The Politics Thread - please direct all related posts here..

[ewingxmanstarks]

I personally think Rick Santorum is a formidable candidate...the problem is he not fresh blood, and he already lost a national election....none the less, he's a very smart and polished politician who can be dangerous to Obama in a general election...there is no clear cut candidate, and he's going to have a real chance to make his case...Newt is done, Hermaine Cain made an idiot of himself over the weekend, Ryan's too young, Daniels isn't running, Paul is a nut, Palin is a joke, Bachman is almost as bad as Palin, Bobby Jindal is too young, Christey ain't running, Romney is vulnerable (health care, and unfortunately being a Mormon hurts him too, not saying its right)...I think its between Santorum and Pawlenty...It might be real close....The general election with an incumbent is more of a referendum on the president's performance than the other candidates merit..there's still a lot that can happen between now and election day.

[yaboynyp]

I personally think Rick Santorum is a formidable candidate...the problem is he not fresh blood, and he already lost a national election....none the less, he's a very smart and polished politician who can be dangerous to Obama in a general election...there is no clear cut candidate, and he's going to have a real chance to make his case...Newt is done, Hermaine Cain made an idiot of himself over the weekend, Ryan's too young, Daniels isn't running, Paul is a nut, Palin is a joke, Bachman is almost as bad as Palin, Bobby Jindal is too young, Christey ain't running, Romney is vulnerable (health care, and unfortunately being a Mormon hurts him too, not saying its right)...I think its between Santorum and Pawlenty...It might be real close....The general election with an incumbent is more of a referendum on the president's performance than the other candidates merit..there's still a lot that can happen between now and election day.

So your saying I should go to Vegas and bet everything I own on black then!!?? Thx for the heads up!!

[HarthorneWingo]

I personally think Rick Santorum is a formidable candidate...the problem is he not fresh blood, and he already lost a national election....none the less, he's a very smart and polished politician who can be dangerous to Obama in a general election...there is no clear cut candidate, and he's going to have a real chance to make his case...Newt is done, Hermaine Cain made an idiot of himself over the weekend, Ryan's too young, Daniels isn't running, Paul is a nut, Palin is a joke, Bachman is almost as bad as Palin, Bobby Jindal is too young, Christey ain't running, Romney is vulnerable (health care, and unfortunately being a Mormon hurts him too, not saying its right)...I think its between Santorum and Pawlenty...It might be real close....The general election with an incumbent is more of a referendum on the president's performance than the other candidates merit..there's still a lot that can happen between now and election day.

Rick Santorum, "formidable"? I don't know about that. He's the Mike Huckabee replacement candidate. Santorum is way too extreme as he's aligned too closely with evangelicals and neo-cons. He was a down the line Bush/Cheney supporter. Plus, he adds nothing to the two areas which are most important to Americans these days (1) the economy/jobs; and (2) foreign policy. Rather, he's one of those "family values" guys.

I agree with you on the other possibilities.

As for Tim ... (yawn) ... Pawlen ...(yawn .... so sleepy) ty zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz (snoring) zzzzzzzzz

[cgf]

Once again for those who are really interested in a informed discussion:

List of developed countries that does not have a universal health care system:

The United States of America

List of developed countries that have a universal health care system:

All others

Do you also want to compare the quality of care? Cause socialized Medicine in Germany might be free but it sucks donkey balls, plus you have access to less quality medications that are a bitch to get. So what's your point again? Everybody else is doing a **** job with their healthcare systems to?

Quality of care? We are riding at the bottom of life expectancy in the whole developed world and middle of pack with infant mortality. The point is we are spending too much money (most in the whole world as percentage of GDP) while we can't even get everyone covered. And even those who are covered, most of the insurance is bullsh*t and does not cover anything.

Sure socialized medicine in Germany suckz balls. They are only 2 years ahead of U.S. in life expectancy (80.2 to 77.9) and only spend 11 percent of GDP as opposed to 17 percent in the U.S. LOL.

