9:37 Home from bowling. Heard some of the debate on the radio. Nothing was being said that was substantially different from what I’ve heard before.
9:39 Kerry is looking right into camera. Is it that someone told him to do so, is the moderator just sitting in front of the camera?
9:40 My God, I’ve never seen Bush’s smirk more pronounced.
9:42 Any Canadians out there with opinions on whether government controlled health care results in poor quality?
9:46 Wait…is that what Bush said? The way that Kerry put it? Did Bush actually say that young people should be able to take money out of SS and put it into accounts? I thought he was just talking about putting money into savings.
9:48 I find that a bit hard to believe, that that tax cut alone would have kept SS going until 2075.
9:52 Okay, seriously. Did Bush have, y’know, a minor stroke on the left hand side of his face? I mean, the sneer is starting to distract me.
9:53 This is the first question to Bush that he hasn’t used to attack Kerry.
9:53: Whoops. Spoke too soon. Got in a shot under the wire.
9:57 That’s an interesting promise, that Kerry will bring the minimum wage up to over $7 an hour. Kerry’s also using the opportunity to target women.
9:58 AW, COME ON. Bush veered jobs over into education, and now he’s veering minimum wage into education? Jesus.
10:00 Holy crap. Two boldly dodged questions by Bush.
10:02 I mean, I hope American women were paying attention to that. Bush’s out and out dodging of the question was not only pathetic, but it really made clear that, hëll yeah, he would want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.
10:04 What the hëll is Bush blinking so much for?
10:07 No, Kerry did NOT talk about a global test in respect to getting permission from other countries to defend himself. Does Bush NEVEr get tired of exaggerating it? Thank God Kerry is meeting that one head on.
10:09 Oh, come on. Bush heard that there wasn’t support for the Assault weapons ban (which I doubt) and therefore decided not to bother to push for it? As if he hasn’t failed to put the full court press to those things that he really DOES believe in.
10:14 I’m not sure if Bush met with the Black Congressional Caucus or not, but he sure as heck didn’t meet with the other organizations Kerry mentioned.
10:17 Jeez, I wish Kerry would find another word to use other than “respect” when it comes to matters of religion.
10:18 Now KERRY swings a question over to education? Oooookay.
10:22 The point isn’t that the country was divided in 2000. The point is that the country was united in 2001 and now is split once again, even worse than before.
10:24 what a powder puff question for the last question in the debate.
10:26 Idear? IDEAR? Kerry can say “nuclear,” but he can’t say “idea?”
10:29 I like the notion that Bush is optimistic. Unfortunately, it doesn’t jibe with many of his speeches that hit again and again sentiments of fear and terror.
I thought Bush’s closing speech was better, but overall Kerry just flat out performed better. I think Bush really hurt himself when he dodged several questions in a row. And I’ll tell you, I was dubious about the whole Bush-listening device thing, but there were moments when it really did look like Bush was listening to someone else talking…Ah well. I dunno.
• 
Craig wrote:
“Unless I’m mistaken, even officials in this Administration have said we’re stretched thin. So, it’s easy to see why they’re all but pressing “retired” soldiers back into service, making threats against others to reenlist, etc.”
From my point of view, either Kerry knows less about the military than I do, or he is just saying this stuff to be a fear-monger and grab votes.
The “stop-loss” program is nothing new, and was utilized a number of times during the 20 years I was in the military — most notably (but NOT most recently) during Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
The recent call-up of inactive reservists (which is only a tiny, tiny percentage of the total military force) is only unusual if you look at it from a recent historical point of view. I know for sure it was done in large numbers during the Korean War (and even afterwards in the 1950s), but I don’t have data regarding its use at other times.
As far as extending someone’s enlistment involuntarily so they can finish out a deployment or assignment, in 1997, I had to involuntarily extend nearly four months to take an involuntary assignment to Korea. Every service person knows that the needs of the military comes first regarding mission requirements.
Also, why would you need a draft when the services are meeting most of their recruiting goals? Sure there are shortages in certain specialties, requiring cross-training and force shaping, but this is again a normal ops in the military.
For example, in the early 1980s, the Air Force had a hëll of a time holding on to skilled electronics technicians. High-paying civilian electronics jobs were booming, and military people had not yet started reaping the pay increases of the Reagan years. Techs were getting out in droves — many after just their first enlistment. When bonuses didn’t work, the Air Force was forced to retrain people from other specialties that had overages, and they also began recruiting many more people into the shortage career fields to help offset the slack. But while all the new people were getting trained (with tech school and OJT, it may take two years to “build” a fairly experienced electronics technician), the units out in the field had to deal with a shortage of experienced people in certain areas — just like the Army is doing now. And to adjust to these unexpected shortages takes TIME.
