Hillary Comes In Third, Lol! Obama Rules Iowa

[Mad Hatter]

I'm a big Fred Thompson fan. Very pleased with a 3rd place finish in Iowa. New Hampshire will be tough, but I think he's up there in most of the southern states.

www.imwithfred.com

Edited January 4, 2008 by Mad Hatter

[pollock]

I thought I was going to be the only democrat to join this discussion, but it looks like that may not be the case.

I hate to see that Joe Biden dropped out, although it has been clear for a while that he didn't have much of a chance. I really like what he has to say about foreign policy and I think he was the right person to get us back on the right track with the rest of the world. Hopefully he will be considered for either Secretary of State (although I'm not sure I see him leaving a senior Senate seat for that) or VP.

I also don't understand the Hillary hate. Many of the reasons that have been suggested here are superficial, such as the out-of-context quotes. I'm not arguing that you should like her, I just don't understand why she is so widely hated. All she did for 8 years was try to contribute as first lady, and stay married to her husband after he cheated on her and lied about it.

Maybe the hatred is purely due to sexist reasons, but speaking as a bit of a sexist myself, that doesn't seem like a sufficient explanation.

My biggest domestic issue is health care. I absolutely think it should be "universal, federalized, socialized, communized".... I don't care what you want to label it. Health care is out of control and it is the insurance companies that are both perpetuating it and reaping the benefits. Meanwhile poor people are dying and the middle class are squeezed by it like nothing else. I don't know if Hillary's plan back in the 90's was worth two squirts of piss, but at least it was a plan. Maybe she's learned more about it in the Senate and can do better now.

Obama's speech during the '04 convention almost made me contribute to his '08 campaign right then and there. No politician since Bill Clinton had made that kind of impression on me. He is a born leader, but given the last 4 years to consider it, I don't know if he's ready to be President yet.

I want to like Edwards, but I just can't like him as more than a VP. He was clearly outgunned in his debate with Cheney last time around and I haven't gotten over it.

So I'm not decided yet. I need to start following it more closely, but it's tough these days. During the '04 election I was so mad at the world that I was making friends mad at me and it left me jaded. I'll try not to get that sucked-in this time.

[yyz28]

My biggest domestic issue is health care. I absolutely think it should be "universal, federalized, socialized, communized".... I don't care what you want to label it. Health care is out of control and it is the insurance companies that are both perpetuating it and reaping the benefits. Meanwhile poor people are dying and the middle class are squeezed by it like nothing else. I don't know if Hillary's plan back in the 90's was worth two squirts of piss, but at least it was a plan. Maybe she's learned more about it in the Senate and can do better now.

Honestly, I think healthcare is the issue that makes many dislike her. We don't need "mommy" telling us how to handle our business. Her campagin is a laundry list of new entitlements.

The vast majority of the people in this country have their own health care and do what is required to maintain it, or they can afford it and make a priority decision not to get it (while they pay for cable, cellphones, high speed internet, etc). We have choice in care right now. Hillary's plan takes these freedoms away from the majority to protect the minority. This isn't the right way to solve the problem.

If you don't believe me - ask some doctors if they support this woman. If you don't believe me, ask hospitals on the northern border how many canadians who can't get the procedures they need who come over and still pay out of pocket for the healthcare they need.

People are dying in countries with Socialized Medicine because of how broken the system it is.

Why trade one broken system for another? I'm not saying something doesn't have to be done to fix the healthcare system and the out of control costs, but giving the Government control over our health isn't the answer. Why give the government who has demonstrated, under both parties, that they can't manage to keep costs in check or even deliver a piece of mail on time, that much control over your lives? Do you think it would actually be less expensive per capita than the current system? With unlimited supply comes unlimited demand. Costs spiral out of control. Get ready to forfit 75% of your earnings to the Government. and then... Dude... THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is in CONTROL of your health. Chew on that for a moment...

...now spit the puke that is in your mouth out...

...ok. Moving on - people are tired of how Washington is working today. Bush's Popularity is in the tank, a reflection on Republicans. The Congress's approval is lower than his... a reflection on Democrats. People are sick of those who represent what Washington is right now and are gravitating to people who can legitimately claim they can be an agent of change. This is why Huckabee and Obama did so well last night. I expect they will continue to do well.

