 |
|
 |
|
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:27:41 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
"Sean" <...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Using the quoted figures [ assuming they are genuine ] would mean that on
GDP of $15 Trillion
3% = $450 Billion
5% = $750 Billion
therefore 8% = $1200 Billion savings per year
That's $12 Trillion over 10 years, more than the current projected Federal
deficit of $9.1 Trillion.
That equals $3934 for every American man, woman, and child - every year
between now and hell freezing over.
If a married couple with one child was able to save this money and put it
aside aside for 20 years for a College Education it would mean $236,040 ----
plus 20 years of Interest, or Investment Returns .......... yeah well over
$600K, and possibly up to a $1 million in the kitty, or a home mortgage paid
off within 20 years.
But of course, if one was to *believe* the lunacy of what masqerades as
mature intelligent discussions of ALL the options which could have occurred
anytime in the last 10, 20, 30 or 40 years, then of course it is "said" that
Americans simply are not interested.
Illusory images of individual freedom cloud the reality, whilst everyone -
with insurance or without it - are all simultaneously being personally
ripped off by a minority group - financially, morally, ethically no matter
how rich or poor the individual may be
On top of this the ongoing downstream unnecessary suffering of real people
including children, the elderly and especially the chronically ill, the
needless avoidable deaths, plus a divided, very angry and distrustful
society as an self-evident outcome is apparently far more preferable than
being responsible mature adult citizens of a Nation willing to stand up to
the plate and be counted.
Socialism has absolutely nothing to do with it.
An over-bearing nanny Government has nothing to do with it either.
There is more than one way to skin a cat -- there is never only one simple
dualistic either/or option to choose between --- there are manifold
*synergistic* alternatives available right here, and right now -- and all of
them can found with an ounce of creativity and a pound of humility.
Like the black gold of Oil and the many other natural resources America was
blessed with once, but now gone forever, apparently the imagination, the
creativity, the inventiveness, the adaptibility, and what was at one time
America's greatest strength - a willingness to learn new ways of doing
things - has dried up just like all the Oil wells have.
All that seems left now is just tons of hot air and 300 plus million people
sitting like startled dear in the headlights of an oncoming truck on the
Highway - scared shitless of shadows.
It's a shame and a pity, but hey, that's life. In the land of the Free one
gets to be as irresponsible, as unco-operative, and as lacking in
self-discipline and ethics as one chooses.
That's right, your childrens childrens children are not your responsibility
to leave this world a slightly better place. If YOU are happy with YOUR
situation, if you are happy enough to keep your current so-called hard earnt
advantages and social priveldges then nothing else matters right?
Which given the nuances of Karma, it's not entirely improbable that many now
alive will be back again in quick time to enjoy the fruits of their lack of
labour that they *believed* they had escaped.
Maybe this time around they believed they had already earnt all their many
worldly priveldges of being an American citizen who could afford exorbinant
health insurance and the many other luxuries of life for those rich enough
to enjoy it.
Right now the Health Care Reform issue in the USA is NOT a problem .... it
is an opportunity and a blessing, but re-presented once again for your kind
attention.
It would help enormously though to first be able to actually see "the
elephant in the room" and then deal with it for what it is. The #1 obstacle
that's blocking all and any progress whatsoever.
and the beat goes on .......... endlessly.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:44:14 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
Them commie socialists don't have a clue as to how difficult it was
for me to get a stay from the U. S. Court of Appeals against my death
panel.
0-------------------------
"Sean" <...@news.optusnet.com.au...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:24:00 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
addendum::
Serious analysis, however, looks remote. And the possibility that Americans
may ultimately decide to keep the current system -- one that leaves more
people behind every day, costs trillions of dollars and is slowly destroying
the U.S. economy -- is simply beyond belief.
In Germany, where people know the real meaning of Nazism, TV viewers' eyes
popped and jaws dropped at the sight of Hitler mustaches painted on Obama's
face as protestors suggested the plan would bring Nazi medicine to America.
Outsiders have a tendency to caricature the United States, drawing rough
lines that exaggerate and oversimplify the traits of a complex and diverse
nation. In truth, I'm afraid, the healthcare debate has become cartoonish.
Consider the spectacle of a constituent asking Rep. Barney Frank why he
``continues to support a Nazi plan,'' and his response, ``Ma'am, trying to
have a conversation with you would be like trying to argue with a
dining-room table.''
Frida Ghitis writes on global affairs.
[ I know how Barney feels - and McCain too during the last election having
to deal with questions from 'concerned citizens' about the Black Muslim ]
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/1197368.html
I live in the West Germany, and have only been here a few years as I am a
native Miamian FL. Since I've lived in both countries I feel I can compare
the two systems fairly well. Neither is perfect, obviously, but I can say no
one here has to pay ridiculous amounts out of their own pockets.
One negative aspect is the annoying amount of bureaucratic paperwork, but
that's just how it is with everything in Germany, not just the healthcare
system.
I have excellent health care. I also pay around 80? a month for government
health insurance. And as samp wrote, if you don't like it, then pay more for
the private insurance! That option is still there if you don't want govt.
funded health care.
But why withhold this from people who cannot afford insurance in the
current system?
Frida is correct in stating that the rest of the Western world is astonished
about the debate. Germans are constanly asking me to explain why my people
in the US are so against govt. healthcare.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
In religion and politics, people's beliefs and convictions are in almost
every case gotten at second hand, and without examination.
Mark Twain
[ the emphasis being on the words *without examination* ]
-----------------------------------
Oppostion to Obama's Health Care reform seems to be mostly educated by miss
information. No one of any degree of education can really go along with this
talk of death panals and other garbage. It's not a suprise the world is
shaking it's head.
People: I would rather have the socialized U.S. Marines then Dick Cheney
style private rent-a-cop out fits like Blackwater fighting our wars. If you
do not like the idea of a public option, then like in the case of the
socialized U.S. Mail, you are free to pay higher prices for a FED EX deal.
Recently, Business Investment Weekly argued that famed physicist Steven
Hawkins would be dead if he lived in England. Duh!!
Steven Hawkins, a British citizen claimed it was only because of the
National Health Care Service that he was still alive!!! My 81 year old
uncle in the UK would argue like-wise. Sarah Palin -stop it with the
absolute lying!!
----
Indeed. This country is forever filled to the brim with culpable human
ignorance, selfishness, backwardness. Terrified of anything new or different
or positive or good. Thank the RepubliNazi Party for "educating" such
uneducated fools and other assorted dirtbags! The proof is...everywhere.
----------------
L. Neil Smith has promoted a great idea of advocating a Constitutional
Amendment mandating a separation of medicine and state.
1) The end of medicare and medicaid
2) The end of the FDA and the DEA
3) The end of medical licensing
4) The end of prescription drugs and controlled substances. Marijuana in the
bulk aisle in the health food store. Morphine over the counter in the drug
store.
5) No more insurance tax breaks for anybody (lower all taxes instead,
preferably to zero).
6) Tort reform: loser pays.
This will engender a true free market in health care.
A doctor visit or a hospital stay for a broken bone will once again be
affordable out of pocket for most Americans.
Catastrophic health insurance will be easily obtainable to cover the rest.
The poor will be very well taken care of with voluntary charity.
[ aha, sure it will -- and in America the poster child of the "free market",
and the home of the "free"?
Surely, it should be this way already ---- right? Ha, in your dreams maybe
LOL -- but at least the poster admitted that it's not affordable nor
easily obtainable now. And I feel less than certain that this poster will be
fronting up anytime soon to offer their volunteer charity work for the
poor - not! ]
"Sean" <...@news.optusnet.com.au...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:50:34 -0700 (PDT), Doug <...@littleknownpubs.com
Sean,
I found these articles interesting and funny. Thanks for posting them.
Here's a question I have for you:
In my many trips to Europe, I've heard the incredibly high taxes many
of them pay. They do get great health care coverage, but the taxes are
so high. I see what appears to be a noticeable reduced interest in
working hard, since most of what they could gain by their own efforts
is donated to taxes. It's not a huge difference, but it is noticeable.
Not all European countries have this, but I've seen it in many. I
don't know whether it is directly tied to having taxes over 50% or
whether it is from a historical cultural difference, such as the
percent of families that own their own homes.
Do you see this in Australia? How high are taxes there?
If all the health care costs only end up as a few percent of GDP, then
why are taxes so high in many European countries? Or maybe the better
question is, what does offering this kind of health care really cost
in terms of taxes? What percent of your income do you need to pay in
taxes for this kind of coverage?
But the other question is do high taxes act as a disincentive to work
hard?
It's a question I've been wondering.
The big thing missed in these articles is the explanation that so much
is being stirred up by this reform that Obama is proposing because the
Republicans see blood in the water and are desperately looking for
something to restore their lost glow, and think this might be a chance
to darken the Democrats image. Making a controversy for this reason is
not good for the country and could make things worse for them.
