Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Hi there, NO, I am not for national health care. I lived through that in Germany and England and I rather pay extra and have the doctor of my choice and also the treatment I need. Eva Geoff <geoff@...> wrote: Hi Gang! Geoff here. We in the States are once again involved in our endless debate about nationalized health care. Nationalized health care is when you make everyone in the nation pay for your personal health care by taking the money they earn through taxes. In order for nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you give up your freedom to step outside the national system. This is a video of how the Canadian system actually works for their citizens. If you're a fan of this idea, or just curious, it's worth the 5-min it takes to watch it. http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Hi Geoff, In Australia we have national health care so everyone receives medical help when they need it, and also private health care for which you can take out insurance if you wish. I don't get the American system.... why should employers pay for people's health care ? Leonie rheumatic National Health Care Hi Gang! Geoff here. We in the States are once again involved in our endless debate about nationalized health care. Nationalized health care is when you make everyone in the nation pay for your personal health care by taking the money they earn through taxes. In order for nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you give up your freedom to step outside the national system. This is a video of how the Canadian system actually works for their citizens. If you're a fan of this idea, or just curious, it's worth the 5-min it takes to watch it. http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 I like the idea of the Australian national health care system. You keep a healthy nation going to work and everybody is covered by taxes collected. Sounds good. On the other hand, here in America, our employers must pay part or all of the premium. And there are many draw backs. Many years ago while I was traveling between states, I developed a UTI. Went to the local hospital and was refused emergency care which would have taken a few minutes to check a urine sample and a prescription. I was told that my home state insurance was not valid in that state. I had to travel back home to get help even tho; I was urinating blood. Does that make sense to treat human beings that way? I lived in California at the time and got sick in Arizona. I could see if I was in another country perhaps, but I was in a bordering state. It didn't matter that I was a nurse. ( No professional courtesies here) They wanted hundreds of $$$$ up front in advance for a simple urine test that I could have done myself in the lab, and a peice of paper with an antibiotic Rx written on it. I think we should have a better level of general health care system in this country. We wouldn't have so many sick and obese people on disability, if they were able to get health care prevention. We don't pay extra for our roads to be built. It comes out of our taxes and nobody squawks when they take two or three years for a road to be built that could be done in half the time. Did you ever watch these construction companies making repairs on the road. One person is in the hole and four or more are watching. Six or more are drinking coffee. And the rest are bullshittting. I agree with and the movie " Sicko " Everyone should see it.~~~~~Dolores & Mike leonie cent <leoniecent@...> wrote: Hi Geoff, In Australia we have national health care so everyone receives medical help when they need it, and also private health care for which you can take out insurance if you wish. I don't get the American system.... why should employers pay for people's health care ? Leonie rheumatic National Health Care Hi Gang! Geoff here. We in the States are once again involved in our endless debate about nationalized health care. Nationalized health care is when you make everyone in the nation pay for your personal health care by taking the money they earn through taxes. In order for nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you give up your freedom to step outside the national system. This is a video of how the Canadian system actually works for their citizens. If you're a fan of this idea, or just curious, it's worth the 5-min it takes to watch it. http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 I never lived in Germany or England, so I can comment. I guess every country has it's good points and bad ones. We all make our choices according to the experiences we have had. How about a world health organization where a human being can be treated regardless of boundaries, political structure, or financial opportunities? Yeah! I know, I'm dreaming! Dolores Eva Holloway <holloway-eva@...> wrote: Hi there, NO, I am not for national health care. I lived through that in Germany and England and I rather pay extra and have the doctor of my choice and also the treatment I need. Eva Geoff <geoff@...