Many people may not know it, but right now the Air Force has a SURPLUS of 20,000 people it will have to cull down in the next few years. The Army has thus implemented a “from blue to green” program to tap into this new pool of experienced military people.
During my time in the military, personnel people had to regularly deal with shortages of personnel and excesses of personnel. It goes with the territory.
All this is why I think Kerry is politicizing and mischaracterizing the military’s current personnel situation, and why I find his alarmist negativity a huge turn-off.
Fred, I’d posted that because there seemed to be a fair number of people who thought you were referring to prayer as a schizophrenic symptom – which it can be, but only if you believe that your prayers control God’s actions, making you His superior…
Personally, I don’t think Bush is exhibiting schizoprenic symptoms per se, although sometimes I wonder if he’s not just a touch hebephrenic. Ashcroft, on the other hand, seems to be showing many of the signs of paranoid schizophrenia, with a comorbid sexual obsession. (Cheney’s just a garden-variety megalomaniac – not uncommon in politics, as far as I can tell…)
Roger, It was sleazy becasue you just don’t bring up the other guys Family. It seems to be an unwritten rule.
How about the other campaign’s director of vice-presidential operations? Okay to talk about them? I don’t think it was the best move for Kerry to bring it up but as far as it being fair game I think the talking heads are off base.
Mary Cheney is a member of the Vice President’s immediate family and the administration is pursuing a constitutional change that would prevent her from marrying her partner of eight years if she so desired. Further, they are doing it in conflict with their party’s common stance of pro-States rights. I don’t understand how anyone can think that’s not a valid character issue to talk about.
MC is a person in the public eye and was in the news and commentaries long before Kerry mentioned her. You can use Google’s news search and limit to articles from September and find a whole slew. http://news.google.com/news?svnum=10&as_scoring=r&hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=Mary+Cheney&btnG=Search+News&as_drrb=b&as_minm=9&as_mind=1&as_maxm=9&as_maxd=31
Craig,
The “person who brought up” a draft and then didn’t vote for it was Charlie Rangel, a harlem Democrat, and an unabashed liberal.
Notwithstanding the vote against his own bill clearly shows he did not take the legislation seriously this time around and that it was done largely to get the media and politicians scaring people about the possibility of bringing a draft back.
The funny thing is, and I know your hatred of Bush and the republicans in general is so maniacal at this point that you will never believe it, but it is members of Congress that are extreme liberals and/or members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who feel that a draft is the only “just” way to replenish our armed forces and stop the “disproportionate” numbers of the poor and minorities in the ranks as currently constituted (when, in fact, the opposite is true).
The fact is that it is extremely unlikely – as close as you can get to guaranteed – that there will not be a reinstatement of the draft. I mean, really, if the administration you hate so much really wanted to, don’t you think they would have done so, say, a week or two right after 9/11 (about the only time it may have been politically possible to do so)?
The armed forces don’t want it. They would rather have people who want to be there and that they are able to train.Bush doesn’t want it. Cheney doesn’t want it. Rumsfeld doesn’t want it. And, right now, it would never pass.
But continue to think the worst of this Administration, no matter how illogical the argument or how removed from reality it is and continue to support trying to scare the American people with false allegations.
You should be very proud.
You should be very proud.
Oh bull šhìŧ.
It’s your man, Cheney, who said that electing Kerry will lead to another 9/11.
It’s amazing that Cheney hasn’t given himself another heart attack with the fear tactics he employs.
“People need to watch what they say.” That’s a pretty accurate paraphase that, no surprise, came from a Republican spokesman post-9/11.
And I need to be proud?
Illogic and lack of reality don’t compare to ignorance and stupidity, of which this Administration has shown plenty.
It was sleazy becasue you just don’t bring up the other guys Family. It seems to be an unwritten rule.
Well, that’s the part I simply don’t understand. I MIGHT understand when you’re in attack mode, but this is pretty clearly not an attack. You certainly bring up the family if there’s policy involved that appears to benefit family members througn nepotism…but are folks saying that you can never mention family members?
I don’t know if this is the reasoning behind Kerry’s claims that Bush’s strategy will require a new draft. Here’s my thought as to why:
Kerry is talking about re-building a treu coalition, which would at some point increase the number of non-American troops based in Iraq. Bush plans to continue to ignore the rest of the world, and use mainly American troops. Oh, and Polish troops. Um, well, at least for a few more months, anyway.
So, if things stay as they are today, neiter candidate is likely to require a draft to continue operations in Iraq. While one poster suggested that recruiting goals are being met, I’ve read in a few places that the only reason those goals are being met is because the goals have been lowered. We’re cutting down on the size of our military in all facets (BRAC, the Stryker, I’ve even seen a plan of the Navy’s to retire it’s current fleet of destroyers and replace them with a fleet/crew 1/3 our current size).
