Rusty Shackleford
Banned
So when is this big **** up going to reach the news and the papers?
When the newspapers stop their slobbering love affair with the Obamessiah.
So when is this big **** up going to reach the news and the papers?
Healthcare is available to all in the US. Most people have private health insurance (usually paid for by their employer) and there is a safety net for those that can't afford it. The only thing the current US system lacks is 4 hour waits in A&E. As someone who has lived in both countries, I know which system I prefer.
Obama wants to take the US into a system similar to the UK and Canada, and when you look at the streams of Canadians coming to the US for medical care, you have to wonder why he thinks this is so important. The obvious answer is that he wants to impose a socialist agenda in the US, and the electorate should have seen that coming when they bought into his 'change' nonsense. The healthcare bill, coupled with Cap & Trade and the horrendously wasteful stimulus package will bankrupt the USA, but on the plus side, it will destroy Obama.
George W Bush had enormously high approval numbers post 9/11 - what destroyed him was straying from key Republican principles (the bail-outs, open borders) so that even his base of support were unhappy as well as the granola-eating tree-hugging commie anti-war crowd.
On George W Bush's watch we had 9/11, global recession and two extremely long wars, neither of which will be over any time soon. Bush had 8 years to catch Osama bin Laden and failed. He took US-Russian relations to a new low. North Korea and Iran responded to his 'rogue state' taunts by accelerating their nuclear programmes. I could go on.
So far, Osama has attempted to bring in a healthcare programme that the blue half of the country are actually quite keen on. It doesn't seem that bad in comparison.
America's biggest problem is the violent polarisation of political debate. If Obama told the nation that it was raining, half the country would refuse to admit they were getting wet*.
On George W Bush's watch we had 9/11, global recession and two extremely long wars, neither of which will be over any time soon. Bush had 8 years to catch Osama bin Laden and failed. He took US-Russian relations to a new low. North Korea and Iran responded to his 'rogue state' taunts by accelerating their nuclear programmes. I could go on.
So far, Osama has attempted to bring in a healthcare programme that the blue half of the country are actually quite keen on. It doesn't seem that bad in comparison.
America's biggest problem is the violent polarisation of political debate. If Obama told the nation that it was raining, half the country would refuse to admit they were getting wet*.
It's CNN's fault Bin Laden is on the loose. Thats fact. We the Brits found him and the Yanks ****ed it up.
On George W Bush's watch we had 9/11, global recession and two extremely long wars, neither of which will be over any time soon. Bush had 8 years to catch Osama bin Laden and failed. He took US-Russian relations to a new low. North Korea and Iran responded to his 'rogue state' taunts by accelerating their nuclear programmes. I could go on.
So far, Osama has attempted to bring in a healthcare programme that the blue half of the country are actually quite keen on. It doesn't seem that bad in comparison.
America's biggest problem is the violent polarisation of political debate. If Obama told the nation that it was raining, half the country would refuse to admit they were getting wet*.
So far, Osama has attempted to bring in a healthcare programme that the blue half of the country are actually quite keen on.
Without wishing to be a Bush apologist, you can hardly blame him for 9/11, the global recession, or the two wars. His Dad, maybe...
I'm sorry but that's just not true. In a recent Rasmussen poll, 83% of Americans said they were happy with their healthcare. If the blue half only makes up 17%, then Obama wouldn't have been elected.
Healthcare is available to all in the US. Most people have private health insurance (usually paid for by their employer) and there is a safety net for those that can't afford it. The only thing the current US system lacks is 4 hour waits in A&E. As someone who has lived in both countries, I know which system I prefer.
Obama wants to take the US into a system similar to the UK and Canada, and when you look at the streams of Canadians coming to the US for medical care, you have to wonder why he thinks this is so important. The obvious answer is that he wants to impose a socialist agenda in the US, and the electorate should have seen that coming when they bought into his 'change' nonsense. The healthcare bill, coupled with Cap & Trade and the horrendously wasteful stimulus package will bankrupt the USA, but on the plus side, it will destroy Obama.
George W Bush had enormously high approval numbers post 9/11 - what destroyed him was straying from key Republican principles (the bail-outs, open borders) so that even his base of support were unhappy as well as the granola-eating tree-hugging commie anti-war crowd.
Do you think the Republicans would have let Gore off had it happened on his watch?
Just out of interest, if the healthcare bill goes through, does that mean the companies don't have to pay for it anymore? Isn't that a good thing for capitalism - more money to go on the bottom line, instead of employee benefits?
That sounds interesting. Pray tell?
But this healthcare plan was the cornerstone of his domestic policy, wasn't it? The blue half must have been onboard otherwise he'd never have made it out of the primaries.
However, having just found a CNN article online, the story says that phone records were used in a court trial in 1998, that showed OBL's phone details, and thats when the phone stopped being used.
.
don't know where you've heard this, but from everything I've seen this movement across the boarder is in the other direction. I know a lot of americans living near the boarder who pop over to Canada to pick up some meds.
Rationed health care already exists in the US, it's just for some reason they'd rather it be done by profit driven businesses rather than an organisation charged with delivering best possible care.
Converting the US to a universal HCS may be expensive, but in general countries with a universal HCS spend less, and spend more efficiently.. AND have better health outcomes. Looks to me like a win, win, WIN.
http://www.who.int/whosis/whostat/EN_WHS09_Table7.pdf
These are the WHO's Health Care Expenditure tables. What it tells us is that in 2006 the US spent over 15% of his GDP per capita on health care provision (compared to 8% in the UK). In the US 46% of total HC expenditure was by the government (87% in the UK)... so we're already looking at comparable levels of government expenditure per person between the UK and US, but almost c.20% of Americans are uninsured and receive only an extremely basic emergency service provision if they can make it to an emergency room.
This is reinforced by the table showing that health care expenditure makes up about 16% of the UK total government spending, in the US it's 19%!
The worry for me is if Obama doesn't do it, then I'm not sure if anyone will... how can any future president force through a large but necessary change of government system if Obama can't do it with HC?
On topic. Obama. Would you have rathered Oven Chips McCain, or heaven forbid- a WOMAN!!! in power. The only reason I can think of to vote for Ms Clinton was the fact that her daughter is fit.