I'm surprised how easily so many get worked up into such extreme
attitudes. So much fear mongering going on just to stir up anger and
make people irate.
Real open dialogue is the best answer for this, which seems to be
taking place gradually and slowly. But the news medial lives on
controversy, so they exaggerate everything, although I do see more
efforts from the media to help clarify and deliver honest information.
In my local area, the representatives have held town hall meetings,
where people got a chance to ask questions and share their opinions.
These meetings have been attracting thousands, even in small areas. I
think many of the people come in expecting that everything is out of
control. That's the image they've picked up. Most walked away glad
that they had a chance to get their feelings heard, but also surprised
that nothing was being forced down anyone's throats.
The representatives come away saying that the most important thing at
this time seems to be patience. People need more time to understand
what all of this means. They don't want it rushed, because such
drastic and dire warnings are being promoted by some, and this leaves
a lot of people wondering how true it is. When they find out that much
of it is bogus, they still have doubts and need time and straight
information to feel better about the proposals.
A lot of what gets aired sounds just as crazy here. You don't need to
be at the center of the world in Australia to see that.
Thanks.
Doug.
On Aug 24, 10:24 pm, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:27:46 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
an addendum of some after thoughts, mainly about Economics and some
essential differences about Australia.
-- Australia's population is about the same as Florida, and yet it is spread
across a land mass the size of the continental USA. There is only 7 cities
that have more than 1 million people. I am talking about *economies of
scale* & potential for synergy here.
-- If instead our population was squeezed into an area of Tasmania so that
it was equivalent with Florida land mass, how much money do you think we
would save from this one physical fact if we ran ebverything the same and
met the health needs of the population? 10% 20% 30% ???
-- And yet already Australian Health Care costs that delivers equivalent or
better care than the USA for about 35% the cost that Americans pay. Why is
that? Where is all YOUR money going whether it's private or public health
care/insurance?
-- New York city has almost half the entire population of Australia, but not
all people in New York get full access to the health care system due to
barriers. Now I don't know because I haven't looked, but if one added up all
the health care costs of New York City, and compared over the same period
with the total health care costs in Australia public and private across a
continent --- I wonder which was the most expensive -- what do you think?
-- Don't forget that a USD 5 years ago was worth $2 aussie dollars. So
exchange rates vary --- and need to be taken into consideration when doing $
for $ comparisons.
-- The USA Military receives Government Health care - in fact it is
Universal health Care for Military personnell and thier families -- at the
cost to the USA Taxpayers as a whole, and yet no one seems to be concerned
about this "welfare" provision given for nothing, or complaining that the
Government has taken over the health care of the freedom loving US Military.
Can you see the limits of the usual beliefs thsat get rolled out to
criticise "universal health care"
-- OK, so someone is going to say that the government is the employer and
that's your preffered system ... I say so???? Why is OK for the community as
whole to require, demand, ask for or to expect *employers* to be responsible
for their employees health care -- why does the employers put up being
morally or by market forces -- either way they are FORCED to offer their
employees health coverage. It is NOT the employers responsibility now nor
ever -- and yet no RIGHT WINGER Free Enterprise Libertarian says boo about
this. NO business could possibly run or plan an effective business model
when they have no control over their costs or the freedom to choose such
costs ..... when costs are related back to the sheer LUCK of ongoing health
demands their employees might place on the insurance which might increase
premiums etc etc ...
-- The other thing someone would say is that of course the government should
pay health care for Military personal because they are the Military - they
will surely need it more than the average person - BUT the Government and
therefore the Taxpayer are also being held responsible for non-military
related ie non-work health care issues that arise. They'll pay for cancer
treatment, or broken bones when driving as a civilian don't they. No one
complains that the Military not only get FREE Health Care, but no one
complains that the doctors the hospitals the nursing staff the whole shebang
is not only run by the Government, but all the personell are Government paid
public servants.
Where is the outcry that the Private providers of health Care are precluded
by Government edict of offering a *cheaper / better* model than the
Government provides?
Now I am not saying any of the above should change -- the issue is the
theoretical criticisms about socialism/government/welfare and spending of
*hard earned* Tax dollars that people bring up that have NO validity in the
REAL world.
To me it's about a lack of any rational consistency in the *arguments* of
the spoilers-distractors-interferers in finding valid workable solutions to
problems -- they cherry pick their ideology and the issues they have with
other theories and absolutely none of it [ imho] would stand any
rational/logicval scrutiny. iow- it's mostly BS that the right/left wing
loud mouths scream about, no matter how genuine these people might be.
-- The Federal Government here pays for the majority of the public health
care system across Australia, and yet they don't run one hospital, don't
have government employed doctors, and they don't dispense drugs either -
except for the Military :-))
Fed Govt sets policy, makes the Laws, provides funds, and regulates the
system and safety controls. The State Governments run the state public
hospitals and local health clincs --- but that's not the end of it -- some
public hospitals are owned and run by the state governments and others only
funded by the state/federal governments but are PRIVATELY owned and operated
just like any other Private Hospital --- this is an exmaple of what Obama
means by "single payer" system.
-- The Catholic & Uniting Churchs run many Public Hospitals across the
nation, and most have ancillary private hospitals usingtneh same doctors etc
on the same grounds. My daughter right now is doing Nursing practical
training in Catholic Private Hospital as part of her Nursing Course, a
course that is run by the State Government, partly funded by the federal
govt with personal fees also being paid.
This is the reality here .... public / private work TOGETHER in all areas of
our nation.
-- In most situations like Doctors, surgeons and medical specialists of all
kinds in ALL PUBLIC Hospitals are Private Practioners who work in BOTH
systems the Public and private. A hospital head who is a Doctor might be
employed by the Government but everyone else is a free-enterprise actor.
-- If you have a brian tumour requiring treatment whether you are in a
private or public system chances are you personally would end with the exact
same Doctor!!! And yeah, they get paid LESS in the Government system $-$ but
again it isn't as simple as that as all things are not equal.
-- Our richest citizen a billionaire never had private health insurance that
I know of -- when he needed a new kidney transplant, open heart surgery
being brought back form the dead almost with a quadruple bipass -- he was in
the PUBLIC system and he never a $ for it -- not a dime of out of pocket.
All he did was pay his lawful taxes. And some years he never paid a dime in
Tax either, but there ya go!
An important point here NO ONE begrudged him that he got treated in the
Public system and he didn't go Private at his own expense. This is a
difference i believe between australian values and the common American
values. Neither is right or wrong, they are just different. Individuals get
to choose their own values, so anyone can decide for themsleves which Value
is better for them and their society.
-- WORDS mean different ideas here to the USA - In Australia when someone
says Public Hospital they aren't talking about a run down thing similar to
in Russia or the old USSR. Private Hospitals do the easy stuff, the optional
stuff, they do not do the cutting edge high quality health care that is
needed in neurology, heart disease, cancer, spinal care or burns units and
so on.
Public Hospitals here have the BEST surgeons and medical experts working in
them. Public funding pays for a big share of the research and new tech
development or treatments that go on. They are also the main Teaching
Hospitals for doctors and nursing and associated medical addons like
radiology etc.
Are they pefect? No. Could better facilities be found or installed, or newer
hospitals built? Sure. Like everywhere it is a balancing act -- and like
everywhere it is about how much people as indivudals or collectively via the
Government can afford, and a balancing act in that is the Tax rates as well.
It's complicated, but it is PRACTICAL here, it is good value for money here,
it is competitive, it is fully funded every year --- FULLY FUNDED and the
most people, despite problems that do arise, aren't about to dump the whole
show on some extreme ideological politcal or philosphical theory, or belief.
-- I wrote elsewhere about the PBS scheme that subsides all australians
medication costs, and the GOVERNMENT, the biggest most powerful entity in
this nation negotiates on behalf of the citzens with Amercian Drufg
Companies and secures long term deals from them at a price aropund about 50%
or less of what they charge Americans.
-- Any idea why the Drug companies in the USA and overseas that supply the
USA are able to charge the prices they do? Any idea why politicians go off
the wall when anyone suggest that the prices for drugs in the USA are
Unconscienable? Any idea what role the current system that had 6000 plus[?]
Private health insurance companies in the USA accept the prices charged by
Drug companies ?
-- When the medicare thing was introduced and ever since the Government as
par tof monitoring the delivery and cost of medicare created an Audit team
that looked at Dotors over-billing, and over-servicing of patient.
Overservicing means doing proceedures, or having repeat visits with patients
in a GP setting that are NOT really necessary. Like an FBI team this group
found an enormous amount of fraud involved in by - yep - Doctors!
-- There is myth that Dotcors are somehow special and more ethical. it may
have been so in the 19th and mid 20th century, but reality is quite
different.
-- There is another myth that Doctors go into medicine for altruistic
reasons. This is true, and it is also NOT true .. these ones need to be
regulated and checked for not just performance but for outright fraud.