Democrats who want to regain the White House would be smart to distance themselves from the Clintons.

[UNTflyer]

My biggest domestic issue is health care. I absolutely think it should be "universal, federalized, socialized, communized".... I don't care what you want to label it. Health care is out of control and it is the insurance companies that are both perpetuating it and reaping the benefits. Meanwhile poor people are dying and the middle class are squeezed by it like nothing else. I don't know if Hillary's plan back in the 90's was worth two squirts of piss, but at least it was a plan. Maybe she's learned more about it in the Senate and can do better now.

This populist rubbish about how people are dying because of lack of insurance is never challenged... so I'm going to challenge you.

Getting health insurance is a choice. You either get it and you're covered, or you CHOOSE not to get it and roll the dice on whether you get sick or not. As I pointed out in another thread, a person can get health insurance cheap (less than $100 a month). If a person decided that it's not a priority in their life and they get sick, too bad. Why should *I* have to pay for their insurance?? We don't provide government auto insurance, government life insurance, or government home insurance...

Health care is out of control and it is the insurance companies that are both perpetuating it and reaping the benefits.

Evil, evil profit!!! I submit the problem isn't insurance companies. Hillary's plan would be nothing but a giant government-run single payer insurance company, except it would be about as efficient as the local DMV. Rather, several problems exist that drive up health care, one of them being excessive and frivolous lawsuits. Do you know how much the average doctor pays in malpractice insurance? For an OB-GYN, it's about $85,000 a year. For a general surgeon, it's about $56k, and for a neurosurgeon you start getting into 6 figures. Is it any wonder it costs $175 just to have a doctor let you in their door?

Another cause is the increase in new medical equipment and pharmaceuticals. While many of these improvements are wonderful, the vast majority offer only marginal improvements over what was already on the market... but someone has to pay for those new drugs and equipment.

Thirdly, insurance actually encourages patients to see the doctor for every little sniffle or cough. We run to the doctor about "restless leg syndrome" or other minor ailments because they see a $25 deductible as being a great deal. What they don't see is that visit is paid for mostly by the insurance company, and then the patient is shocked when premiums go up the next year, again!

Finally, health care costs are rising because like every other product on the market, supply and demand affects the prices, and the Baby Boomers are becoming geriatric and the demand for services and pharmaceuticals is skyrocketing.

The last thing we need is an inefficient government agency throwing open the doors of every doctor's office for every person in America. The results would be disastrous. What people need to do is once again take responsibility and economize their medical care, just like they have to do with every other cost in life. Get rid of these insurance companies and go back to a Pay For Service system, with tax-free medical accounts that never expire and can be handed down to your children.

[stebo]

I was married to a doctor for 8 years so I know the arguement on the side of the doctors. The reason that hospital costs are so high is that the hospital automatically charges those WITH health care to make up for those without. A simple answer for the problem would be to have a happy medium. Let the government expand Medicare to include non-insured citizens. Have the government put caps on hospitals for what they can charge on everything. An aspirin in the hospital should be no more then it is at a convenience store. If the homeless guy can't pay for it than the government can absorb those costs into the current Medicare system. If they were to get costs down, they would probably be able to pay for all of the uninsured people and even save money.

There are some people that do not have as choice in an open market. Those people are the mentally handicapped, the elderly with fixed incomes, and children. We currently take care of the first two through Medicare and regardless of what the negative are - the system works. Children need to be added to the list. As a society, an adult should be able to choose whether or not they will pay for health insurance - an 8 year old can't choose and we don't choose our parents. Absorb children into Medicare as well. If you are between the age of 18 and 63 then you should be on your own. Have that jacked up to 25 for a college student all the way through grad school. Again, the only way to do this is to overhaul the billing with universal hospital cost watch. If you do these things - the hospitals will be happy and will lose their silly excuses for overcharging. Insurancee companies will have to compete for lower rates like car insurance companies do... and all kids, handicapped, and elderly will be covered.