> wrote: Hi Gang! Geoff here. We in the States are once again involved in our endless debate about nationalized health care. Nationalized health care is when you make everyone in the nation pay for your personal health care by taking the money they earn through taxes. In order for nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you give up your freedom to step outside the national system. This is a video of how the Canadian system actually works for their citizens. If you're a fan of this idea, or just curious, it's worth the 5-min it takes to watch it. http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Having watched this video and read the comments that followed, I wondered if anyone on this list lives in Australia, Canada, the UK, NZ or any of the other 87 advanced countries that have some version of national health care. How do you feel about your health care system? It would be especially interesting to hear from the list because we are people we have a rheumatic disease. I have friends in France, the UK, Canada, who do like their systems. On Feb 20, 2008, at 7:11 PM, Geoff wrote: > Hi Gang! Geoff here. > > We in the States are once again involved in our endless debate > about nationalized health care. Nationalized health care is when > you make everyone in the nation pay for your personal health care > by taking the money they earn through taxes. In order for > nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to > work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you > give up your freedom to step outside the national system. This is a > video of how the Canadian system actually works for their citizens. > If you're a fan of this idea, or just curious, it's worth the 5-min > it takes to watch it. > > http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest watching. Sue rheumatic National Health Care Hi Gang! Geoff here. We in the States are once again involved in our endless debate about nationalized health care. Nationalized health care is when you make everyone in the nation pay for your personal health care by taking the money they earn through taxes. In order for nationalized health care, also know as single-payer health care, to work, it is necessary to outlaw private health care, meaning you give up your freedom to step outside the national system. This is a video of how the Canadian system actually works for their citizens. If you're a fan of this idea, or just curious, it's worth the 5-min it takes to watch it. http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 The heading says " National Health Care " not Political Commentaries. Fortunately, we are supposed to be a Democracy where the people rule. Let's get together as a nation of people who would like to see our " Health Care System Fixed " It's broken. Don't allow politics or religion to blur the importance of our message here. It is " National Health Care " . Dolores Sue Emrick <semrick@...> wrote: Isn't there another forum for political commentary? IMO this isn't the place for it. Sue rheumatic National Health Care Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies are about raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest > watching. > > Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Delores, I'd like to second your motion (below). We need real national health care, that is, not healthcare that enriches insurance companies. On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:28 AM, mike rosner wrote: > The heading says " National Health Care " not Political Commentaries. > Fortunately, we are supposed to be a Democracy where the people > rule. Let's get together as a nation of people who would like to > see our " Health Care System Fixed " It's broken. Don't allow > politics or religion to blur the importance of our message here. It > is " National Health Care " . Dolores > > Sue Emrick <semrick@...> wrote: Isn't there another forum > for political commentary? > IMO this isn't the place for it. > > Sue > rheumatic National Health Care > > Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people > would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies > are about > raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > > > > You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the > rest > > watching. > > > > Sue > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 It just seems to me that this isn't the place for bitching and moaning about it. Are you in contact with your local and national representatives? Your voices should be heard by those that might possibly be able to do something about it, not those who are sick and are struggling to fight that battle. Sue rheumatic National Health Care Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies are about raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest > watching. > > Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 You hit the nail. Already I have gone broke trying to fix a variety of auto immune problems. The people who are disabled or retired have it much worse. Amy Beckman wrote: > > > > With so many health problems, I am terrified of not being able to > afford drs and meds. I am on Medicare now (and fortunately can > afford the premiums), but my meds, which I get through my pension, > are shaky. That is, we keeping hearing we could lose them. I know I > could probably afford Minocin from Canada, but certainly it would be > hard to have to buy it here in the states. And friends on Plan D > tell me that it is horrible, so they must try to get everything from > Canada. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Broken??? My car's broken, but it get's me back and forth, does what I need it to do, so I maintain realistic expectations and don't spend my money on a new one, or at least until AAA gets wise to me. The number of uninsured in the US that is consistently quoted is 47 million (the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005,” puts the initial number of uninsured people living in the country at 46.577 million). The same report notes that 9.487 mil are non-citizens; 8.3 mil earn between 50 - 75K annually (median income is $46,326); 8.74 mil earn >75,000K. So, that's about 17 mil that with responsible budgeting should be able to afford SOME health care insurance. Another 4 mil are between the ages 17 and 22, and either receive basic health care on campus through their college tuition enrollment or they are still on their parents plan because they live at home and attend school. That leaves about 16 mil or about 6% of the population who earn <50K and may have trouble buying insurance. Also in the same report.....45% if those w/o insurance are w/o for <4 months (i.e. between jobs, budget tight, etc.). 