*shrug* that's much more of a result of the obesity issue and the terrible condition people let themselves get into, it's a cultural difference. If Americans didn't gorge themselves like they do and had to ride bikes instead of cars the life expectancy would quickly catch up and surpass many european nations since the actually doctors and drugs in the US are much better and more easily accessible.

[HarthorneWingo]

*shrug* that's much more of a result of the obesity issue and the terrible condition people let themselves get into, it's a cultural difference. If Americans didn't gorge themselves like they do and had to ride bikes instead of cars the life expectancy would quickly catch up and surpass many european nations since the actually doctors and drugs in the US are much better and more easily accessible.

You want us to be more like Europe?

[cgf]

*shrug* that's much more of a result of the obesity issue and the terrible condition people let themselves get into, it's a cultural difference. If Americans didn't gorge themselves like they do and had to ride bikes instead of cars the life expectancy would quickly catch up and surpass many european nations since the actually doctors and drugs in the US are much better and more easily accessible.

You want us to be more like Europe?

I'm german and have spent a good chunk of my life in Berlin so I can admit that there's a lot of good things about Europe, but there's also a lot of god awful ones that ensure I'll never move back to Germany for good. Still, better public transportation, a less obese society, lower drinking ages, more lacks approach to prostitution and the drug problem as well as a much more reserved foreign policy, are some positives of German society that would benefit the US. Although the tax/welfare system in Germany is disgusting and would cripple most countries, fortunately enough germans are **** up in the head from the world wars and the strong influence of protestantism on the society that still lingers deep in the german psyche, that it kinda works ish, still certainly not something you'd ever wish to see here in the US.

[seren]

Do you also want to compare the quality of care? Cause socialized Medicine in Germany might be free but it sucks donkey balls, plus you have access to less quality medications that are a bitch to get. So what's your point again? Everybody else is doing a **** job with their healthcare systems to?

Quality of care? We are riding at the bottom of life expectancy in the whole developed world and middle of pack with infant mortality. The point is we are spending too much money (most in the whole world as percentage of GDP) while we can't even get everyone covered. And even those who are covered, most of the insurance is bullsh*t and does not cover anything.

Sure socialized medicine in Germany suckz balls. They are only 2 years ahead of U.S. in life expectancy (80.2 to 77.9) and only spend 11 percent of GDP as opposed to 17 percent in the U.S. LOL.

*shrug* that's much more of a result of the obesity issue and the terrible condition people let themselves get into, it's a cultural difference. If Americans didn't gorge themselves like they do and had to ride bikes instead of cars the life expectancy would quickly catch up and surpass many european nations since the actually doctors and drugs in the US are much better and more easily accessible.

Right. Cultural difference. Funny that obesity and health insurance (as well as wealth and income) has very significant correlation. I guess it has to be a coincidence. LOL.

[cgf]

Glad to know that correlation = causation. I guess I'm just an **** for blaming fat people for being excessively fat. *shrug* I've lost 40 pounds from my biggest, my dad dropped 70 pounds after he had a heart attack, I understand that it's easy to put on a lot of weight, but it's your own damn fault when it happens and it's your own decisions that will determine what will happen. If people don't care about their health it doesn't make sense to hold that against the healthcare system...lemme re-phrase that, if people care more about short term gratification than their health...etc. I'm willing to chalk it up to a culture that's a little more skewered towards short term gratification, but it's certainly not because germans have **** access to **** free doctors, kinda.

[ewingxmanstarks]

^First of all life expectancy data is very easily distorted...More importantly HC is just one on the long list of things that affect life span...Second of all u making the argument that our health care would cost less if more people have access is pure and simple wrong...there also is no possible way that HC quality will get better with more ppl receiving treatment....Let's say everyone had government insurance, then more ppl would seek treatment, making it harder for doctors to provide the individual patient the necisary attention for successful treatment...Also as demand for HC increases and supply stays the same (we not growing doctors on trees) understanding of economics tells us prices go up...Universal HC is not lowering cost or increasing quality of care...At least be honest and say we're looking to dilute the quality of individuals who are using HC services and increase the over all cost associated with HC so we can create a brand new entitlement program...lmao @ the U.S. Needing to catch up to the rest of the world in HC...Institutions like Sloan Kettering and Mayo Clinic are the best in the world by far.