Finally - our veterans get great care at some facilities and terrible care at others. I believe that if you serve this country, in the military - in any way at all - you should never be without insurance, regardless of age. If you are working then you would probably want to take the company insurance because dealing with the VA would be such a pain in the ass... but if you are unemployed then I think that all veterans should be eligible for the VA care system. And it needs to be consistent. I saw a story about a guy that had his leg blown off in the war. He had a million dollar leg on. You could tell it was a fluff piece. Not all soldiers are this lucky, most are not. In fact - this could be the only guy in the country with a million dollar electronic leg and it was probably all put together so that he could make appearances about his great care that he got from the VA and the government. Well, I think that vets should be given equal care. That is my opinion. If we cannot afford it - then I would say that we should raise taxes for it. The people that serve this country deserve the best. I don't give a damn how much it costs. And they deserve it for the rest of their lives if they are not covered through a traditional method. No other civilized country treats its vets as inconsistent as we do. Notice how I didn't say treat their vets as "bad" as we do - because my grandfather is treated VERY well by his VA hospital in northern CA... but I have read nightmare stories about how bad other VA hospitals are. If they need to cut costs - well, there are a butt load of brand new doctors with student loan debt that would love to "serve" their country without fighting in a war or being shipped off to New Guinea... just set up a program where a doctor can work off his/her student loans after residency or during residency... hell, turn the VA hospitals into teaching hospitals and you would have an influx of $40K a year labor... use those residents and their skills, they are more prepared then older doctors that are not as up to date on the new technology and cannot even run a computer. Use these guys and gals and you got yourself a new system that has been overhauled - without really spending that much money.

Of course - this is all too much common sense, it would never be proposed by a politician.

[UNTflyer]

Well sure, children should never be without health insurance, so let's give them all insurance. They shouldn't be without food, or clothes, or shelter. Let's not do things half-assed... Everyone that has a kid gets basic kid-caring stuff from the government for "free". Government cheese for everyone!! After all, they are children and they can't choose their parents.

Why does there have to be a "happy medium"? When did health care become something that people demand as a "right"? If you eliminate the drivers of high health care costs (insurance companies that mask the real cost from patients, frivilous lawsuits, unhealthy lifestyles, and a pharmacy culture that shoves a new medicine down our throats every day), then we can reach a point where we can actually pay for most medical services out of pocket and take out catastrophic health insurance if we choose.

Health care is not a right. When it imposes an obligation on me in the form of higher taxes, it stops being a right and becomes an entitlement that will never go away and only become a big black hole of government waste and inefficiency.

What you are proposing is the removal of incentive for people to do things on their own. Once incentive is gone, the whole damn thing falls apart.

[CMJ]

Well then why should folks who don't have kids have to pay for the education system? Why even have public schools at all? Education "imposes an obligation" on all folks who are taxpayers whether they have children or not. I guess if parents really want their children to get ahead they'll find a way to send them to private school. For that matter all Universities should be private as well.

Let's all have a me first attitude.

[MCMLXXX]

Well then why should folks who don't have kids have to pay for the education system? Why even have public schools at all? Education "imposes an obligation" on all folks who are taxpayers whether they have children or not. I guess if parents really want their children to get ahead they'll find a way to send them to private school. For that matter all Universities should be private as well.

Let's all have a me first attitude.

How is the Federal Government paying for healthcare the equivalent of State Governments paying for education? Where does the U.S. Constitution give one the right to Healthcare or Public Education? I thought the founders of this country sought to limit the power of the National Government. Why should parents not have the primary responsiblilty for educating their children? Aren't public universities the creation of State Governments? If the constitution of a given state affords the right to an education doesn't that answer your first question and your second question? Do you want all power in a central government or divided between multiple governmental entities? How is opposition to the consolidation of all government power in Washington D.C. a me first attitude?

[UNTflyer]

If you really feel the need to give more than the 25% taken from your paycheck, you are free to voluntarily pay more taxes. The Treasury even has a special address for that:

Gifts to the United States

U.S. Department of the Treasury

Credit Accounting Branch

3700 East-West Highway, Room 6D17

Hyattsville, MD 20782

Personally, I recommend that you give the money to a charity hospital, a children's fund, or some other good cause. St Jude is my charity of choice because they treated my cousin when he had leukemia at age 9.

[CMJ]

How is the Federal Government paying for healthcare the equivalent of State Governments paying for education? Where does the U.S. Constitution give one the right to Healthcare or Public Education? I thought the founders of this country sought to limit the power of the National Government. Why should parents not have the primary responsiblilty for educating their children? Aren't public universities the creation of State Governments? If the constitution of a given state affords the right to an education doesn't that answer your first question and your second question? Do you want all power in a central government or divided between multiple governmental entities? How is opposition to the consolidation of all government power in Washington D.C. a me first attitude?