-- 47 % of Australians have private medical insurance cover -- and yet
private aspects of our helth care only account for about 7% of the total
heath $ spent overall.
-- The governmment gives people a 30% cash rebate via their tax returns for
them taking out private health insureance -- the purpose is to relieve the
pressure/demand on private hospitals and totall Govt costs long term.
-- The benefits to people of private health insurance here is minimal. if yo
had a heart attack you'll be delivered to a PUBLIC hospital anyway ... all
emergency and 90% of intensive care is handled by Public Hospitals and it is
this that is the most expensive. So the well top do get to have their hip
rplaced faster, or have a private personal room, or can claim for their GYm
membership or for their Nike running shoes on their Priavte health
insurance -- or their massage, or their accupuncture etc .
But it is PRIMARY care -- this is paid for by the people via the government,
and then both public and private people deliver the health services
depending onnthe location and situation.
Bottom line?
6% of total GDP is spent on average on health care related costs across the
nation all up.
The rest is really just mathematics Doug. :-)))
The Law of Economy is a part of the ECK Teachings - folow this guideline and
people will succeed in life. Paul twicthell wrote about the spiritual value
of not wasting one grain of rice.
The Law of Economy, imho, is ignored in the USA. The myth there is that the
Private system is ALWAYS more efficient, more procutive than the public
sector, or anything the Government could do
The Law of Economy imho supercedes any theory that letting the Government do
things on behalf of the people is an abdication of personal responsibility.
That is Myth and it's wrong.
The Law of Love supercedes all spiritual laws imho, and it is this Law that
gets repeatedly ignored by American Eckist who think their political
philosphy is the same thing as the ECK teachings. It ain't.
But others have the freedom to live their life or choose the type of
government they want to vote for, and I respect that of course.
I am just a tad tired of getting lectured by a few who think that got it all
down pat and can tell me I don't know what goers on the USA or what their
values are about for I do. Whilst I may personally not hold the exact same
values i sure do accept that they exist.
and I also a tad tired of people mis-using the term *socialism* by applying
to activities and nations where it does NOT fit in any real way.
OK, enough ..... I hope this helps.
I am not expecting anything much to change though, be it USA health care, or
how American Eckists see things just because I see it differently.
all the best Doug .....
Cheers Sean
"Doug" <...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Sean,
I found these articles interesting and funny. Thanks for posting them.
Here's a question I have for you:
In my many trips to Europe, I've heard the incredibly high taxes many
of them pay. They do get great health care coverage, but the taxes are
so high. I see what appears to be a noticeable reduced interest in
working hard, since most of what they could gain by their own efforts
is donated to taxes. It's not a huge difference, but it is noticeable.
Not all European countries have this, but I've seen it in many. I
don't know whether it is directly tied to having taxes over 50% or
whether it is from a historical cultural difference, such as the
percent of families that own their own homes.
Do you see this in Australia? How high are taxes there?
If all the health care costs only end up as a few percent of GDP, then
why are taxes so high in many European countries? Or maybe the better
question is, what does offering this kind of health care really cost
in terms of taxes? What percent of your income do you need to pay in
taxes for this kind of coverage?
But the other question is do high taxes act as a disincentive to work
hard?
It's a question I've been wondering.
The big thing missed in these articles is the explanation that so much
is being stirred up by this reform that Obama is proposing because the
Republicans see blood in the water and are desperately looking for
something to restore their lost glow, and think this might be a chance
to darken the Democrats image. Making a controversy for this reason is
not good for the country and could make things worse for them.
I'm surprised how easily so many get worked up into such extreme
attitudes. So much fear mongering going on just to stir up anger and
make people irate.
Real open dialogue is the best answer for this, which seems to be
taking place gradually and slowly. But the news medial lives on
controversy, so they exaggerate everything, although I do see more
efforts from the media to help clarify and deliver honest information.
In my local area, the representatives have held town hall meetings,
where people got a chance to ask questions and share their opinions.
These meetings have been attracting thousands, even in small areas. I
think many of the people come in expecting that everything is out of
control. That's the image they've picked up. Most walked away glad
that they had a chance to get their feelings heard, but also surprised
that nothing was being forced down anyone's throats.
The representatives come away saying that the most important thing at
this time seems to be patience. People need more time to understand
what all of this means. They don't want it rushed, because such
drastic and dire warnings are being promoted by some, and this leaves
a lot of people wondering how true it is. When they find out that much
of it is bogus, they still have doubts and need time and straight
information to feel better about the proposals.
A lot of what gets aired sounds just as crazy here. You don't need to
be at the center of the world in Australia to see that.
Thanks.
Doug.
On Aug 24, 10:24 pm, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:26:44 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
This is the succinct version of what it is I am trying to communicate ,,,,,
the issues are uch bigger than just health care. Until the political system
is brought into a more enlightened 21st it will be waste of time doing
anything with the health care ... it's root and branch time.
THX to JR for the links .... i never knew this guy existed, never heard of
his books or the things he mentions. But apparently Korten and I agree 100%
on the Values discussed below. PLUs it is written far better than I am
capable of doing.
Sean
------------------------------------------------------------------
Market fundamentalists would have us believe that the only alternative to
the current system of markets controlled and exploited by corporations
devoted only to their financial bottom line is a socialist system of rule by
government bureaucrats.
Ironically, market fundamentalis rarely mention the far more attractive
alternative of a real market economy governed by authentic market rules that
balance public and private roles and interests. See Ten Rules for Socially
Efficient Markets.
http://www.davidkorten.org/content/neweconomy
The Second Edition of the Modern Classic, Released April 2001.Considered by
many to be the "bible" of the emerging global Living Democracy Movement,
When Corporations Rule the World has become a modern classic with a message
that seems increasingly prophetic with each passing day. Its central message
is a clear and unequivocal wake up call to humanity. The global economy has
become like a malignant cancer, advancing the colonization of the planet's
living spaces for the benefit of powerful corporations and financial
institutions. It has turned these once useful institutions into instruments
of a market tyranny that is destroying livelihoods, displacing people, and
feeding on life in an insatiable quest for money.
http://www.davidkorten.org/whencorps
For much of my adult life I have been embarked on a quest to understand the
institutional sources of human dysfunction and map a pathway to positive
change.
Beginning with the launch of When Corporations Rule the World in 1995, my
most widely read books have addressed the dysfunctions of a global economic
system that values money more than life. For all the tragic pain created by
the recent financial collapse, it is in the larger view a blessing as it
demonstrates so conclusively that the economy we came to collectively
worship as an engine of perpetual wealth creation was nothing more than an
illusion based on massive fraud and self-deception. My most recent book,
Agenda for a New Economy: From Phantom Wealth to Real Wealth exposes the
truth and maps a path to a new real wealth economy.
http://www.davidkorten.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:27:57 -0400, "Ken" <...@NowHere.net
Terry Gross had a good healthcare interview on the radio show, Fresh
Air.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112172939&ps=cprs
It was with T.R. Reid, the author of "The Healing of America: A Global
Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care." There's a lot of
good information (some favorable, some not) about other countries'
healthcare systems, provided by someone who traveled around the world to
compare the different systems. Although it was somewhat biased towards
a national system, it was worth reading.
The link has both a recorded version and a transcript.
--
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 10:32:58 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
This doco made by Reid [ 2 years ago?] was shown on australian tv soon after
it screened in the USA.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/
It barely scratched the surface [ the usual time contraints ] but it was a
good effort and overall what was said/reported was fairly accurate. He
didn't come to Australia, which when compared to the other nations he did
visit Australia's system would have been the most intergrated between
Public/Private delivery of health care.
From what I recall, many times when he said things about each nation like
"this part seems to work well, is much cheaper than the US system, the
people and the doctors seem overall quite happy with it" he would then add
on the other key phrase like -- "but such a thing could never occur in
America" ..
at least this was one of the lasting impressions I got from watching it a
year to two ago.
During my 9 months or so in the USA I had contact with many people including
my sister, her in-laws, her neighbours & friends, and Eckists who had many a
direct personal experience tale about Private US Health care system over
years. One Eckist my age at the time was lucky to even be alive after being
discarded on the heap of impoverished humanity in an absolute sea of wealth.
When I met her she was suffering from malnutrition living a life of callous
disregard from both American Eckists and society as a whole.
It was the private system that almost killed her, too sick to work she lost
her coverage and then had no welfare support but it was the Public system
that eventually saved her life .... but that didn't happen until her Eckist
sister who on inner guidance and nothing else travelled from Canada to
Florida to try and find her ... when she did the lady concerned was near
death and living in a park under a tent put up for the homeless in a park
opposite the City townhall.
Generally I avoid 'theory' - I have seen a lot of how things really work
first hand IN the USA with my own eyes ..... some of it great some not so
great -- it's called experience. Not complete, but it is real and it is
accurate.
