Why not Universal Healthcare?

[ForeverAutumn]

You may consider it uncool, but it's most certainly true. There must be something like a Napoleon complex with you guys.

As for condescending, you either don't know what it means or you've never read your own posts. Obviously you have no idea of the meaning of the word demographics, but it looks kewl to throw it out, doesn't it?.

It's noticeable, and has been commented on by others on other sites on which I post. Buy, ya know, it's funny that it just popped up it's ugly head here since you've arrived.

And I haven't caught any flak for this line of discussion, only from differing ideas and that isn't really flak, it was simply discussion. Actually, most thik you're the dick setting fire to the small, perfect, british possessions vs the big, bad, USA discussion, er...., flame war.

I do notice that since your arrival here, (and it's funny that your only posts are here) is that tendency to dog-pile on the USA has ramped up significantly. Is that just a coincidence? I dunno know about that. Previously it was just one rancorous old man who was a site joke, but here you go, proudly flinging your poo like a monkey from a tree and drawing support from other heretofore nice, friendly, inncent, second-worlders where countries made no difference, at least until you arrived. And I'm not the only one who noticed that.

BTW, I notice you haven't disputed my facts either, but simply try to put me down for stating them. It ain't workin', mate. No apology.

So, deal with it. You're simply a rabble-rouser with really nothing to contribute to an audio forum except an ego and an attitude. You're just here for the fight.

Geez, no wonder this site is dying...with a welcome like that!

Mark, why don't you just go back to talking about the issue at hand instead of attacking the non-americans who are only trying to provide a different viewpoint.

If you stopped being defensive for five minutes, you might actually find something of value in our experiences with our own health care systems.

[markw]

But then this pipsqueak from a tiny country with less people than Texas and has about as much impact in world affairs as a fart in a hurricane comes on all superior and starts lecturing us from the POV of his tiny country.

Sorry, that don't sit too well with me, what with living in the greater NYC metro area which, surprisingly enough, has just about as many people as oz in it's entirety. Apparently it does with you, though.

And, I hate to say this, but I wouldn't be too quick to accuse others of being defensive.

[Feanor]

But then this pipsqueak from a tiny country with less people than Texas and has about as much impact in world affairs as a fart in a hurricane comes on all superior and starts lecturing us from the POV of his tiny country.

Sorry, that don't sit too well with me, what with living in the greater NYC metro area which, surprisingly enough, has just about as many people as oz in it's entirety. Apparently it does with you, though.

And, I hate to say this, but I wouldn't be too quick to accuse others of being defensive.

It's really too bad that you are incapable of reasoned arguement.

I'm afraid, "My dick (or country) is bigger than yours, so shut up", isn't very persuasive.

[bobsticks]

I'm afraid, "My dick (or country) is bigger than yours, so shut up", isn't very persuasive.

...that may depend on what locker room...or bath house...you're in...

[markw]

It's really too bad that you are incapable of reasoned arguement.

I'm afraid, "My dick (or country) is bigger than yours, so shut up", isn't very persuasive.

Anyhow, here's your "reasoned response" whe you're in informed that you're comparinng a plan for 300 million to a plan that has only has to cover 20 million.

Sorry, this is a non sequitur.

The problem in the US is not the inability but the unwillingness to provide universal healthcare to its citizens.

Actually, feanor, I don't think your dick is bigger than a chipmunks.

[bobsticks]

Actually, feanor, I don't think your dick is bigger than a chipmunks.

Seriously, now you're just out of line. There's room for alot of opposing points of view and, certainly, some disagreement but that was unnecessary...

[markw]

Seriously, now you're just out of line. There's room for alot of opposing points of view and, certainly, some disagreement but that was unnecessary...

I apologize to chipmunks everywhere.

[nightflier]

Watchdog Groups Expose Healthcare Industry Lobbyist Spending

New details have emerged about how the healthcare industry has been trying to sway the debate in Congress. A study by the Sunlight Foundation and the Center for Responsive Politics has uncovered never-before-seen webs of campaign contributions from outside lobbyists and their clients to key members of Congress. Between January 2007 and June 2009, Max Baucus, the chair of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, collected contributions from thirty-seven outside lobbyists representing the pharmaceutical industry’s chief trade association, PhRMA, as well as thirty-six lobbyists who listed drug maker Amgen as their client. In all, eleven major health and insurance firms had their contributions to Baucus boosted through extra donations from ten or more of their outside lobbyists. Some thirty-two members of Congress got money from ten or more PhRMA lobbyists over the last two-and-a-half years. Amgen’s lobbyists did the same for twenty-four members.

