately incorporate their own biases about financing in their statistics, which makes market-driven health systems appear worse even if their outcomes are similar or better. </i></p><p><i>An additional limitation of these studies is the omission of any measure of innovation. None of the best-known studies factor in the contribution of various countries to the advances that have come to characterize the current practice of health care in the developed world. </i></p><p><i>Every single health care test or treatment must be invented at some point. We would be living in a different world today were it not for the remarkable genius and hard work of health care inventors in the past, as well as investments from government health agencies and pharmaceutical and medical device companies. The health care issues commonly considered most important today—controlling costs and covering the uninsured— arguably should be regarded as secondary to innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must first be invented before its costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. </i><br/></p></blockquote><p>Furthermore, from another Glen Whitman <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf">article</a>:</p><blockquote><p><i> Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions- some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO health care rankings result from an index of health-related statistics. As with any index, it is important to consider how it was constructed, as the construction affects the results. </i><br/></p><p><i> There is good reason to account for the quality of care received by a country’s worst-off or poorest citizens. Yet the Health Distribution and Responsiveness Distribution factors do not do that.Instead, they measure relative differences in quality, without regard to the absolute level of quality. To account for the quality of care received by the worst-off, the index could include a factor that measures health among the poor, or a health care system’s responsiveness to the poor. This would, in essence, give greater weight to the well-being of the worst off.  Alternatively, a separate health performance index could be constructed for poor households or members of disadvantaged minorities. These approaches would surely have problems of their own, but they would at least be focused on the absolute level of health care quality, which should be the paramount concern. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO rankings, by purporting to measure the efficacy of health care systems, implicitly take all differences in health outcomes not explained by spending or literacy and attribute them entirely to health care system performance. Nothing else, from tobacco use to nutrition to sheer luck, is taken into account. </i></p><p><i>To some extent, the exclusion of other variables is simply the result of inadequacies in the data. It is difficult to get information on all relevant factors, and even more difficult to account for their expected effects on health. But some factors are deliberately excluded by the WHO analysis on the basis of paternalistic assumptions about the proper role of health systems. An earlier paper laying out the WHO methodological framework asserts, “Problems such as tobacco consumption, diet, and unsafe sexual activity must be included in an assessment of health system performance.” </i></p><p><i>In other words, the WHO approach holds health systems responsible not just for treating lung cancer, but for preventing smoking in the first place; not just for treating heart disease, but for getting people to exercise and lay off the fatty foods. <br/></i></p><p><i> Second, the WHO approach fails to consider people’s willingness to trade off health against other values. Some people are happy to give up a few potential months or even years of life in exchange for the pleasures of smoking, eating, having sex, playing sports, and so on. The WHO approach, rather than taking the public’s preferences as given, deems some preferences better than others (and then praises or blames the health system for them). </i></p><p><i>A superior (though still imperfect) approach would take people’s health-related behavior as given, and then ask which health systems do the best job of dealing with whatever health conditions arise.<br/></i></p></blockquote><p>In other words, its a bunch of meaningless cherry-picked measurements framed in a way to make the private system appear terrible in order to push for more socialized medicine.  </p><p>Despite all of it’s flaws, which are usually thanks to government market intervention, the United States still has the best health care system on the entire goddamn planet per capita.  It’s most likely that the life-saving equipment and procedures that are used in other hellholes using slave healthcare to save lives are thanks to us.  </p><p>You’re welcome.</p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/b97a460c917c68f3900de0bc46e50c59/tumblr_inline_owpcxquafE1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"/></figure></blockquote>
commonwealth: ITS EASY TO FORGET THAT
 FOR DECADES THE U.S. HAD A
 HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT WAS THE
 ENVY OF THE WORLD. WE HAD THE
 FINEST DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS,
 PATIENTS RECEIVED HIGH QUALITY,
 AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE, AND
 THOUSANDS OF PRIVATELY FUNDED
 CHARITIES PROVIDED HEALTH
 SERVICES FOR THE PO0
 RON PAUL
 TURNING
 POINT USA
<p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="http://bushmeat.tumblr.com/" title="bushmeat">bushmeat</a> said:</p><blockquote><p>When they tell you how ghastly socialised healthcare is, remember what they are saying is absolute bullshit

<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253</a></p></blockquote><p>If I had a nickel every time some leftist moron linked to a World Healthcare Organization or Commonwealth Fund study, well, I would have a shitload of nickels.</p><p>Since my previous source’s website is currently down–<a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/142352613032/that-red-guy-montypla-weaselwonderworld">which I’ve used in the past</a> to slap this idiotic notion that other countries’ healthcare systems are somehow superior the US’s private system–I’ll instead point to this <a href="https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf">other great explanation</a> by the folks over at CATO on why this pathetic claim is always made by these left-wing think-tanks:</p><blockquote><p><i>