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:13:55 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
Not very long ago I posted several things Framing - one was
http://fora.tv/2009/08/03/Politics_of_Language_George_Lakoff and there
were other more psychological things before that including Fritz Perls and
Gestalt, amongst other things.
all was connected in some form ...
then again, thx to JR ... there's a little more colour by one who can write
and communicate ideas betteer than I ...
Story Power
We humans live by stories that frame our understanding of ourselves, our
world, and our human possibilies. Our shared stories create a culture of
shared values, understanding, and expectations that is an essential
foundation of coherent community life. (See Tom Atlee's discussion of story
fields.) Because we literally see the world through the lens of our cultural
stories, we are strongly inclined to conform to the cultural norms of our
tribe or community. For this reason, those who control the prevailing
cultural stories, control the society.
Herein lays the key to understanding how the dominator hierarchy of Empire
has maintained its hold on human societies for 5,000 years and why most
people in contemporary societies have been inclined to accept and conform to
the stories of economic values and relationships that legitimated rule by
the institutions of Wall Street.
Ruled by Stories
Throughout history, imperial institutions have disrupted the relationships
of community and the processes of cultural regeneration by which authentic
communities continuously renew and affirm their shared values and
understanding. The propagandists of Empire then replace cultural stories
that affirmed values of mutual caring and accountability with stories that
celebrate the special merit of those in power and the duty of each citizen
to comply with the dictates of imperial authority. Empire maintain's its
control in part through the coercive power of sword and gun, but its
ultimate instrument of control is cultural power, the ability to control the
defining stories of the public culture. The result is a cultural trance,
rather like a hypnotic state, in which Empire conditions us to accept
submission as liberation. Want to know whether you are engaging the world in
an awakened state? This link will take you to a simple test.
The Earth Community Advantage
Although Empire controls the mass media and the formal education system,
Earth Community holds the natural advantage because most Empire stories are
fabrications that deny:
a.. Reality and our daily experience, and
b.. The potentials of our higher human consciousness it is our nature to
cultivate.
We humans are born to learn. Although suppressed by Empire, a natural drive
to know and understand our world is inherent in our human nature This gives
truth an inherent advantage. Although this advantage is greatest with those
who have awakened from the cultural trance, the thirst to know resides in
all of us. The faster the awakening spreads the greater truth's advantage
becomes.
http://www.davidkorten.org/content/story-power
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:11:10 -0700 (PDT), Jasmyn <...@yahoo.com
On Aug 25, 1:50�am, Doug <...@littleknownpubs.com
"The big thing missed in these articles is the explanation that so
much
is being stirred up by this reform that Obama is proposing because
the
Republicans see blood in the water and are desperately looking for
something to restore their lost glow, and think this might be a
chance
to darken the Democrats image. Making a controversy for this reason
is
not good for the country and could make things worse for them."
Most everyone wants reform, Republicans and Independents want reform,
please let's reform the system so that everyone is included, and no
one becomes ineligible.
It's the nature of the proposed bills in congress that are
controversial--not that Republicans are objecting due to political
reasons, it's the facts of the bill that people want made clear, and
for their congressmen to actually read the bill and not take it on
faith--taking it on faith is what is political.
Many people have strongly held opinions against most Americans ending
up eventually on enforced government run health care, the so-called
single-payer system, and for reasons as shown in the 20/20 report
below. The way many people interpret the current health care bill is
having stealth single-payer over time as it's natural result--that's
the nature of the controversy, not any political reasons.
Obama IN HIS OWN WORDS saying His Health Care Plan will ELIMINATE
private insurance:
http://tinyurl.com/konhpw
John Stossel & 20/20 Take On Health Care Reform - President Obama's
Proposed Health Care:
http://tinyurl.com/m7noo9
Obama on Single Payer Healthcare:
http://tinyurl.com/kjs242
Does the House Plan Outlaw Private Insurance?:
http://tinyurl.com/myeyle
Jasmyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:07:39 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
Obama IN HIS OWN WORDS saying His Health Care Plan will ELIMINATE
private insurance:
http://tinyurl.com/konhpw
John Stossel & 20/20 Take On Health Care Reform - President Obama's
Proposed Health Care:
http://tinyurl.com/m7noo9
Obama on Single Payer Healthcare:
http://tinyurl.com/kjs242
----------------------------------------------------------
I believe links to things like this are of little value to anyone.
It is not accurate information at all. It is cherry-picked. It is out of
context. It is not the whole story. It is not conducive to positive
dialogue, it is divisive and argumentative. It is simply someone who already
believe sthey know the facts and the truth and the best way to do, or not do
things with little interest in truly hearing the full possibilities being
discussed. It ends up being cheap biased propaganda only.
I believe that the decent, more honest and most useful alternative, that
would actually help others understand the issues involved and the possible
solutions, would be providing additional links to the FULL text or the FULL
video of ALL the above speeches and discussions so that the individual here
has an opportunity to consider things in their proper context, of time and
space.
------------------------------------------------------------
Does the House Plan Outlaw Private Insurance?:
http://tinyurl.com/myeyle
extract from above:
" In order to qualify as an "Exchange-participating health benefits plan,"
all health insurance plans must confirm to a slew of new regulations,
including community rating and guaranteed issue. These will all drive up the
cost of health insurance. "
100% WRONG assumption. This author is obviously not a business persona nor
an economist, nor very knowledgeable about the subject they are opinionating
on.
This analysis utterly neglects the massive change of having a not-for-profit
govt option, that will drive down the now exorbinante prices charged by the
Private system as it works now. The Govt plan will cause a restructuring in
the private health insurance system over time, and it is a re-structuring
that is not only preferrable but essential to sustainability and achieving
the primary Goals overtime.
This plus many other things about the Exchange-participating health benefits
plan is that it will drive out inefficient, unproductive, poorly managed,
offering poor value for money and high levels of refusing medical care or
coverage to their existing clients -- the Profiteering Private Health
Insurers [ pirates basically holding people to ransom ] will be driven out
of the industry forever - Insurance prices will drop *in part* over the long
term from this ONE change alone, and GOOD private health Insurers will stay
in business and compete, and lower their prices, and increase their
productivity, and ulitmately their long-term survival will depend on being
responsible Insurers that service the actual needs of their
clients/customers and provide good value for the money.
The thing that will also significantly lower insurance prices across the
board across the entire nation is that the pool of those covered by
insurance will increase significantly as it becomes more affordable be they
in a private company plan or a Govt plan, or a not-for-profit fund that
operates on a "mutual - co-op basis".
As this occurs the number so people "sharing the national burden of total
costs" will progressively grow which means that everyone, rich and poor or
in between, gets to pay less and less over time.
This is NOT an assumption but a proven fact that has been shown to occur in
other western nations in the world of many decades. It isn't even a known
fact that such approaches are not rstricted to just health care, but smart
people have imporved all sorts of economic dynamics and improved
productivity, lowered costs, and increased access over all aspects of the
economy.
But again, just doing one thing or a few changes on the margins will not
solve the problem people want solved. Deep structural change within the 6%
of the US economy that is health care, plus in other areas that also
influence and feed into the dynamics of the health economy must also be
structurally adjusted to achieve the goals the people want as an outcome.
That is NOT to say that I am saying that the current Bill is good or the
best option. In fact I have no doubt that it is in manifold ways flawed, and
could be much better. I say that without reading it, but there is a thing
called "patterns of consistent behaviour" in the way Bills are created,
ammended, and passed or rejected. That system and process has not changed,
but that's another story entirely.
thx
---------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:24:49 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
Does the House Plan Outlaw Private Insurance?:
http://tinyurl.com/myeyle
actual link
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/16/does-the-house-plan-outlaw-private-insuranc e/
---------------------------------------------------------
It's a *Blogger* on the Heritage Foundation website.
Has the Heritage Foundation said anything about *Exchange-participating
health benefits plans* before?
Well Yes, they have ............ this ONE example:
October 5, 2006
The Rationale for a Statewide Health Insurance Exchange
by Robert E. Moffit, Ph.D.
WebMemo #1230
U.S. health insurance markets are governed by a complex system of
state and federal laws and regulations, many of which are outdated and
counterproductive. The most important of these laws is the federal tax code.
Americans get unlimited federal tax breaks for the purchase of health
insurance if they receive that coverage through their workplace. Outside of
the workplace, however, they almost always pay for coverage with after-tax
dollars. Statewide health insurance exchanges are a solution to this
inefficient inconsistency, giving individuals and families the opportunity
to secure the health plans of their choice without losing tax benefits.
The Federal Tax Code
The federal tax code profoundly distorts health insurance markets. By
law, Congress ties the enormous tax benefits of health insurance almost
exclusively to the place of work. Workers who buy health coverage outside of
the employer-based system often have to cope not only with high
administrative costs and inflexible government mandates, but also with the
loss of federal and state tax breaks. The loss of these tax breaks could add
40 to 50 percent to the cost of a policy purchased through the place of
work.
