CANNOT FACE THE TRUTH?

'Scuse, pliz ... it's very MUCH about the WHO if you're using it as the arbiter / determinant of what constitutes good health care AROUND THE WORLD and use THEIR top pick as your choice ... or did I miss something here ... ? The WHO is not about ensuring 'good care'. It is about advancing political agendas regarding many different aspects of what has popularly become misleadingly known as 'health care'. There's a difference. The biggest difference is that they have a devoutly ANTI-US agenda that drives their point of view. They are not 'objective', much as the 'United Nations' (another oxymoron-in-waiting) is not objective. They share the same mindset. Their 'objectivity', if you choose to apply that word to their Top Pick of the World as the French system of 'healthcare', disappears when you also consider that the French 'healthcare' system is notorious for letting the aged portion of their population die of heatstroke during heat waves. Yes, that IS provably true. A bit of research will supply that answer for you. The French 'health care' system is also the system which gave us wonders such as 'RU-486', the 'abortion pill'. I don't know - and don't care to know - your stance on the issue of abortion. I state it only as a point of fact about this 'health care' system. Consider that, if a nation the size of France (which is equivalent to, oh, say, Ohio in size) can't properly care for their aged during a heat wave (which is an annual occurence and therefore able to be planned for), they are not going to amaze anyone with the ongoing quality of care for a much smaller population than that present in the U.S. I will still take the health care system of the U.S. over that of France - but I would also make major modifications in the practice of Tort law (which, in turn, drives up the use of 'defensive medicine' so as to prevent frivolous lawsuits), allow insurance to be sold across state lines, change the policy to 'loser pays' for all costs of bringing frivolous suits, and other changes. Is our system perfect? No. Is it better than anywhere else in the world? HELL YES. If you doubt that, please consider a trip to France if you need hip replacement or a coronary bypass. Might change your point of view if you experience it on a 'user' level ...

does any one know the meaning of the word lackey ?

On healthcare, I know some canadians, some french and some Brits, and none of them would trade us our healthcare system

I would gladly incorporate theirs though.

On the economic issues, lets clarify deficit and debt as they are sometimes interchanged in a most confusing way,,

so, in laymans terms, like a household the country has a BUDGET( a financial plan based upon estimating the money that will come in and the money that needs to to out)

When there is a BUDGET DEFICIT , it means we spend more than what we take in

When there is a BUDGET SURPLUS, it means we are bringing in more than we have to spend

When we have DEBT, it means we owe...and we use this figure in deciding our BUDGET,,,, and so on and etc,,,


Now,,,pretty much since Clinton left office, we have had a budget deficit in this country and since before Clinton we have had DEBTS

I dont know a time when we have had a zero debt in this country so that discussion we can save for another day.


Pertaining to the DEFICIT though,,,,OBama pledged to half it ( from nine percent of GDP to four percent) by 2013
In simple numbers, he pledged to turn the 1.75 trillion year end deficit of 2009 into a 533 billion year end deficit in 2013


since 2009 only ended roughly one quarter (three months) ago,, I will wait to see how the plans unfold....


I want to add that coming from a rather analytical family, numbers are interesting to me. I in no way feel I know everything though and ANYTIME anyone has some information to share that I may not previously be aware of ,,,I appreciate hearing it because knowledge is power

Because I dont particularly care when people 'talk down' to me as if I am less intelligent or capable than they, I want to STRESS that that is never my intention here. I take it seriously if I ever make anyone feel otherwise.


these forums can be used to gain knowledge just as easily as they can to try and prove how knowledgable we are,,,,,always with respect

I am familiar with the French system. I have lived there.
It is a very decent system. Here in the U.S. the care is substandard
and if someone gets ill they are denied insurance.

I pointed out that the New England Journal of Medicine is in
agreement that our system is severely lacking in quality (ranked
37th worldwide by objective measures)

Actually I do not advocate for either political party but the
fact is that Obama is not responsible for our current financial
problems and seems to be trying to work toward solutions although
it will be years before we can assess the results.

From personal experience,, for those who are uninsured and facing MAJOR necessary surgery,,research a group called Volunteer Medical Staff,,,,if you qualify they will try to help with your medical needs for little or no cost, no insurance required.

It is embarassing that in a country where we can spend millions on entertainment, fast food, sports, etc,,,
we gripe about a few dollars to make sure noone has to ever choose between eating and receiving medical care or between having medically necessary surgery or losing their home.

I don't know if you realize it or not, but it's 2010 and Obamanation has introduced his second budget.. 2 Budgets..3 Trillion in deficits..

You have nothing positive to say about obama so you continue to regurgitate the bush bush bush mantra..