Well the Feds partly pay for the nation's education system - many billions of dollars worth. There's also the Department of Education for crying out loud. I'm not sure of the exact figure they disperse, but it's alot of cash. If we're discussing what the Founders wanted - I don't think you can say all they were after to do was limit the powers of the National government. Some did, some did not(obviously...the Articles of Confederation was too decentralized prompting our current one in the first place). It's a debate that will always be waged in this country, and people often jump sides of the argument depending on what the issue being discussed is. Your staunch States Rights folks might pull a U-turn over gay marriage by pushing for a Constitutional Amendment banning it - when a few states have made it legal. We all do it, and have for over 200 years depending on the issue(slavery being the most obvious example). It's one of the most interesting philosopical struggles our country has and will always have.

And to respond to UNTFlyer - I usually do give a few dollars a year to various charities(usually Cancer research since that's what my Grandfather passed away of when I was a child) and to NT. Even though I barely get by myself at times, I think it's very important that we help when we can. That doesn't mean I don't feel health care should be for everyone however.

[Mad Hatter]

We can't afford the Entitlement programs we have now, but please, by all means, lets be responsible adults and add to the problem by creating a new one.

[JesseMartin]

Speaking as a swing voter...is there any way to mutate Ron Paul and Barack Obama into one person? I like them both for completely different reasons.

I think Huckabee and Romney are as nuts as Kucinich. We just haven't seen the extent of it yet, because they know how to hide it in public. Notice that that is an unqualified statement...there's just something weird about them that I can't quite put my finger on.

Hilary is, scientifically speaking (social science, that is) a borderline Socialist. And just as with the Communist Manifesto, the ideas sound nice but wouldn't execute well in practice.

I do think everyone should have healthcare, I just don't think it should fall into the hands of the politicians...and out of the wallets of the taxpayers. There has to be another way to do it, but nobody has figured it out yet.

And as far as video game ratings...an "adults only" rating is like a death mark, because none of the major consoles will carry it. I read a loooong article about it early last year, I forget what they were called, but there were a couple of games that were supposed to be really badass and had gamers clamoring for their release, but they were adults-only rated and so no company would license it for their consoles. They offered to license censored versions. I don't know if the designers went back to work to do so or if they didn't want to change the games, but still, censorship sucks...I don't mind ratings and classification systems, but when your methods effectively silence whatever you don't like-be it a video game, a movie, or a lecture-THAT is where it crosses the line into first amendment violations. I wouldn't be surprised to see a Supreme Court ruling on video games in the next 5 years or so. Not that it would help the games that are already "dead", because by then they will probably appear outdated, but it would probably be a helpful "Bright line" standard to which censors, designers, and companies alike could compare the content of a game and rate it without keeping it off of the market.

...okay, now I've brought civil liberties into the discussion, great...like there weren't enough offshoots to this thread already!

[yyz28]

Well the Feds partly pay for the nation's education system - many billions of dollars worth. There's also the Department of Education for crying out loud.

This is a responsibility that the Federal Government has picked up along the way, but that doesn't make it right. The Federal Government does LOTS of things outside its Constitutional mandate. This doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean, "well, if the federal government is paying for Education, they should pay for healthcare too."

Edcuation and Healthcare are two different things, but since you brought it up - how well are our schools performing? We spend more money per student in this country than any other country does on edcuation, yet the states and federal government want to pump taxpayers for even more money to throw at education. If the Government can't get the public school system work worth a crap, what in God's name makes you think they can make the Health system work?

The problem isn't money in the case of education, nor would it be in healthcare. It is the buracruacy that sucks up all the money and it never gets where it is intended. Bloated staffs, following bloated rules and regulations who are being paid bloated salaries and are racking up bloated pensions (that most people don't get) because they are Government employees.

SOCIALISM hasn't worked ANYWHERE it has been tried. Wealth Redistribution on the scale we'd be talking about here is pure socialism, and the founding fathers would be turning in their graves to even be hearing the debates. You have the Freedom to get health insurance and the freedom not to get health insurance. Your choice. ...and nobody is without healthcare - the emergency room can never turn you away. If you CHOOSE to make this your avenue for healthcare, you have to live with that choice.