Employers do not own auto, life, homeowners', or property and casualty
insurance policies on behalf of their employees. Indeed, most Americans
would find such arrangements strange. But in contrast to every other type of
insurance in the private market, health insurance in the United States
sticks to the job, not the person. Employers own health insurance policies;
individuals and families do not.
http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/wm1230.cfm
Doing one's homework, doing the research, educating oneself with high
quality credible and ACCURATE FACTS is the more responsible way to live ones
life imho.
Avoiding fear-mongering, propaganda, ideological mis-informed biased people,
and the illformed opinions by ignorant or unintelligent people [ and those
with another agenda entirely to finding practical and workable solutions to
issues ], plus those not qualified nor experienced nor knowledgable enough
to get their head around a problem seems to me a big step towards becoming
more aware and being able to drop even more self-delusions, false beliefs
and social myths.
In fact, I think it is a much better habit than being a willing agent of
mis-truths and conscious deception generated by others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:22:07 -1000, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
This last link didn't work for me...
It seems to me that Doug is right in that some Republicans see blood in the
water, are attacking the Democrats for political gain and the media is
exaggerating the issues. I agree that is not good for the country.
However, as I see it, it is the proposed _laws themselves_ that is making
the controversy, not the Republicans. It's the saying it is this, and then
it isn't, that kind of contradictory political talk which can clearly be
seen in those videos. It's my guess that the interns and aides to the
Congressmen are among the very few who have actually read the bill, and
likely the ones who wrote most of it too. It's a general awareness that the
existing govt run VA, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security health systems
are not satifactory, that has people balking at the idea of a new and way
more expensive system.
http://bit.ly/3j1IOx
http://bit.ly/q7Irf
http://bit.ly/9FGrd
If those Govt programs were excellent it would be a different matter. Not
that the private systems are perfect either...
And as always, it is the philosophical/political differences between whether
to choose big govt control as opposed to individual freedoms. Socialism vs
Capitalism Right now there is somewhat of a balance between the two. There
are private and Govt programs. Just as I think it could get much worse to
have private market driven health care options replaced entirely with Single
Payer Govt healthcare, it would likely be just as foolish to have no Govt
involvement.
What guidance has Harold Klemp our current spiritual leader given on these
differences? I spent some time today researching the Eckankar writings.
"In the United States the government has spent an enormous amount on social
reform and aid, even during this last administration. Social welfare has
nearly gotten out of hand; it'll probably get a lot worse. As this happens,
taxes increase. It's harder for businesses to hire employees. Then we find
the unemployment rate rises, fewer people can pay taxes, and more people
live in poverty.
"Once this cycle begins, you have people voting in officials who promise
them something for nothing, entitlements taken from someone else. Once that
starts, it's a long slide to the bottom.
"You kill yourself by taking self-responsibility away from people. It's
against spiritual law. There's nothing wrong with helping people who need.
it, but after a while it goes far beyond this. Graft and corruption among
political leaders and those who support them is then supported by people who
live off the money of others. Politicians live off the votes of the poor,
who are living on welfare. And the cycle never ends.
"When this happens a country goes into a decline. No one has the backbone to
say, "We've got to learn to stand on our own two feet again.""
Harold Klemp - What is Spiritual Freedom pg. 169-170 July 1992
"The Great Society program was supposed to create a society free from the
imbalances that result in poverty.
"Today you can look around and see that the experiment was not successful at
all. Yet we are now embarking on another phase of socialism that I call the
Great Society, part two. Why are we doing this? Because part one was a
disaster.
"If it had worked, we wouldn't need the social programs that are about to
tax the spiritual life out of people today.
"I mention this in light of the ECK teachings, which say that our purpose
here on earth is to learn to become Co-workers with God. Does this evoke a
vision of people who are dependent upon a government for their food,
shelter, and clothing? Can an unmotivated person be a Coworker with God?
"I'm speaking about the spiritual side of this issue..."
Harold Klemp - How the Inner Master Works pg. 133-134 April 1993
also see pgs 136-139
"I do think that socialism is a direct cause of spiritual decline in people
in that it makes them weak. They become dependent, not on their own
God-given powers as Soul, but on an outside political force that often acts
without morals or ethics."
Harold Klemp - How the Inner Master Works pg.141-142 April 1993
"Here's the whole purpose of incentive, of why people work: "that he that
ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be
partaker of his hope" (1 Corinthians 9:9 10). If you're plowing and
somebody demands that you give your entire crop to Caesar, there's no
incentive for you to work. That's what they used to do in the Soviet Union.
People didn't work, and today there is no Soviet Union. It was a government
trying to enslave its people.
"The government said, "Don't worry about things. We'll take care of you."
And all they did was suppress and make slaves of their people.
"Socialism is the same as communism, just not quite as strongyet."
Harold Klemp - The Secret of Love pg.144 April 1995
"The fact is no Soul comes to this earth born equal. And no government
intervention will ever make it so. Not to say that people shouldn't try to
improve conditions, but you have to improve conditions by not breaking other
spiritual laws. If you want to give to a charity, you don't rob the poor box
to do it. In socialism, the end justifies the means. It's the lie of
socialism. Because it's based on the wrong spiritual premise."
Harold Klemp - Our Spiritual Wake-Up Calls pg.185 March 1996
"The immature Souls in this world are always taking, taking, taking. They'll
use any excuse: "I'm a victim," for instance. Then they get attorneyswho
often are immature Souls too. So you've got this whole group of people who
are always taking, because they think they can without having to pay for
whatever they receive. It's one of the old lies of this world that so many
people fall for: something for nothing.
"Someone sent me a poster of a mouse standing by a mousetrap, and there was
a sign underneath. The sign said, "The only free cheese is in the trap."
"That's what a lot of the people today don't realize. Traps come with all
kinds of trappings, and one of the biggest traps is socialism. Hearing this
will make some people furious. But I say this just for love. Because
whenever people try to get something that they haven't earned, they're going
to pay for it at some point. And they're going to pay for it very dearly.
When they do, the payment comes in a way that they hadn't expected."
Harold Klemp - Our Spiritual Wake-Up Calls pg.100 April 1996
Eckankar's founder was direct with Gail.
"Socialism means to hinder those who believe in freedom of mind and spirit"
Paul Twitchell - Letters to Gail V.II pg.83 June 1963
These present a more expanded picture.
"We are being taught today to live collectively, that all are responsible
for one another, especially our brother's welfare and behavior in this
world. This is not true. We are seekers of God; we are to develop
self-responsibility and be the sole responsible one for our own welfare and
behavior in this world. This is individualism. Unless we accept this
responsibility for ourselves, then our efforts have been wasted. God does
not want anyone who is not able to make his own way through the worlds into
His kingdom."
Paul Twitchell - Eckankar Complied Writings pg.138
"The righteous law is called danda. It treats the divine rights of the
people as well as that of kings. When it works both ways, it means that
neither can trespass upon the other's rights. To have to write law upon the
books and use this as a guide to keep society within the moral standards of
life is to bring about disorder in a society. As the human race enters upon
its decline in civilized standards, there is, and was, a transfer of the
center of government from within man to enacted statutes; in other words,
from moral standards deeply embedded in the inner consciousness of people to
laws written in books. When the time came that the fundamental danda, the
Law of Righteousness, was no longer in the hearts of people but in books,
then the decline of civilization set in for society."
Paul Twitchell - Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad Book2 pg.68
Personally I feel that a good approach to improving health care would be to
open up new ways which empower people to take care of themselves and their
families.
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:35:29 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
"Rich" <...@news2.newsguy.com...
Nice quotes.
What does ANY of that have to do with Reforming health care in the USA?
Nothing, imho.
What does ANY of that have to do with the Govt creating an Insurance fund,
that individuals can freely accept or reject AND that they are personally
required to pay premiums for?
Nothing, imho.
Does anyone know exactly what Sri Harold / Paul Twitchell meant, in context,
at the specific time they said it, in relation to the specific subject they
were talking about, in EACH use of the word *socialism* contained in the
quotes above?
AND What is the difference between the phrase "social welfare" and
"socialism"? Everyone should be aware by now that they are NOT one and the
same thing at all.
I'd like to hear those ideas.
Did Sri Harold say this or didn't he?
"There's nothing wrong with helping people who need it."
Isn't he suggesting that what's needed is to be a balance is maintained and
that it doesn't get out of hand and force others or the whole nation into a
cycle towards poverty?
Did Sri Harold say this or didn't he in 1995 not long after the fall of the
USSR?
"That's what they used to do in the Soviet Union. It was a government
trying to enslave its people."
--- In the USSR the people had limited freedom, didn't vote, had restricted
info from the govt media, the Govt owned everything from homes to farms and
industry, the nation was run by a Dictatorial Elite not much different than
the Tsar and other Royal Courts across Europe in days gone by.