60% of those w/o report being in very good or excellent health. Crisis??? rheumatic From: martysfolks2004@... Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:28:57 -0800 Subject: Re: rheumatic National Health Care The heading says " National Health Care " not Political Commentaries. Fortunately, we are supposed to be a Democracy where the people rule. Let's get together as a nation of people who would like to see our " Health Care System Fixed " It's broken. Don't allow politics or religion to blur the importance of our message here. It is " National Health Care " . Dolores Sue Emrick <semrick@...> wrote: Isn't there another forum for political commentary? IMO this isn't the place for it. Sue rheumatic National Health Care Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies are about raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest > watching. > > Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Instead of arguing with Jeff's figures, I will talk about the insured. Anyone that has seen " Sicko " (whatever excesses that movie has, it's really good on its main message) knows that insurance companies make money when they turn people down, so people are denied coverage for tests they need, procedures deemed too " experimental, " and often have policies that their buyers don't understand the consequences of when they get it. My son in law had to fight for a year with his insurance company because he had a heart attack in Boston and received heart surgery there, but his insurance company, an HMO, thought he should have had that surgery in New York City, where he was to go to only certain doctors and hospitals. My own son and his wife had to have their baby induced because he insurance, which she had as a graduate student, was ending when she got her M.A., yet the baby was due a week later. As mentioned earlier, my doctor told me of a woman who bought insurance didn't realize it would not cover all her medical needs and found it didn't cover the expenses involved in treating her RA. I hear from a friend that her son who has Obsessive Compulsive Disorder has no insurance so has had to get off his meds, so she is looking for a job at 70 since her social security check is not enough to cover his medications. We need not just National Health Insurance but an excellent, well-funded system that would meet our needs. It would be good for business too, since we can't compete with other countries whose employers don't have to pay health benefits. On Feb 22, 2008, at 10:33 AM, Jeffery wrote: > > Broken??? My car's broken, but it get's me back and forth, does > what I > need it to do, so I maintain realistic expectations and don't spend my > money on a new one, or at least until AAA gets wise to me. > > > > The number of uninsured in the US that is consistently quoted is 47 > million (the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health > Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005,” puts the initial > number of uninsured people > living in the country at 46.577 million). The same report notes that > 9.487 mil are non-citizens; 8.3 mil earn between 50 - 75K annually > (median income is $46,326); 8.74 mil earn >75,000K. So, that's > about 17 mil that with responsible budgeting should be able to afford > SOME health care insurance. Another 4 mil are between the ages 17 and > 22, and either receive basic health care on campus through their > college tuition enrollment or they are still on their parents plan > because they live at home and attend school. That leaves about 16 mil > or about 6% of the population who earn <50K and may have trouble > buying insurance. Also in the same report.....45% if those w/o > insurance are w/o for <4 months (i.e. between jobs, budget tight, > etc.). 60% of those w/o report being in very good or excellent > health. > > > > Crisis??? > > rheumatic > From: martysfolks2004@... > Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:28:57 -0800 > Subject: Re: rheumatic National Health Care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The heading says " National Health Care " not Political > Commentaries. Fortunately, we are supposed to be a Democracy where > the people rule. Let's get together as a nation of people who > would like to see our " Health Care System Fixed " It's broken. > Don't allow politics or religion to blur the importance of our > message here. It is " National Health Care " . Dolores > > > > Sue Emrick <semrick@...> wrote: Isn't there another > forum for political commentary? > > IMO this isn't the place for it. > > > > Sue > > rheumatic National Health Care > > > > Isn't it terrible how we have lost unions. You would think that people > > would get it that pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies > are about > > raking in obscene amounts of money, IMO. > > > > > >> You can thank our unions for one person digging the hole and the rest > >> watching. > >> > >> Sue > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 Sorry.....not even crocodile tears to spare for you. I don't doubt that drawing the short straw is no fun, but for every sob story there will be one for somebody whose life was bettered by care for which they could not have afforded. And in the context of changing policy, they'll not likely bend the ears that matter most. Congress looks at the same data....its government data. Since