The debate over how to reform America’s
health care sector often involves comparisons
between the United States and other countries,
and with good reason. Looking at other
countries can help us learn which policies, if
any, to emulate, and which to avoid. </i></p><p><i>There have been many attempts at international
health care system comparisons.Among
the most influential are the World Health Report
2000 published by the World Health Organization, several studies published by the
Commonwealth Fund, and individual measures
such as infant mortality and “mortality
amenable to health care.” Generally in these
studies, the United States performs poorly in
comparison to Europe, Australia, and Japan.
Therefore, scholars often use the studies to
argue for adding even more government regulations
to our already highly regulated health
care system. </i></p><p><i>However, these studies suffer from several
problems. First, they often rely on unadjusted
aggregate data—such as life expectancy, or
mortality from heart disease—that can be
affected by many non–health care factors,
including nutrition, exercise, and even crime
rates. Second,they often use process measures,
such as how many patients have received a pap
smear or mammogram in the past three years.
Process measures tell us what doctors do, but
provide only an indirect measure of doctors’
productivity. Third, some of these studies
inappropriately incorporate their own biases
about financing in their statistics, which
makes market-driven health systems appear
worse even if their outcomes are similar or better. </i></p><p><i>An additional limitation of these studies
is the omission of any measure of innovation.
None of the best-known studies factor in the
contribution of various countries to the
advances that have come to characterize the
current practice of health care in the developed
world. </i></p><p><i>Every single health care test or treatment
must be invented at some point. We would be
living in a different world today were it not
for the remarkable genius and hard work of
health care inventors in the past, as well as
investments from government health agencies
and pharmaceutical and medical device
companies. The health care issues commonly
considered most important today—controlling
costs and covering the uninsured—
arguably should be regarded as secondary to
innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must
first be invented before its costs can be
reduced and its use extended to everyone.

</i><br/></p></blockquote><p>Furthermore, from another Glen Whitman <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf">article</a>:</p><blockquote><p><i>

Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions- some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares.

<br/></i></p><p><i>

The WHO health care rankings result
from an index of health-related statistics. As
with any index, it is important to consider
how it was constructed, as the construction
affects the results.

</i><br/></p><p><i>

There is good reason to account for the
quality of care received by a country’s worst-off
or poorest citizens. Yet the Health Distribution
and Responsiveness Distribution factors
do not do that.Instead, they measure relative
differences in quality, without regard to the
absolute level of quality. To account for the
quality of care received by the worst-off, the
index could include a factor that measures
health among the poor, or a health care system’s
responsiveness to the poor. This would,
in essence, give greater weight to the well-being
of the worst off.  Alternatively, a separate health
performance index could be constructed for
poor households or members of disadvantaged
minorities. These approaches would
surely have problems of their own, but they
would at least be focused on the absolute level
of health care quality, which should be the
paramount concern.

<br/></i></p><p><i>

The WHO rankings, by purporting to
measure the efficacy of health care systems,
implicitly take all differences in health outcomes
not explained by spending or literacy
and attribute them entirely to health care system
performance. Nothing else, from tobacco
use to nutrition to sheer luck, is taken into
account. </i></p><p><i>To some extent, the exclusion of other
variables is simply the result of inadequacies
in the data. It is difficult to get information
on all relevant factors, and even more difficult
to account for their expected effects on
health. But some factors are deliberately
excluded by the WHO analysis on the basis of
paternalistic assumptions about the proper
role of health systems. An earlier paper laying
out the WHO methodological framework
asserts, “Problems such as tobacco consumption,
diet, and unsafe sexual activity must be
included in an assessment of health system
performance.” </i></p><p><i>In other words, the WHO approach holds
health systems responsible not just for treating
lung cancer, but for preventing smoking
in the first place; not just for treating heart
disease, but for getting people to exercise and
lay off the fatty foods.

<br/></i></p><p><i>

Second, the WHO approach fails to consider
people’s willingness to trade off health
against other values. Some people are happy
to give up a few potential months or even
years of life in exchange for the pleasures of
smoking, eating, having sex, playing sports,
and so on. The WHO approach, rather than
taking the public’s preferences as given,
deems some preferences better than others
(and then praises or blames the health system
for them). </i></p><p><i>A superior (though still imperfect) approach
would take people’s health-related
behavior as given, and then ask which health
systems do the best job of dealing with whatever
health conditions arise.<br/></i></p></blockquote><p>In other words, its a bunch of meaningless cherry-picked measurements framed in a way to make the private system appear terrible in order to push for more socialized medicine.  </p><p>Despite all of it’s flaws, which are usually thanks to government market intervention, the United States still has the best health care system on the entire goddamn planet per capita.  It’s most likely that the life-saving equipment and procedures that are used in other hellholes using slave healthcare to save lives are thanks to us.  </p><p>You’re welcome.</p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/b97a460c917c68f3900de0bc46e50c59/tumblr_inline_owpcxquafE1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"/></figure></blockquote>

<p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbl...