From: Ray Fischer on
mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>> Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>>>Yep. In Australia, the government pumped a ton of cash into stimulus
>>>payments for just about everybody, & told us to go spend it. We did, &
>>>it kept us out of a recession by the skin of our teeth. In fact, we're
>>>the only G20 nation that has avoided recession. The only thing Obama has
>>>done wrong is not give /enough/ money to people who'd go straight out &
>>>spend it.
>>
>> What the rightards and politicians don't seem to grasp is that giving
>> tons of money to rich people doesn't do squat for the economy, and
>> most likely makes things even worse because they often ship their
>> money out of the country. Give stimulus money to the poor and middle
>> classes and the money will get spent and will get spent in the
>> country.
>>
>So what do the lefttards do? They throw it at big business, banks, etc

Never trust a man who's certain that he has simple solutions to
complex problems.

Never trust a man who gives online retorts with *no* substance.
mikey in <h8rvun$1hb$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer(a)sonic.net

From: Walter Banks on


C J Campbell wrote:

> On 2009-09-18 00:46:40 -0700, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> said:
>
> > C J Campbell wrote:
> >> And no -- bureaucratizing health care is unlikely to get rid of waste
> >> and corruption. Far to the contrary. A national health care plan would
> >> vastly increase waste and corruption.
> >
> > Really? In every other country with 'socialised' health care, they
> > spend much less than the USA does.
>
> They also ration their health care. If we included all the patients
> from countries with socialized health care who come to the US for care
> as part of the cost of their care, and subtracted it from what we
> spend, I think the numbers would be dramatically reversed.

The rationing argument doesn't standup to the facts.

All the Canadian patients who come to the US for necessary
health care have the costs paid for by the Canadian health
care system. That includes elective procedures.

The spending in Canada is about half per person of the
US health costs. Logic alone says that care for foreign nationals
cant account for a sum that is 10 times the total of what Canada
spends on health care.

>> And no -- bureaucratizing health care is unlikely to get rid of waste
>> and corruption. Far to the contrary. A national health care plan would
>> vastly increase waste and corruption.

Do the math.

Take the 20% or so of the costs of health care that winds up in
administrative and profit columns of a layer of complexity in the
insurance companies and you have $400B a year to start with.

Multiply the carpal tunnel example in this thread by all the folks
paying into pure overhead of jurisdictional fights, and the cost
of delayed care add in the $400B in the last paragraph and
any administration can be pretty bad and still come out ahead.

That comment alone may explain why no industrialized country
with a national health plan that after implementation produced
worse results than they previous had.

w..







From: SMS on
Walter Banks wrote:

> The spending in Canada is about half per person of the
> US health costs. Logic alone says that care for foreign nationals
> cant account for a sum that is 10 times the total of what Canada
> spends on health care.

The whole "Canadians flock to the U.S. for health care" schtick is a
myth that has long since been disproved. You have a very few wealthy
Canadians that don't want to wait for elective surgeries deciding to
come to the U.S. and pay out of pocket in order to get the surgeries
done quicker. Not much different than wealthy Americans that are able to
manipulate the transplant system to their benefit, jumping in front of
the line by various methods not available to someone without a lot of money.

Oh, and don't forget the U.S. patients without insurance (or in some
cases with insurance) that are taking medical vacations.
"http://online.barrons.com/article/SB125211376542588163.html?mod=googlenews_barrons"
From: mikey4 on

"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4ab3c1c3$0$1619$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>> Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Yep. In Australia, the government pumped a ton of cash into stimulus
>>>>payments for just about everybody, & told us to go spend it. We did, &
>>>>it kept us out of a recession by the skin of our teeth. In fact, we're
>>>>the only G20 nation that has avoided recession. The only thing Obama has
>>>>done wrong is not give /enough/ money to people who'd go straight out &
>>>>spend it.
>>>
>>> What the rightards and politicians don't seem to grasp is that giving
>>> tons of money to rich people doesn't do squat for the economy, and
>>> most likely makes things even worse because they often ship their
>>> money out of the country. Give stimulus money to the poor and middle
>>> classes and the money will get spent and will get spent in the
>>> country.
>>>
>>So what do the lefttards do? They throw it at big business, banks, etc
>
> Never trust a man who's certain that he has simple solutions to
> complex problems.
>
> Never trust a man who gives online retorts with *no* substance.
> mikey in <h8rvun$1hb$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>
>
> --
ROFL........ Ray, there is nothing funnier than a schmuk on mommy's pc


From: mikey4 on

"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4ab39e49$0$1662$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
> mikey4 wrote:
>
>> Just what do you think is happening right now????????? Why do you think
>> people are so PISSED????????
>
> You have a very small number of people that are "PISSED" and they are
> pissed because their handlers tell them to be pissed, not because they
> have even the slightest understanding of what's going on. They aren't out
> there reading The Economist to gain an in-depth understanding of the
> complex issues, they're listening to lies from Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity,
> Rush, and the Heritage Foundation. They have no capacity or desire to even
> try to learn. Such is the state of the right-wing.
>
> The rest of the population may not be too happy about the bailouts but
> they have developed the critical thinking skills to understand why the
> government could not let companies like AIG fail, why the major banks
> could not be allowed to fail, and why manufacturers with billions of
> dollars of pension liabilities were better bailed out than allowed to
> fail. Yes, it's not fair. The alternative would have been far worse.
>
> No one blames Obama for this mess. They may put too much of the blame on
> George W. Bush since the political philosophy that led us down this road
> was began by Ronald Reagan, who has near god-like status among the right
> wing, and cannot be blamed for anything.

People are pissed because "they" have finely woke up to the fact that the
"government" is out of control and has been for a very long time. Problem
is we have no idea what would have happened if any of these those companies
would have been allowed to fail, only best guesses. AIG spun off their auto
insurance company which Farmers has picked up. Yes *I know* that's only one
example, my point is that with the mad rush we will never know how many
other example there could have been.