they are in the the self-perpetuation business, they are obliged to voters and dollars. This is a loser in both cases. This was my intent, though my words may have got caught up in the din of my insensitivity, so I apologize for that. Though, the frustration that some feel with this is more than equaled by my anger towards those who strive to take from me something that I earned through years of sweat and sacrifice....fair and square. My health insurance is a benefit provided to me through my company. They contribute to it with their dollars. If they did not offer it to me, I would not have accepted the job. I could have earned more otherwise, and other contract employees do. My company does it because they want my expertise, which I developed over years, including in the military, primarily to benefit my family so that they can go on and develop their own expertise. Pretty simple formula. If the government exerts control in the manner discussed here, it will mean I will pay more for less. No free lunches...somebody pays. This is why I resist the grab. This is the root of my selfishness. In the absence of good fortune, self-sufficiency will always be the best path to choose, as we do not seem to be much adept at selecting the best and the brightest to govern or lead these days. Woe be to the non-cynic. jeff rheumatic From: Evanesce@... Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:19:28 -0500 Subject: Re: rheumatic National Health Care It's kinda surprising that one who belongs to the rheumatic group has this view. Our disease is degenerative & disabling... will kill us. It's those who get very sick who have the biggest risk, even with the best insurance plans. Then, we must have big funds to go outside of insurance plans, or must go along with death sentences of some of the mainstream doctors who throw up their hands. Many of the specialty doctors will not work with insurance providers. I get the feeling you've not had this experience. Should you become disabled, unable to work (incl retired), then your income & doctor choices are locked. There are a LOT of people in this category. I know you don't care, & this is your prerogative. But you should know that these scenarios are very real, are frequent, because I see them in my job, and in my personal life. Amy Jeffery wrote: > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 Well said Jeff. Sue Re: rheumatic National Health Care It's kinda surprising that one who belongs to the rheumatic group has this view. Our disease is degenerative & disabling... will kill us. It's those who get very sick who have the biggest risk, even with the best insurance plans. Then, we must have big funds to go outside of insurance plans, or must go along with death sentences of some of the mainstream doctors who throw up their hands. Many of the specialty doctors will not work with insurance providers. I get the feeling you've not had this experience. Should you become disabled, unable to work (incl retired), then your income & doctor choices are locked. There are a LOT of people in this category. I know you don't care, & this is your prerogative. But you should know that these scenarios are very real, are frequent, because I see them in my job, and in my personal life. Amy Jeffery wrote: > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 In a message dated 2/24/2008 6:43:05 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, rhondagoebel@... writes: Health care seems like more of a fundamental basic right than reading books. I agree 100%. Isn't it supposed to be LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Today, health is necessary for life in most cases. **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 Do people think it's reasonable to have a fire department, or a library, 2 of the many examples of socialism that already infuse our society? Any kind of insurance is a form of socialism, it's just a matter of how fair and inclusive we're choosing to be. Don't know why people are turned off by the concept of socialism, it just means we all pitch in to make sure if someone's house is burning & they want to ask the fire department for help, if someone wants to read a book, or if someone needs health care, they have that ability. You figure people would complain about the socialist library system before a socialist health care system. Health care seems like more of a fundamental basic right than reading books. Can you imagine if we privatized the fire department & made it available only to those able to pay? That's exactly what we're doing with health care. > > > > > > > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > > > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > > > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > > > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > > > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > > > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > > > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 I agree! We should all be able to share equally in services that are for the common good. Staying with a company all your life because they carry health Insurance is the same thing as being an indentured slave. Nobody should have to subject themselves to any company just to insure that they receive health care. I believe in social medicine. Sorry for the people that spend so much time as indentured slaves just for health care. I believe that is exactly what is wrong with our system. ~~~~Dolores rhondagoebel <rhondagoebel@...