[markw]

For the life of me, I've never understood who the practice of lobbying has been allowed to continue for as long as it has. And this has been going on for along time and both parties benefit from it.

So, hoccum it still thrives, and who is gonna stop it.

Like I said a long, long time ago here, cost contaimnent first, then worry about a plan.

[Feanor]

Watchdog Groups Expose Healthcare Industry Lobbyist Spending

New details have emerged about how the healthcare industry has been trying to sway the debate in Congress. A study by the Sunlight Foundation and the Center for Responsive Politics has uncovered never-before-seen webs of campaign contributions from outside lobbyists and their clients to key members of Congress. Between January 2007 and June 2009, Max Baucus, the chair of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, collected contributions from thirty-seven outside lobbyists representing the pharmaceutical industry’s chief trade association, PhRMA, as well as thirty-six lobbyists who listed drug maker Amgen as their client. In all, eleven major health and insurance firms had their contributions to Baucus boosted through extra donations from ten or more of their outside lobbyists. Some thirty-two members of Congress got money from ten or more PhRMA lobbyists over the last two-and-a-half years. Amgen’s lobbyists did the same for twenty-four members.

Maybe this sort of thing is the bigger problem for the US than the size of the country.

[nightflier]

But then this pipsqueak from a tiny country with less people than Texas and has about as much impact in world affairs as a fart in a hurricane comes on all superior and starts lecturing us from the POV of his tiny country.

Mark, it's these kinds of insults that give your point of view the impact of "a fart in a hurricane."

I may not agree with ClothEars' point of view, but he's being a whole lot more civil in making it.

[markw]

Mark, it's these kinds of insults that give your point of view the impact of "a fart in a hurricane."

I may not agree with ClothEars' point of view, but he's being a whole lot more civil in making it.

Perhaps when these overly proud simpletons realize that it's a lot simpler to design a workable plan for 20 to 30 million in a few population centers as opposed to one for 300 million spread across an entire continent, and then some, then perhaps then I'll tone it down.

Until then, I'll just respond in the simplist manner since they obviously cannot grasp the big picture.

[Feanor]

Perhaps when these overly proud simpletons realize that it's a lot simpler to design a workable plan for 20 to 30 million in a few population centers as opposed to one for 300 million spread across an entire continent, and then some, then perhaps then I'll tone it down.

Until then, I'll just respond in the simplist manner since they obviously cannot grasp the big picture.

Mark, you seriously underestimate the complexities of governing in Canada. Being 10% the size doesn't make in 1/10 the problem. There are significant cultural, regional, and federal vs. provincial issues.

For starters, you might be interested to know, (or more you aren't), that there isn't a Canadian heathcare system; there are 10 provincial heathcare systems and they are definitely not identical.

[markw]

Mark, you seriously underestimate the complexities of governing in Canada. Being 10% the size doesn't make in 1/10 the problem. There are significant cultural, regional, and federal vs. provincial issues.

For starters, you might be interested to know, (or more you aren't), that there isn't a Canadian heathcare system; there are 10 provincial heathcare systems and they are definitely not identical.

And, by that token, I think you truly underestimate the ways the tendrils of greed and corruption can become entwined in a system designed to govern well over ten times the population of Canada.

Did you read BR's post? As he pointed out, we have fifty different states, each with it's own rules governing insurance. And yet, everyone expects just one perfect answer to arrive instantly when, in fact, as it now stands, it would be against the law.

so far, this current regime isn't even getting warm...

[Feanor]

And, by that token, I think you truly underestimate the ways the tendrils of greed and corruption can become entwined in a system designed to govern well over ten times the population of Canada.

Did you read BR's post? As he pointed out, we have fifty different states, each with it's own rules governing insurance. And yet, everyone expects just one perfect answer to arrive instantly when, in fact, as it now stands, it would be against the law.

so far, this current regime isn't even getting warm...

I think I can agree with you on that one.

As heard on CNN a couple of days ago, the "public option" as omitted with Democrat support despite 65% approval by the actual population. Of course that's where Nightflier's reference to the insurance industry's funding politicians is so relevant.

As I understand it, everytime there's be a State-side proposal to limit campaign funding by source or amount, it's squelched because is supposedly offends free speech. This is obviously a crock.