[mugzi]

It sounds to me like you're talking about PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY Cgf. That's a very conservative principle, be careful there youre going down a very slippery slope.

Thats the biggest problem I have with socialized medicine here in the U.S.

As usual the gov't is trying to get the productive class to subsidize those who are less so, and in this case this law tries to force people like me, who have never been to a hospital, rarely gets sick, pays taxes like only half of this country does to pay for some jabroni in Nebraska with 4 kids whose 150 lbs overweight and has diabetes because of his obesity and poor health choices.

It's crap, and I'll never do it. They can try to fine me or whatever but the 1st thing the president should do with this monstrosity of a law is give himself an enema with it.

[Pharmcat]

^First of all life expectancy data is very easily distorted...More importantly HC is just one on the long list of things that affect life span...Second of all u making the argument that our health care would cost less if more people have access is pure and simple wrong...there also is no possible way that HC quality will get better with more ppl receiving treatment....Let's say everyone had government insurance, then more ppl would seek treatment, making it harder for doctors to provide the individual patient the necisary attention for successful treatment...Also as demand for HC increases and supply stays the same (we not growing doctors on trees) understanding of economics tells us prices go up...Universal HC is not lowering cost or increasing quality of care...At least be honest and say we're looking to dilute the quality of individuals who are using HC services and increase the over all cost associated with HC so we can create a brand new entitlement program...lmao @ the U.S. Needing to catch up to the rest of the world in HC...Institutions like Sloan Kettering and Mayo Clinic are the best in the world by far.

i dont understand what you are trying to argue?

the US spends the most $, yet the outcomes lag behind compared to others...that is a bad equation and one that needs to be fixed

and the NIH *gasp govt insitution* funds a lot of research

[ewingxmanstarks]

Mugzi I'm definitely against socialized medicine, but this is a civilized society that has and should never refuse emergency treatment...We have all ways helped to pay the bill for necessary service, and as far as personal responsibility is concerned...sometimes people get sick through no fault of their own...if u want to single out obesity than I don't think that's fair and where should the line be drawn? Science has told us being obese in many cases be a genetic predisposition....If a person who choses to be obese should be accountable than what about ppl that chose to live in high risk earth quake areas? Or ppl living closer to radiation? Ppl who are obese suffer for their short comings enough as is..I don't think we should have to pay for other ppl in non essential HC, but we have always collectively protected life of all...I don't believe in taxing fat ppl, or smokers, or anyone else that doesn't fit the standard of life style that someone else sets for all of us..I work out and stay healthy for me, if others are not doing the same they are doing themselves a disservice.

[ewingxmanstarks]

Pharmcat anyone will a fundamental understanding of economics will tell u that universal HC will make prices go up...that's not an opinion its a fact....statistical data does not tell the story of quality and effectiveness of HC...again something like life expectancy data can be miss represented in this argument...First of all what's considered living? People strapped to machines brain dead? Do abortions factor in? Missing ppl? And so on, but the main thing is life expectancy is not a legitimate tracking pole for effectiveness of a HC system...Also I disagree strongly that we lag behind the world in any area of HC we provide...wether its medicine, research, or treatment...the U.S. Is the gold star standard...what European pharma company is better than Pfizer? Mayo clinic? Sloan Kattering?