Did you know that 85% of the households that are under the poverty line have at least 1 TV and cable? With Freedom comes choices. You live with the ones you make for yourself.

[SUMG]

The problem isn't money in the case of education, nor would it be in healthcare. It is the buracruacy that sucks up all the money and it never gets where it is intended. Bloated staffs, following bloated rules and regulations who are being paid bloated salaries and are racking up bloated pensions (that most people don't get) because they are Government employees.

To show you how bureaucracies get bloated...here's an example: In 1966, the entire Dallas Independent School District was run by 16 supervisors. By 1996....the same school district had 1500 supervisors.

[SUMG]

Things are starting off roughly for Ms. Clinton in New Hampshire:

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/01...democratic.html

[Texas Stranger]

I think the problem of video-game rating is much the opposite.....designers will consider an Adults-Only label to be carte-blanche for any content whatsoever. First-person p.orn will likely be the first new explosion (rrrock me). Are we ready for 'Hostel: The Game' ?

[UNTFan23]

I think the problem of video-game rating is much the opposite.....designers will consider an Adults-Only label to be carte-blanche for any content whatsoever. First-person p.orn will likely be the first new explosion (rrrock me). Are we ready for 'Hostel: The Game' ?

The thing about the Adult Only (AO) rating is that most development groups will do everything possible to avoid having a game come out with this rating. Why? Virtually all retailers refuse to carry AO games since they don't want to deal with the policing that comes with selling those types of games. It's all about getting your game in front of as many eyes as possible so that they can buy it.

Go search the ESRB website. You'll find 23 game (mostly PC platform) that are AO out of the thousands of games that have been made. Most of the AO games that are listed are made by development groups that I have never heard of. A lot of games that are available to buy today are either Teen (T) or Mature (M) with a good selection of Everyone (E) titles.

Where the ratings system fails is with the parents. If parents don't know (or care) what their kids are playing, then the rating system is worthless. My brother (forever eagle) worked at Best Buy and would tell me stories about parents that were buying their 9 year old M rated games. He'd try to steer them away to something more suitable, but some were convinced that that the M rated game was what they needed to get their little Tommy.

[UNTflyer]

Simple... elect me for President. As President I would implement market solutions for the health care industry.

Once in office, I will sign Executive Orders 10987, 10988, 10989, and 10990 which will do the following:

• All univeristy students seeking a degree in a medical related field (physicians, nursing, pharameutical, medical research, etc.) will receive interest-free federal student loans and an automatic grant in the amount of $2500 a year. The loans can be repaid with 3 years of full-time volunteer work, or 5 years part-time, in some type of charity hospital or free-clinic. This is to increase the number of doctors and nurses, which would drive down their fees and salaries due to competitive forces.
• I will cap all federal court lawsuits to award actual damages for malpractice suits to no more than 6 times the plantiff's annual salary, and limit "pain and suffering" to a maximum of 4 times the annual salary of the plantiff. Federal torts will also become a "loser pays" system where the loser pays all court costs and half of the other side's attorney's fees (with a cap). This will have the effect of driving down malpractice insurance premiums.
• All pharmaceutical companies will be permitted to hold their patents for a maximum of 5 years, but would be entitled to royalty fees of any generic drugs resulting from their patent release, or any equivalent drug that copies their patented formula at 98% or higher. I would also ban all pharmaceutical advertising. This would allow cheaper generic drugs to reach patients quickly and reduce the costs of new name-brand drugs.
• Hospitals receiving federal funds will once again be permitted to turn away non-emergency cases. This would prevent patients from using the emergency rooms as a doctor's office then sticking the bill to paying patients.
• All U.S. citizens would be required to contribute a minimum of 2% of their wages toward a tax-free medical savings account that never expires and can be passed down to their heirs. The effect here is obvious- tax-free dollars that can be used to pay for health care costs.

[CMJ]

This is a responsibility that the Federal Government has picked up along the way, but that doesn't make it right. The Federal Government does LOTS of things outside its Constitutional mandate. This doesn't make it right. It doesn't mean, "well, if the federal government is paying for Education, they should pay for healthcare too."