> wrote: Do people think it's reasonable to have a fire department, or a library, 2 of the many examples of socialism that already infuse our society? Any kind of insurance is a form of socialism, it's just a matter of how fair and inclusive we're choosing to be. Don't know why people are turned off by the concept of socialism, it just means we all pitch in to make sure if someone's house is burning & they want to ask the fire department for help, if someone wants to read a book, or if someone needs health care, they have that ability. You figure people would complain about the socialist library system before a socialist health care system. Health care seems like more of a fundamental basic right than reading books. Can you imagine if we privatized the fire department & made it available only to those able to pay? That's exactly what we're doing with health care. > > > > > > > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > > > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > > > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > > > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > > > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > > > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > > > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2008 Report Share Posted February 24, 2008 Amy, Thank you for speaking for so many of us. I agree with you 100%!. I had to stop working for a while. Paying Cobra was very expensive. It is not a good option for people who cannot work because of their illness. I did get on Medicare but not all drs take it. When I was on the HMO Medicare I could not go to the dr of my choice. Now I turned 50 so I chose regular Medicare with AARP-this gives me freedom of choice but it cost me $227 for AARP Supplemetal Coverage and this does not include drug coverage. Fortunately I have been able to work part-time again but I never no when my health may get even worse. And it is not easy to work when you don't feel well. Our country has not properly addressed the medical needs of the disabled and elderly. Carol E from NY From: rheumatic [mailto:rheumatic ] On Behalf Of Amy Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 9:19 AM rheumatic Subject: Re: rheumatic National Health Care It's kinda surprising that one who belongs to the rheumatic group has this view. Our disease is degenerative & disabling... will kill us. It's those who get very sick who have the biggest risk, even with the best insurance plans. Then, we must have big funds to go outside of insurance plans, or must go along with death sentences of some of the mainstream doctors who throw up their hands. Many of the specialty doctors will not work with insurance providers. I get the feeling you've not had this experience. Should you become disabled, unable to work (incl retired), then your income & doctor choices are locked. There are a LOT of people in this category. I know you don't care, & this is your prerogative. But you should know that these scenarios are very real, are frequent, because I see them in my job, and in my personal life. Amy Jeffery wrote: > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 <<Don't know why people are turned off by the concept of socialism>> Maybe they're afraid the people in support of such a system will come up with their own (and probably violent!) folk song! Ellen rheumatic Re: National Health Care Do people think it's reasonable to have a fire department, or a library, 2 of the many examples of socialism that already infuse our society? Any kind of insurance is a form of socialism, it's just a matter of how fair and inclusive we're choosing to be. Don't know why people are turned off by the concept of socialism, it just means we all pitch in to make sure if someone's house is burning & they want to ask the fire department for help, if someone wants to read a book, or if someone needs health care, they have that ability. You figure people would complain about the socialist library system before a socialist health care system. Health care seems like more of a fundamental basic right than reading books. Can you imagine if we privatized the fire department & made it available only to those able to pay? That's exactly what we're doing with health care. > > > > > > > > > Sad stories......all worthy of much compassion, including my own, but > > > not including my hard earned dollars. Certainly not more for those who > > > clearly cannot manage them. Bottom line is.....my family's my priority > > > and as long as voters (like me) who have some satisfaction with their > > > family's health insurance arrangement far outnumber those who lack any > > > satisfaction, Congress will not be impelled to thwart those groups > > > that profit financially from the current arrangement. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Amen! Judy **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I disagree... Australia is the greatest nation and a land of freedom and opportunity also but I'm biased <wink wink>. Here it is compulsory to take out private health insurance (or you get taxed), but if you can't afford it, the government provides health care to all through our publically funded Medicare system. We aren't billions and squillions of dollars in debt to china or wherever, like the US is, so I don't see how anyone can say the US is the richest. Maybe I'm wrong ? I'm sure someone will correct me. Leonie Re: rheumatic Re: National Health Care The US is without doubt the greatest nation in the world. Our success is based on principles exemplified by the constitution and, of course, individual ability to be self expressing. We are the richest of all nations and share wealth with our citizens by providing food stamps, free health care to indigents, programs dedicated to support child care, the handicapped, seniors and a numerous host of other welfare, most of which are also offered free or at little