[Pharmcat]

Pharmcat anyone will a fundamental understanding of economics will tell u that universal HC will make prices go up...that's not an opinion its a fact....statistical data does not tell the story of quality and effectiveness of HC...again something like life expectancy data can be miss represented in this argument...First of all what's considered living? People strapped to machines brain dead? Do abortions factor in? Missing ppl? And so on, but the main thing is life expectancy is not a legitimate tracking pole for effectiveness of a HC system...Also I disagree strongly that we lag behind the world in any area of HC we provide...wether its medicine, research, or treatment...the U.S. Is the gold star standard...what European pharma company is better than Pfizer? Mayo clinic? Sloan Kattering?

i dont understand what individual institutions have anything to do with it....there are great facilities all around the world....of course its great to have gold facilities, but whats the point if people cant even afford treatment there?

i mean US is 33 in infant mortality rate, that is just shocking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... ality_rate

[ewingxmanstarks]

Again the infant mortality rate does not determine the effectiveness of our HC system...Our Medical institutions are a by product of our HC system...The fact is access to our medical institutions garner more demand world wide than the rest....When u talk about right and wrong and moral obligation that's where u can make an argument...I don't agree with it, but its an argument....Just don't tell me the government is going to make it cheaper, better, and more plentiful...that's not a rational argument...

[Pharmcat]

Again the infant mortality rate does not determine the effectiveness of our HC system...Our Medical institutions are a by product of our HC system...The fact is access to our medical institutions garner more demand world wide than the rest....When u talk about right and wrong and moral obligation that's where u can make an argument...I don't agree with it, but its an argument....Just don't tell me the government is going to make it cheaper, better, and more plentiful...that's not a rational argument...

LOL huh? the terrible rate is an reflection on the current (flawed) system that is in play

US spends so much, yet the outcomes are terrible compared to others

[ewingxmanstarks]

God forbid u had an infant with a problem, and u had to rely on any other alternative countries for their treatment....Ur so concerned with winning an argument u keep using the same talking points and data which does not speak to the truth....For instance forget Obama care, explain how in theory does universal HC lower cost??

[seren]

Glad to know that correlation = causation. I guess I'm just an **** for blaming fat people for being excessively fat. *shrug* I've lost 40 pounds from my biggest, my dad dropped 70 pounds after he had a heart attack, I understand that it's easy to put on a lot of weight, but it's your own damn fault when it happens and it's your own decisions that will determine what will happen. If people don't care about their health it doesn't make sense to hold that against the healthcare system...lemme re-phrase that, if people care more about short term gratification than their health...etc. I'm willing to chalk it up to a culture that's a little more skewered towards short term gratification, but it's certainly not because germans have **** access to **** free doctors, kinda.

Right. Right. I understand your german highnosedness calling Americans idiots. What you simply fail to understand is we are a product of our surroundings.

What personal responsibility are you talking about when 10 percent of children have no health insurance, when asthma, child obesity and type 2 diabetes are all through the roof while it is simply impossible to afford any kind of health care for 15 percent of the population? Yesterday my 15 month old son had his monthly doctor visit where we got the tips for what to feed him, how to interact with him etc. I guess it was his personal choice to go see the doctor instead of stuffing himself with candy. Or because some other parents simply do not do what I did because they hate their children. Of course not. I can do it because I can afford insurance for my son. I can do it because I can ask my employer for a day off to take him there. I know what to feed him right because a) I can get the information, b) I have the time and the means to get healthy food for him.

[seren]

God forbid u had an infant with a problem, and u had to rely on any other alternative countries for their treatment....Ur so concerned with winning an argument u keep using the same talking points and data which does not speak to the truth....For instance forget Obama care, explain how in theory does universal HC lower cost??

As in all the countries with UHC in the world spend less on health care?

[Nutty Nats Fan]

God forbid u had an infant with a problem, and u had to rely on any other alternative countries for their treatment....

Hey! If you don't have health care, you'd at least have an alternative if your infant had a problem. In the US it is either let infant die (if it could be fatal) or be in debt the rest of your life if you don't have health care insurance.

Yeah, god forbid that.

People are just ignorant or / and brain washed when they think a system that ruins people financially when they have a medical emergency out of their control is a good thing.

Don't like the way other countries do it? Improve upon it. Or does the GOP think so little of the US, that they think the US couldn't take something another country does and do it better?