The USSR, in fact every *so-called* Socialist regime that I know of, was NOT
following the actual Theories of *socialism* being appied at all - it was
tryanny, no different form any Right Wing Military Dictatorship who was
*theoretically* pro a free market Capitalism.......... a Capitalism that was
anything BUT a free market, and anything but a Democracy, and anything but a
Republic operating under a just system of the Rule of Law which respected
Human Rights.
Did Sri Harold say this or didn't he?
"It's one of the old lies of this world that so many people fall for:
something for nothing."
How do such sentiments shed light on the following realities:
Taxpayers Bailout of AIG and the wealth of their rich shareholders?
Taxpayers Bailout of GM and the wealth of their rich bondholders?
Taxpayers Bailout of the Banks and the wealth of their rich
shareholders?Taxpayers Ongoing subsidies to Agricultural Corporations?
Taxpayers Bailout of the people of Iraq?
Taxpayers ongoing Welfare payments to Israel?
What has Georgia got from the USA for nothing?
What did and still today does Japan & South Korea get from the USA for
nothing?
What did the Contras get from US Taxpayers for nothing?
What did Marcos the corrupt and fraudulent Dictator get for nothing?
What have all the politicians gotten for nothing from their Corporate donors
including the Health Care Insurance Funds and every other powerful rich
special interest business group?
and
What did Greenspan and Bernake and the entire Federal Reserve System get for
nothing when their #1 Primary responsiblity was ENSURING the stability of
the Financial System of the United States of America and they utterly failed
in that task?
a) they still got paid for being incompetent, and at worst fraudulent tools
of Corporatism and all the profiteering Pirates in the Financial, Insurance,
Stock markets and Real Estate areas.
b) They didn't lose their jobs, and they haven't ended up in Court, or in
Jail either
Yes indeed, Harold did indeed say :: "It's one of the old lies of this world
that so many people fall for: something for nothing."
and he also said:
"Hearing this will make some people furious. But I say this just for love.
Because whenever people try to get something that they haven't earned,
they're going to pay for it at some point. And they're going to pay for it
very dearly.
When they do, the payment comes in a way that they hadn't expected."
Now think of the Mortgage Crisis in the USA fueled by people getting loans
at irrationally low interest rates.
Think of the people of America that were in a position to re-mortgage,
upscale to a better house with a four car garage, increase their credit card
limits, buy other investment properties, those that Flipped properties with
deception and fraud, the sales agents for homes and loans that made a
fortune over a few years, the over paid Lehmann's Brothers exectutives,
staff and thier rich shareholders who made a big fortunes doing CDSs and
Mortgage Securities and on and on it goes ......
Think of the re-packaging of Housing Loans into securities, the gross fraud
and deception involved that delivered the enormous profits and commisions
and salaries to a small minority -- and the Bill for all this laid at the
foot of every taxpayer now and for the next 10-20 years to pay off that
debt.
YES indeed people are now paying for all these "something for nothing" acts
and the payment has come in a way that they hadn't expected.
Yet for YEARS people were trying to tell other people that the whole thing
was a con, was fraudulent, was doomed to fail, was irresponsible, would
create a fincial tsumami when the bubble burst ... and so on.
And the Politicians of Congress let this go on form both sides of Politics.
As I have said, there is an small outspoken sub-group of American Eckists
and leaders who mis-interpret and and mis-represent the teachings of
Eckankar and the words of the LEM out of context, and beyond what those
words actually say, and mean because perhaps they cannot tell the difference
between the spiritual teachings of Eckankar and their Cultural mindset and
values, and so tend to cherry pick whatever "text" will fit todays personal
beliefs and cultural myths.
Forgetting all the time that Paul, Darwin and Harold have repeatedly said
that Truth and Wisdom will NOT be found in a book of text, or any spiritual
writings.
Still people will naturally use anything that they believe shores up their
own particular Political Beliefs and personal Values --- whilst missing the
woods for the trees.
I know this is true, because I have done it myself -- we all do in some way
shape and form along the way from time to time I think. grist for the mill
they call it don't they? cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:26:32 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
A more succinct way of putting what I said below is this:
IMHO, I believe that any suggestion that there are similarities between what
is commonly known as Socialist [ China, USSR, Nth Korea ] and the American
social, political and economic system is deluded.
One may as well say that an icecube accurately describes the American system
and way of life.
Australia is not socialist, no matter any American of any political
persuasion or beliefs might otherwise believe is the case.
Neither is Norway, Sweden, Germany, France, UK, Denmark, Bolivia, El
Salvador, Canada, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and the list goes on
.....
When one looks around the world today, the most likely nation of the OECD
about to fall off the abyss into Banana Republic status as a result of the
recent Financial crisis is the USA -- if something hasn't yet told you that
there are serious structural problems within your current social, political,
and economic system and mythical cultural ideology-- then I don't know what
could.
I total respect the right of all Americans to make their own choices, and
the the fruit of those choices. Really, I don't care about such things at
all.
I have always had an issue with accepting without comment the dissemination
of more ignorance, lies, deceptive propaganda, false beliefs,
misreprsentations and the using of other people's words such as 'spiritual
teachers' from Abraham to today, to push a dead-end agenda that is not in
the best interests of Life and humanity no matter where it exists on Earth.
That's my agenda - the freedom of people to pursue knowledge and truth
without the incessant interference by others pushing their own
self-interests, and especially when there is an imbalance of power that
plays a negative role in blocking genuine progress and positive change.
And of course, there will be those who believe and will accuse me of being
the one interfering and pushing the deceptive propaganda. Which is fine and
to be expected. But it would be interesting to see them try and actually
prove that as being true, and actually engage in a mature intelligent
dialogue/discussion and provide the evidence to substanctiate their claims
about anything, including health care reform in the USA.
Thank god for exceptions like Doug and the handful of others who just grin
and bear it, and those who usually don't bother to say a thing from the
sidelines.
<smile
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:18:04 -0700 (PDT), Jasmyn <...@yahoo.com
On Aug 27, 9:22 pm, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
Sorry that one link didn't work for you, here it is:
Does the House Plan Outlaw Private Insurance? :
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/16/does-the-house-plan-outlaw-private-insuranc e/
Thanks again for finding those quotes, Rich. I also appreciated the
great quotes from a couple of days ago on the subject of words and
speech, which I forwarded to someone close who is temporarily working
out of the country and not allowed to bring in ECK books to read,
think I'll forward these quotes as well. We who are free sometimes
forget the value of our freedoms...until they are taken from us
against our will.
I never forget, frequently mention to my spouse about gratitude for
today's freedoms and today's gifts no matter how small. Another thing
I like to do is each night go over the day and remember the things
that were good, mostly about doing something for someone else, make it
a priority. Most are small everyday things we don't even think twice
about.
These two things can be like another spiritual exercise--start the day
with gratitude and think consciously about what there is to be
grateful for, and end the day thinking about the things that were good
today and mostly about things done for others, even little things.
I don't see the health care issue (and all other issues) as one side
is thinking about others and the other side is not, just a different
philosophy about what it takes. People on both sides of the political
spectrum of left or right have lots of people who are thinking of how
to help others, as well as some who are not thinking along those lines
but only thinking politically.
You said: "Personally I feel that a good approach to improving health
care would be to open up new ways which empower people to take care of
themselves and their families."
I think so too. There have been some great ideas put forth on
different plans to work across the board to provide coverage for all
as well as reform insurance. Health savings accounts is just one:
Health Savings Accounts: Putting Patients in Control
Whole Foods Employees Go Bargain Hunting for Health Care
By JOHN STOSSEL, GENA BINKLEY and PATRICK McMENAMIN
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=3602579&page=1
[or]
http://tinyurl.com/nvewbm
Jasmyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:59:31 -1000, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
Ah, thanks. I heard about that and understood it a while ago.
It was a nice exercise for me.
Ah, yes. Hope all is well there for them.
Speaking of freedoms, as a side bar to this subject, I've been exchanging
emails with an Iranian journalist. (Imagine what it's like there for him...
Internet accounts blocked, hassled by the militias, etc...) Anyway he says
that most all Iranians are sympathetic to their heritage as Persians and at
odds with the Islamic Arabs. The difference, he explained, is shown by their
symbols. The Moon And Night is the symbol of Islam and Arabia, while the Sun
and Day is the symbol of Persia from Mithraism And Zoroastrian beliefs.
Excellent habit. I gotta do that.
I agree.
Yes, as I've been paying attention I've seen many great ideas. Unfortunately
it seems none of them are in the bill. Hopefully the whole thing will be
scuttled and we could have some think tanks take these great ideas and work
up a program, which is apparently way beyond the capacity of most all of the
people in congress.
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:05:33 -0700 (PDT), Jasmyn <...@yahoo.com
On Aug 29, 5:59 am, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
Yes, it would be great if more care could be taken to come up with
plans for changing certain things about the health care system without
having to scuttle everything in favor of government take over
eventually.