You know you must think I'm some dyed in the wool socialist based on my posts, and yet I've voted for just as many Republicans thru the years as Democrats. But you know, the Constitution was written somewhat vaguely for a reason...to change with the times. Many Founders would also be amazed that we aren't an agrarian society and most of the population resides in cities. To use your later phrasing, Jefferson would roll over in his grave on that one.

Edcuation and Healthcare are two different things, but since you brought it up - how well are our schools performing? We spend more money per student in this country than any other country does on edcuation, yet the states and federal government want to pump taxpayers for even more money to throw at education. If the Government can't get the public school system work worth a crap, what in God's name makes you think they can make the Health system work?

The USA is the only western country that doesn't have health care. Yes there are problems overseas, but we have a helluva lot of them here too. Folks that kicked out of hospitals when they can't pay, insurers that refuse pay for treatment forcing hospitals to kick people out. You later discussed how badly US schools are doing at education and blamed it on the Federal government. Fair enough. On the other hand wat about all the countries that are scoring ahead of us? Most of them are also funded thru tax dollars, not all private schools. So obviously it can be done.

[CMJ]

Simple... elect me for President. As President I would implement market solutions for the health care industry.

Once in office, I will sign Executive Orders 10987, 10988, 10989, and 10990 which will do the following:

• All univeristy students seeking a degree in a medical related field (physicians, nursing, pharameutical, medical research, etc.) will receive interest-free federal student loans and an automatic grant in the amount of $2500 a year. The loans can be repaid with 3 years of full-time volunteer work, or 5 years part-time, in some type of charity hospital or free-clinic. This is to increase the number of doctors and nurses, which would drive down their fees and salaries due to competitive forces.
• I will cap all federal court lawsuits to award actual damages for malpractice suits to no more than 6 times the plantiff's annual salary, and limit "pain and suffering" to a maximum of 4 times the annual salary of the plantiff. Federal torts will also become a "loser pays" system where the loser pays all court costs and half of the other side's attorney's fees (with a cap). This will have the effect of driving down malpractice insurance premiums.
• All pharmaceutical companies will be permitted to hold their patents for a maximum of 5 years, but would be entitled to royalty fees of any generic drugs resulting from their patent release, or any equivalent drug that copies their patented formula at 98% or higher. I would also ban all pharmaceutical advertising. This would allow cheaper generic drugs to reach patients quickly and reduce the costs of new name-brand drugs.
• Hospitals receiving federal funds will once again be permitted to turn away non-emergency cases. This would prevent patients from using the emergency rooms as a doctor's office then sticking the bill to paying patients.
• All U.S. citizens would be required to contribute a minimum of 2% of their wages toward a tax-free medical savings account that never expires and can be passed down to their heirs. The effect here is obvious- tax-free dollars that can be used to pay for health care costs.

I'd basically go for all of that. Run 3rd Party.

[UNTflyer]

Things are starting off roughly for Ms. Clinton in New Hampshire:

RASMUSSEN New Hampshire Poll: Obama 37% Clinton 27%

As a Republican, I can live with Obama becoming President. But not Shrillary. This makes me very happy.

[HoustonEagle]

Can someone explain the Hillary hate?

Don't bring up murder, suicides, money laundering, etc. Bring the facts. What makes you hate her?

I want to understand.

I was going to ask the same question. I understand if a person disagrees with her politics but why the outright hate?

As for the candidates, I am left uninspired at this point. Such is the nature of politics these days. Step out of your shell and the American voter will hand you your hat. So we are left with robots running for President and a collection of sound bites to understand them.

As for politics in general. I feel we are best served as a nation to swing on a pendulum between the two parties. Leave any one party in power for too long is asking for trouble. The Republicans have had their day in the sun, it is time for this country to swing back to the left. To this point there is little chance I will be voting Republican this year. Yet make no mistake I have voted Republican in the past and mostly likely will do so again some time in the future.

As for the candidates I think I like Obama the most up to this point. I truly hope Hillary does not win if for no other reason than to get a new name in the White House. I enjoyed the Dallas Cowboy dynasty but i don't care for political dynasties.

[UNTflyer]

The USA is the only western country that doesn't have health care.