Keep up the good work

Oh. We've suddenly gone from Obama's handling of the ENTIRE economy to JUST his o'erweening desire to assimilate the world's best healthcare into his 'Borg'-like Communist Collective Empire ... ? Well, let's broaden the horizon a bit and look at the leadup to his 'porkulus' bill (by way of an analogy borrowed from the Catherine Austin Fitts website) ... I'll even throw in a 'bonus point' to the Libwhacks and trace the beginnings of this back to Bush, Paulson, et al and even before their 'We're all gonna DIE!' combined extortion response for their asking pittance of a mere $700 billion ... that was before 'trillion' became the 'new billion' ...

“In From the Internet”

Catherine and News & Commentary, March 8, 2010 at 5:03 pm

Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Detroit. She realizes that virtually all of her customers are unemployed alcoholics and, as such, can no longer afford to patronize her bar. To solve this problem, she comes up with a new marketing plan that allows her customers to drink now, but pay later.

Heidi keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers’ loans). Word gets around about Heidi’s “drink now, pay later” marketing strategy and, as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi’s bar. Soon she has the largest sales volume for any bar in Detroit.

By providing her customers freedom from immediate payment demands, Heidi gets no resistance when, at regular intervals, she substantially increases her prices for wine and beer, the most consumed beverages. Consequently, Heidi’s gross sales volume increases massively.

A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes that these customer debts constitute valuable future assets and increases Heidi’s borrowing limit. He sees no reason for any undue concern, since he has the debts of the unemployed alcoholics as collateral.

At the bank’s corporate headquarters, expert traders figure a way to make huge commissions, and transform these customer loans into DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then bundled and traded on international security markets.

Naive investors don’t really understand that the securities being sold to them as AAA secured bonds are really the debts of unemployed alcoholics. Nevertheless, the bond prices continuously climb, and the securities soon become the hottest-selling items for some of the nation’s leading brokerage houses.

One day, even though the bond prices are still climbing, a risk manager at the original local bank decides that the time has come to demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi’s bar. He so informs Heidi.

Heidi then demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but being unemployed alcoholics they cannot pay back their drinking debts. Since Heidi cannot fulfill her loan obligations she is forced into bankruptcy. The bar closes and the eleven employees lose their jobs.

Overnight, DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS drop in price by 90%. The collapsed bond asset value destroys the banks liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans, thus freezing credit and economic activity in the community. The suppliers of Heidi’s bar had granted her generous payment extensions and had invested their firms’ pension funds in the various BOND securities. They find they are now faced with having to write off her bad debt and with losing over 90% of the presumed value of the bonds. Her wine supplier also claims bankruptcy, closing the doors on a family business that had endured for three generations, her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local plant and lays off 150 workers.

Fortunately though, the bank, the brokerage houses and their respective executives are saved and bailed out by a multi-billion dollar no-strings attached cash infusion from their cronies in Government. The funds required for this bailout are obtained by new taxes levied on employed, middle-class, non-drinkers who have never been in Heidi’s bar.

NOW do you understand ... ?

I understand, that like the initial problem in HEIDIS situation, a system that has become too engulfed in GREED without consideration to the well being of others, contributed to a situation that became so dire that SOMETHING Had to be done. Of course, unless follow up is done to address the issue of GREED we will find ourself in this situation again,,,,so time will tell


Why DO we spend so much more on a healthcare system, when our lives and healths are no better for it? Its like putting bandaids on a broken leg,, makes no sense ...


Why do we allow corporate greed to run up debts so high(much higher than personal welfare,, I might add) but then complain about paying into a system that will help us all?

i think there was not much choice in the matter but I pray something will be done to assure we dont find ourselves there again besides just another TEMPORARY band aid. PRofit is great, GREED is another thing altogether and ends up hurting alot of people.

Greed, hmm ... ? What would you call the motivation of someone who wants to control YOUR body, YOUR access to medical care, YOUR choice of doctor, YOUR choice of 'insurance' coverage, YOUR decision as to whether or not you even WANT to carry insurance, YOUR right to NOT be COERCED under penalty of law into purchasing an unwanted insurance policy, YOUR right to purchase insurance through your employer's plan (which employer, btw, will shunt you into the 'government insurance' to save that 8% overhead), or any OTHER rights you currently enjoy? In my world, THAT's greed.

you are all wrong our debt started during the "Panic of 1837" so blame Martin Van Buren

Damn. Finally - the voice of reason ...

Well, I dont know who is doing all those things, but Id say mandating health coverage is as reasonable as mandating insurance, beyond that capitalism is still at work through competitive pricing and adequate services,,,just gives us MORE options to choose from. Id say thats a welcome plan , to me anyhow.

Greed to me is when you want to have excessively more(and I realize excessive is a subjective term) than your needs dictate, ESPECIALLy at the expense of others. We live in a country where the wealthiest get the best, which is reasonable, but what is not reasonable is that those getting the best actually want to IMPEDE others from a chance at the best as well. When it comes to healthcare, I dont think financial worth should dictate the worth of anyones health. Competent and affordable healthcare for all,,,,