It's interesting about what the Iranian journalist said about being
more atuned to Persian Mithraism and Zoroastrian beliefs. I didn't
know about the sun and day symbol. When we have direct contact with
someone we know well living in countries with no freedoms, religious
or otherwise, we can understand not to take anything for granted. We
think never could we have problems as they have, but still, we need to
be watchful of the slippery slopes that could pervert the freedoms in
our Constitution:
Meet Mark Llyod, Barack Obama's New FCC Diversity Czar :
http://tinyurl.com/ml3zpz
Jasmyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:46:01 -0400, "Ken" <...@NowHere.net
David Goldhill is a writer whose father died in 2007 from a hospital
infection. He has an interesting article in The Atlantic about how he
believes the U.S. health-care system can be improved.
Besides simply requiring doctors and nurses to wash their hands more
often, Goldhill says the system needs a complete overhaul, with
free-market incentives and price competition that almost no one is
talking about.
From the article: "All of the actors in health care-from doctors to
insurers to pharmaceutical companies-work in a heavily regulated,
massively subsidized industry full of structural distortions. They all
want to serve patients well. But they also all behave rationally in
response to the economic incentives those distortions create.
Accidentally, but relentlessly, America has built a health-care system
with incentives that inexorably generate terrible and perverse results.
Incentives that emphasize health care over any other aspect of health
and well-being. That emphasize treatment over prevention. That disguise
true costs. That favor complexity, and discourage transparent
competition based on price or quality. That result in a generational
pyramid scheme rather than sustainable financing. And that-most
important-remove consumers from our irreplaceable role as the ultimate
ensurer of value."
"How American Health Care Killed My Father"
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:25:16 -1000, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
Looks like a reasonable article. Thanks Ken.
As I read past this part...
"But fundamentally, the comprehensive reform being contemplated merely
cements in place the current systeminsurance-based, employment-centered,
administratively complex. It addresses the underlying causes of our
health-care crisis only obliquely, if at all; indeed, by extending the
current system to more people, it will likely increase the ultimate cost of
true reform.
"Im a Democrat, and have long been concerned about Americas lack of a
health safety net. But based on my own work experience, I also believe that
unless we fix the problems at the foundation of our health systemlargely
problems of incentivesour reforms wont do much good, and may do harm. To
achieve maximum coverage at acceptable cost with acceptable quality, health
care will need to become subject to the same forces that have boosted
efficiency and value throughout the economy. We will need to reduce, rather
than expand, the role of insurance; focus the governments role exclusively
on things that only government can do (protect the poor, cover us against
true catastrophe, enforce safety standards, and ensure provider
competition); overcome our addiction to Ponzi-scheme financing, hidden
subsidies, manipulated prices, and undisclosed results; and rely more on
ourselves, the consumers, as the ultimate guarantors of good service,
reasonable prices, and sensible trade-offs between health-care spending and
spending on all the other good things money can buy."
... I noticed there were 5 more pages! Have to get back to it the rest
later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:36:32 -0400, "Ken" <...@NowHere.net
Yeah, it's kind of long but it carries forward the idea that we can
create a better system by putting the power of choice back into
individual hands.
And thanks for posting those quotes. They were some I hadn't read
before and definitely worth saving.
--
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:02:56 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
to the Americans group ....
The power of choice has always been in your individual hands.
That is why the System is like it is right now.
Everything is exactly as it should be!
It is not an accident - no one TOOK your power of choice away in America.
Collectively and individually you have repeatedly chosen to surrender it
willingly to others, and then washed your hands of that responsibility, and
have been spending decades as a nation wasting your time looking for someone
else, eg the Politicians and the Government and false images/theories about
Socialism, to blame.
If you are not happy with your health care system, if you think it needs
major reform now because it is fundamentally broken or unsustainable, then
feel free to collectively and individually go look in the mirror for the
real culprit who is to blame.
IOW take responsibility for yourself and your own nations behaviour and
actions, and deal with the Truth instead of the endless BS, deceptions and
fraud, which has been the longterm MO of the US political, economic and
media systems for some decades now.
The current state of Health Care & the Insurance system is just one of the
minor examples of the manifold outcomes which would also include the
responsibility for what occurred in Iraq post March 2003, and the Global
Financial Crisis all of which has caused severe harm, death and destruction
far beyond your own borders to this day.
Karma always comes back to teach us a better way to Live Life. Ignore it at
your individual and collective peril. That being said, no one is perfect,
and no one needs to be either.
But there is always a better way to do things, if one is trully willing to
learn from their past mistakes, adjust the internal beliefs and myths that
underpinned prior mis-takes, but more importantly IF they are willing to
change their thinking and especially their habitual behaviour a better more
creative and positive way forward will be found.
I'd believe that somewhere in the teachings of Eckankar you will find some
"quotes" that basically say the exact same thing as I just said.
I simply put it into my own words as best I can -- this is MY Eckankar --
this is how I gained my individual freedom, the hard way. Political and
Economic theory, philosophy, and ideologies has nothing to do with it.
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:02:44 -1000, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
I look at those as an overall spiritual message or guidelines for
individuals, not as how Eckists should determine their own political
choices. I take Eckankar, and the ECK fully, as non-political.
Harold was speaking about the spiritual aspects in light of the ECK
teachings. IOW(mine, paraphrasing), as individuals, our purpose is to learn
to be motivated to become Co-workers with God, which of course necessitates
the prerequisite of self-responsibility. As Paul said, we are seekers of
God. They were both speaking about Soul's journey.
I really see the much bigger picture which Paul wrote about as the
difference between moral standards which come from the inner hearts of
people, and how those diminish with Governments attempt to transfer those
into laws for everyone. Isn't the height of, as Paul called it
"individualism", Self-Realization?
As to political systems, it's clear what they were both saying about
Socialism. However, as individuals on our path to God, we could prefer to
live in a more socialistic culture(or any for that matter) and still be
fully responsible for our own welfare. Just because one would like it for
others doesn't mean one has to take handouts from others which the
government would redistribute to you.
I think it's also important to point out that it is not a black and white
issue as some try to paint it. There are degrees of and aspects of different
politicals systems
Anyway back to the article. On page two I found these important points.
"Health Care Isnt Health (Or Happiness)
Medical care, of course, is merely one component of our overall health.
Nutrition, exercise, education, emotional security, our natural environment,
and public safety may now be more important than care in producing further
advances in longevity and quality of life. (In 2005, almost half of all
deaths in the U.S. resulted from heart disease, diabetes, lung cancer,
homicide, suicide, and accidentsall of which are arguably influenced as
much by lifestyle choices and living environment as by health care.)"
Is it 'fair' that all the people of the US pay for the unhealthy choices of
some irresponsible citizens?
Why is this generally accepted:
"But health insurance is different from every other type of insurance.
Health insurance is the primary payment mechanism not just for expenses that
are unexpected and large, but for nearly all health-care expenses. Weve
become so used to health insurance that we dont realize how absurd that is.
We cant imagine paying for gas with our auto-insurance policy, or for our
electric bills with our homeowners insurance, but we all assume that our
regular checkups and dental cleanings will be covered at least partially by
insurance."
I think it goes back to the illusion that we aren't really paying for it.
"for every two doctors in the U.S., there is now one health-insurance
employee" !! There's another explanation I hadn't heard of why 'health care'
has become so expensive.
Gotta go now. Page three later.
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:04:42 -0400, "Ken" <...@NowHere.net
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html
"Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health adviser to President Barack Obama, is under
scrutiny. As a bioethicist, he has written extensively about who should
get medical care, who should decide, and whose life is worth saving. Dr.
Emanuel is part of a school of thought that redefines a physician's
duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society
instead of focusing only on a patient's needs. Many physicians find that
view dangerous, and most Americans are likely to agree.
The health bills being pushed through Congress put important decisions
in the hands of presidential appointees like Dr. Emanuel. They will
decide what insurance plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will
have, and what seniors get under Medicare. Dr. Emanuel, brother of White
House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has already been appointed to two key
positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget
and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness
Research. He clearly will play a role guiding the White House's health
initiative.
Dr. Emanuel says that health reform will not be pain free, and that the
usual recommendations for cutting medical spending (often urged by the
president) are mere window dressing. As he wrote in the Feb. 27, 2008,
issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): "Vague
promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and
wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of
care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public
relations than for true change."
True reform, he argues, must include redefining doctors' ethical
obligations. In the June 18, 2008, issue of JAMA, Dr. Emanuel blames the
Hippocratic Oath for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school
education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he
writes. "This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of
professional obligations, specifically the Hippocratic Oath's admonition
to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and
judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless
of cost or effect on others."
"In the next decade every country will face very hard choices about how
to allocate scarce medical resources. There is no consensus about what
substantive principles should be used to establish priorities for
allocations," he wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, Sept. 19,
2002. Yet Dr. Emanuel writes at length about who should set the rules,
who should get care, and who should be at the back of the line.