First, we do have health care. We have the best health care in the world. Ask yourself why Canadians and Brits come to America for treatment. What we don't have is a health care industry run by the government. Let's look at Britain's system:

"It goes without saying that healthcare on the NHS isn't free. But just how unfree it is gets too little attention. We pay for it through our noses, every month. Next year's NHS budget will be about £104 billion. That's roughly £1,733 per man, woman and child. Multiplied by four for a typical two-child family, then divided by 12, that equates to median monthly family healthcare expenditure of £577, or $1,155 in American money. I can buy some very respectable US health insurance for $1,155 a month."

In France:

"It's funded through a 13.55 percent payroll tax, a 5.25 percent income tax and other taxes on tobacco, alcohol and drug-company revenues. And the system is still running a $15.6 billion deficit."

And before we beat this down any more, let's ask ourselves if there really is a problem?? The study that claims "40-50 million Americans without insurance" includes 20 million illegal aliens. Since they aren't American citizens, let's just toss that number aside. Now we have 20-30 million without insurance, but accoring to the CBO, 17 million were estimated to get insurance within 4-6 months of the survey. OK, well now we're down to 3-13 million Americans that don't have health inusrance. That's between 1 and 4% of all Americans. We have a higher percentage of Americans without cable television.

Do we really need to embrace socialized medicine, which has proven to be a failure throughout the western world, because 1 to 4% of Americans can't manage to sacrifice and get insurance?

School funding is a bit different. In order for education to be succesful, the student has to make an effort. You can throw $25 TRILLION at our education system and we'd still churn out dumb kids. Our problem with education is not funding. When private schools do a better job at half the cost, the only explanation is student effort and parental involvement.

Edited January 5, 2008 by UNTflyer

[stebo]

I'd basically go for all of that. Run 3rd Party.

Yeah, no doubt. Why can't someone run on this platform... oh yeah, he did - his name is Ron Pual.

[HoustonEagle]

Rank Country/territory Life expectancy at birth (years)

Overall Male Female

World average 67.2 65.0 69.5

1 Japan 82.6 79.0 86.1

2 Hong Kong (PRC) 82.2 79.4 85.1

3 Iceland 81.8 80.2 83.3

4 Switzerland 81.7 79.0 84.2

5 Australia 81.2 78.9 83.6

6 Spain 80.9 77.7 84.2

7 Sweden 80.9 78.7 83.0

8 Israel 80.7 78.5 82.8

9 Macau (PRC) 80.7 78.5 82.8

10 France (metropolitan) 80.7 77.1 84.1

11 Canada 80.7 78.3 82.9

12 Italy (20% above world average) 80.5 77.5 83.5

13 New Zealand 80.2 78.2 82.2

14 Norway 80.2 77.8 82.5

15 Singapore 80.0 78.0 81.9

16 Austria 79.8 76.9 82.6

17 Netherlands 79.8 77.5 81.9

18 Martinique 79.5 76.5 82.3

19 Greece 79.5 77.1 81.9

20 Belgium 79.4 76.5 82.3

21 Malta 79.4 77.3 81.3

22 United Kingdom 79.4 77.2 81.6

23 Germany 79.4 76.5 82.1

24 U.S. Virgin Islands (US) 79.4 75.5 83.3

25 Finland 79.3 76.1 82.4

26 Guadeloupe 79.2 76.0 82.2

27 Channel Islands (Jersey and Guernsey) 79.0 76.6 81.5

28 Cyprus 79.0 76.5 81.6

29 Republic of Ireland 78.9 76.5 81.3

30 Costa Rica 78.8 76.5 81.2

31 Puerto Rico (US) 78.7 74.7 82.7

32 Luxembourg 78.7 75.7 81.6

33 United Arab Emirates 78.7 77.2 81.5

34 South Korea 78.6 75.0 82.2

35 Chile 78.6 75.5 81.5

36 Denmark 78.3 76.0 80.6

37 Cuba 78.3 76.2 80.4

38 United States 78.2 75.6 80

While posting this as a comparison of health care systems is anecdotal, I do feel that it fosters thought.

We are the richest most powerful country in the world. Why do the populations of 37 countries live longer? With that being said I do not necessarily think socialized medicine is the answer. Nor do I know if we really need to find an answer. It is quite possible that our free-market system will sort this out on it's own. Continue to raise prices and eventually demand will drop. What is true for used cars, winter wheat, crude oil, etc......is true for health care. It is just sad to think of basic health care in those terms.