cost. In our society everyone has the potential for success if they are willing to do what it takes to become so. Unfortunately, there are those who are unwilling to choose this path and feel that government has the responsibility to provide the platform for more and more " free lunches " . Taking this approach surely will put us on the road to socialism/communism. All for one and one for all in theory may sound good, but it just doesn't work. Taking everything into consideration, would anyone change our US standard of living for any other country's standard of living? I don't think so. As I said last week, none of us will change another's individual convictions, so why don't we stick with our health issues? Judy and **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I am so glad that Leonie responded to Judy and . There are many advanced countries with freedom and opportunity. I love the U.S. but I know that we are not best in every way, and studies show that upward mobility is much harder to achieve here NOW than in several countries, Australia being one of them. There are more poor people in America than in any other " rich " country except Mexico (which is regarded as rich by certain measures and compared to the rest of Latin America, I guess): one-third of those in the US make $40,000 or less for a family of four (20,000 is the poverty line, but everyone acknowledges that a family of four has a hard time). One of the ways that we are not best is in not providing universal health care. On Feb 25, 2008, at 4:34 PM, leonie cent wrote: > I disagree... Australia is the greatest nation and a land of > freedom and opportunity also but I'm biased <wink wink>. Here it is > compulsory to take out private health insurance (or you get taxed), > but if you can't afford it, the government provides health care to > all through our publically funded Medicare system. > > We aren't billions and squillions of dollars in debt to china or > wherever, like the US is, so I don't see how anyone can say the US > is the richest. > > Maybe I'm wrong ? I'm sure someone will correct me. > > Leonie > > Re: rheumatic Re: National Health Care > > The US is without doubt the greatest nation in the world. Our > success is > based on principles exemplified by the constitution and, of course, > individual > ability to be self expressing. We are the richest of all nations > and share > wealth with our citizens by providing food stamps, free health care to > indigents, programs dedicated to support child care, the > handicapped, seniors and a > numerous host of other welfare, most of which are also offered free > or at > little cost. > In our society everyone has the potential for success if they are > willing to > do what it takes to become so. Unfortunately, there are those who are > unwilling to choose this path and feel that government has the > responsibility to > provide the platform for more and more " free lunches " . Taking this > approach > surely will put us on the road to socialism/communism. All for one > and one for > all in theory may sound good, but it just doesn't work. Taking > everything > into consideration, would anyone change our US standard of living > for any other > country's standard of living? I don't think so. > As I said last week, none of us will change another's individual > convictions, so why don't we stick with our health issues? > Judy and > > **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. > (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel- > campos-duffy/ > 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Bah! Humbug! We are approaching third world status. Would I exchange? Yes, and there are many ex-pat's who agree. Dolores Judkeels@... wrote: The US is without doubt the greatest nation in the world. Our success is based on principles exemplified by the constitution and, of course, individual ability to be self expressing. We are the richest of all nations and share wealth with our citizens by providing food stamps, free health care to indigents, programs dedicated to support child care, the handicapped, seniors and a numerous host of other welfare, most of which are also offered free or at little cost. In our society everyone has the potential for success if they are willing to do what it takes to become so. Unfortunately, there are those who are unwilling to choose this path and feel that government has the responsibility to provide the platform for more and more " free lunches " . Taking this approach surely will put us on the road to socialism/communism. All for one and one for all in theory may sound good, but it just doesn't work. Taking everything into consideration, would anyone change our US standard of living for any other country's standard of living? I don't think so. As I said last week, none of us will change another's individual convictions, so why don't we stick with our health issues? Judy and **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 our health, especially the health of the chronically ill, is intricately intertwined with our health insurance. discussions on controversial topics may not come easy, but if we don't have them, we don't progress toward helping one another in the most essential way that we need help. > > I would like to second that! > > Sue > Re: rheumatic National Health Care > > > Leonie makes my point. > This is an international forum and it is inconsiderate for us to go on like > it's all about us. We all have strong feelings about this, one way or the > other, but it does not belong here. Let's help each other deal with our > illnesses and find other venues to vent our local political issues. > Take care, > Ute > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.