"You can't avoid these questions," Dr. Emanuel said in an Aug. 16
Washington Post interview. "We had a big controversy in the United
States when there was a limited number of dialysis machines. In Seattle,
they appointed what they called a 'God committee' to choose who should
get it, and that committee was eventually abandoned. Society ended up
paying the whole bill for dialysis instead of having people make those
decisions."
Dr. Emanuel argues that to make such decisions, the focus cannot be only
on the worth of the individual. He proposes adding the communitarian
perspective to ensure that medical resources will be allocated in a way
that keeps society going: "Substantively, it suggests services that
promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future
generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and
ensure full and active participation by citizens in public
deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Covering services
provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or
becoming participating citizens are not basic, and should not be
guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to
patients with dementia." (Hastings Center Report, November-December,
1996)
In the Lancet, Jan. 31, 2009, Dr. Emanuel and co-authors presented a
"complete lives system" for the allocation of very scarce resources,
such as kidneys, vaccines, dialysis machines, intensive care beds, and
others. "One maximizing strategy involves saving the most individual
lives, and it has motivated policies on allocation of influenza vaccines
and responses to bioterrorism. . . . Other things being equal, we should
always save five lives rather than one.
"However, other things are rarely equal-whether to save one 20-year-old,
who might live another 60 years, if saved, or three 70-year-olds, who
could only live for another 10 years each-is unclear." In fact, Dr.
Emanuel makes a clear choice: "When implemented, the complete lives
system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly 15
and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and
oldest people get changes that are attenuated (see Dr. Emanuel's chart
nearby).
Dr. Emanuel concedes that his plan appears to discriminate against older
people, but he explains: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation
by age is not invidious discrimination. . . . Treating 65 year olds
differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist;
treating them differently because they have already had more life-years
is not."
The youngest are also put at the back of the line: "Adolescents have
received substantial education and parental care, investments that will
be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet
received these investments. . . . As the legal philosopher Ronald
Dworkin argues, 'It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most
people think, when a three-year-old dies and worse still when an
adolescent does,' this argument is supported by empirical surveys."
(thelancet.com, Jan. 31, 2009).
___
There's more at:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html
No death panels. Just government control over the quality of care
depending on your age and other factors. Supported by "empirical
surveys".
And apparently now the Hippocratic Oath is a problem as it puts the
patient first rather than "societies needs", however that might be
defined.
I wish I could find something appropriate to say here but 'Goodwin's
Law' is holding me back.
--
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:31:39 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
Note the subject title please.
Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is NOT from Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, France.
Ezekiel "Zeke" J. Emanuel (born 1957) is an American National Institutes of
Health bioethicist[1] and fellow at the nonprofit bioethics research
institute The Hastings Center,[2] is a leading OPPONENT of euthanasia laws,
sometimes called state-assisted suicide,[3] and a proponent of a Guaranteed
Healthcare Access Plan.[4]
[ = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care ]
His two younger brothers are White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a
former Democratic US Representative, and Hollywood-based talent agent Ari
Emanuel.[5]
If anyone has an issue with the ideas of the good Doctor, or that he has
been hired as an advisor to President Obama, then by all means feel free to
write to him, and the President direct ....
BUT DO NOT twist what ONE Amercian Believes, into an unspoken suggestion
that this has ANY relevance to any other nation's Health Care System, or
Cultural Values but your own - he is an American - you go sort him and Obama
out if you feel strongly about it. Not my responsibility, nor am I
interested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:52:52 +1000, "Sean" <...@du.oz.com.au
According to WHO, government funding covered 67.5% of Australia's health
care expenditures in 2004;
PRIVATE Sources covered the remaining 32.5% of expenditures.[58]
During the 1980s, Medibank Public was renamed Medicare by the Hawke Labor
government, which also changed the funding model, to an income tax
surcharge, known as the Medicare Levy, which was set at 1.5%, with
exemptions for low income earners.[88]
The Howard Coalition government introduced an additional levy of 1.0%, known
as the Medicare Levy Surcharge, for those on high annual incomes (above
average weekly earnings) and do not have adequate levels of private hospital
[insurance] coverage.[89]
This was part of an effort by the Coalition to encourage take-up of private
health insurance.
-------------------------------------------
Health care systems vary according to the extent of government involvement
in providing care, ranging from nationalized health care systems (such as
the U.K. and Sweden) to DECENTRALISED PRIVATE & NON-PROFIT institutions (as
in Germany and France).
Universal health care is implemented in all industrialized countries, with
the exception of the United States.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care
--------------------------------------------
Question: Which nations health care system is the most expensive, does not
cover all people who WILL NEED Health Care sooner or later, and is totally
unsustainable in it's present form if not reformed, and whose Citizens have
been demanding for ages and most recently Voted for it to be structurally
reformed?
Answer : The United States.
---------------------------------------------
Question: Which nation spends the highest amount in Military exopenditure,
and Military aid to other nations in the entire world, all of which is 100%
PAID FOR BY EXCESSIVE BUSINESS AND PERSONAL TAXATION of Americans???
Answer : The United States
----------------------------------------------
Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan, & France have nothing to do with this.
Nor FAUX notions about the theory/beliefs about what Socialism is or isn't.
Your Health Care, you go fix it, or leave it be.
Your Private Free-enterprise economic and financial system that has failed,
you go fix it.
Your Political System that has failed to live up to the promises of the
American Dream, you go fix it.
And I humbly suggest that you leave Eckankar and other Nations out of it, as
well as other things that perhaps some here do not really understand or know
much about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:02:38 -0400, "Ken" <...@NowHere.net
The post was relevant because this *is* an answer to your question.
These are the people who are pushing for nationalized health care in
this country. *This* is what they believe and want to do.
Is it any wonder?
--
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:20:45 -1000, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
'Goodwin's Law' Ha, yeah. The comparison occurred to me too as I was reading
it.
That's the kind of change "they" ;-) want. True reform will mean forgetting
the Hippocratic Oath. Discrimination by age is actually OK, if it's not
unfair or ill willed(invidious). :-0 Oh, and even some of the people who
post here won't be able to get treatment.(those with dementia;)
At least he's honest in saying that the promises of savings are not true but
just for show and public relations and that the Govt plan will have scarce
medical resources. He's just one example of why American's are questioning
this proposed health bill. There are so many things egregiously wrong with
this it that critics haven't even bothered to get around to examining the
pork and special interests. It's more and more of these kind of facts,
direct quotes, that is turning the tide against this abortion of a bill.
Hopefully they'll throw the whole thing in the garbage. It's too important
and definitely needed to be left to politicians. Best case would be if they
sub-contracted out the whole reform idea to be simplified, published that
bit by bit for the citizens to see and understand and voice their opinion,
and _then_ give what's left to the lawmakers in congress to add their pork
and vote on it.
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:09:13 -0400, "Ken" <...@NowHere.net
I cannot believe that the current administration actually tried to get
that thing passed before the end of August. I have a difficult time
imagining what kind of reaction people would have had once they found
out what was all about. These people either do not understand this
country or they do not care.
--
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:04:13 -1000, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
This came in an email to me. While there's certainly bias, black/white
thinking, and some exaggeration it is
Something to Ponder
The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775 - they've had 234 years to get
it right; it is broke, and even though heavily subsidized, it can't compete
with private sector FedEx and UPS services.
Social Security was established in 1935 - they've had 74 years to get it
right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - they've had 71 years to get it right;
it is broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - they've had 39 years to get it right;
it is broke. Together Fannie and Freddie have now led the entire world into
the worst economic collapse in 80 years.
The War on Poverty was started in 1964 - they've had 45 years to get it
right; $1 trillion of our hard earned money is confiscated each year and
transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - they've had 44 years to get
it right; they are both broke; and now our government dares to mention them
as models for all US health care.
AMTRAK was established in 1970 - they've had 39 years to get it right; last
year they bailed it out as it continues to run at a loss!
This year, a trillion dollars was committed in the massive political payoff
called the Stimulus Bill of 2009; it shows NO sign of working; it's been
used to increase the size of governments across America , and raise
government salaries while the rest of us suffer from economic hardships. It
has yet to create a single new private sector job. Our national debt
projections (approaching $10 trillion) have increased 400%
"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009 - -
after 80% of the cars purchased turned out to be produced by foreign
companies, and dealers nationwide are buried under bureaucratic paperwork
demanded by a government that is not yet paying them what was promised.
So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record that proves that each and
every "service" shoved down our throats by an over-reaching government
turns into disaster, how could any informed American trust our government to
run or even set policies for America's health care system - - 17% of our
economy?
Maybe each of us has a personal responsibility to let others in on this
brilliant record before 2010, and then help remove from office those who are
voting to destroy capitalism and destroy our grandchildren's future.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government
from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of
them.
-- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT), Jasmyn <...@yahoo.com
On Aug 31, 4:04�pm, "Rich" <...@inorbit.com
Excellent. Thanks for passing that to us, Rich.
Jasmyn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|