But that’s if things stay the same, where we lose 1-5 US soldiers a day in service in Iraq. What happens if, God forbid, some insurgents do manage to attain and deploy a WMD, even a small one? Suddenly we’re lost 100 or maybe 1000 troops, not in a single DAY, but in a single EVENT. At that rate, and American only or mostly-American force cannot be sustained by a volunteer force, and the pressure on the government to instate a draft will substantially increase.
Those same pressures will exist if Kerry is elected and successful in infusing non-American troops, but the casualty burden will be spread across the coalition.
And for those who would say “I’m sure Bush and his folks have accounted for that,” consider this. Bush has stated on several occasions that one of the reasons why we’re continuing to experience resistance in Iraq is because our initial attack was “too successful.” He’s stated that we “conquered” (his very word) Iraq so fast that many of the leaders loyal to Saddam were able to slink away into the night, only to regroup and lead a guerilla resistance against us. In fact, recent evidence indicates that this was the Iraqi plan all along, knowing that they could never withstand using “conventional” military tactics.
So, what Bush is saying, is that because the Iraqi’s didn’t stand against us in a normal war, which by implication Bush is saying he expected them to do, we were unable to accomplish the goal of eliminating their command structure. He didn’t consider that the Iraqi generals might actually be smart enough to know that they’d never win in a “fair fight.”
Bush has been wrong about this from the start. Don’t let anyone kid you about him being wrong about it in the future. Kerry may be overstating the likelihood of a draft under Bush, but it IS a very real possibilty.
“People need to watch what they say.” That’s a pretty accurate paraphase that, no surprise, came from a Republican spokesman post-9/11.”
The statement in question, which is usually said to refer just to Bill Maher’s comments on US troops being cowards, was also referring to a congressman who had made racial comments about Arabs.
Just an FYI for those who care.
as for the rest…Jerome seems to have made some good points, since they go unchallenged.
Jerome seems to have made some good points, since they go unchallenged.
Apparently the rest of us have made good points as well, since many of them go unchallenged.
You guys can say all you want that a draft is out of the realm of possibility. I’m sure Bush thought it was out of the realm of possibility that Saddam didn’t have WMD either.
Will somebody PLEASE remove this dûmbášš from office?
Campaigning in an area heavily dependent on the military, Bush said, “We will not have an all-volunteer army” before correcting himself. “Let me restate that,” he continued. “We will not have a draft … . The best way to avoid a draft is to vote for me.”
Been off for a while, and I’m back. So….
Healthcare: 2 observations:
#1. Peter, you might remember years ago when I was talking with you about Isaac’s birth and we were comparing notes. I think it was just after Shana was born, (or am I getting confused about which of you kids?…..the years melt together). Anyways to referesh you and let everyone else know:
Isaac was 10 weeks early and weighed in at about 3 lbs. 2 oz., and had among other stuff going against him a blood-brain bleed, as well as Hyalin Membrane syndrome and lots of other stuff like that. He spent the time from July 13 to September 5, 1984 in the hospital, a good portion of which was in the ICN. Now in case folks aren’t aware of it, hospitals are the most expensive hotels you can book, at an average MINIMUM of about $1200 per night. So…do the math. That was 55 days, plus the initial delivery procedure (I assisted if you recall), as well as all the tests and auxiliary treatments and medications. Cost to us: 0. Zip. Nada. I remember how you mentioned that your birthing procedure alone set you back $3500 or so.
Isaac is a great guy, just turned 20 this July.
#2. My mother (z”l) passed away November 2, 1996 after “a lengthy illness”. Actually she had liver cancerand almost became a statistic because it’s rare that anyone with that ailment can survive more than a few months, let alone the almost 18 months that she lasted with it. We suspect it was the result of a procedure that earlier removed a tumour in her large bowel, where we think a cell or two might have gotten away and taken up residence in the liver. Anyways, she was in the hospital for a good month before her passing and received the finest of care. Again, do the math. Cost to us or her estate: 0. Zip. Gournisht.
Now, it’s true that there are problems, and that there are waiting lists. These lists are being pared down every day. Things are improving, but I can honestly say from some very direct experiences that the system largely works and works well.
The draft: Read my lips folks (or rather imagine them if you will): If Bush gets re-elected I can guarantee you that you’ll have one within 6 to 8 months. You heard it here first.
Joe Krolik wrote:
“The draft: Read my lips folks (or rather imagine them if you will): If Bush gets re-elected I can guarantee you that you’ll have one within 6 to 8 months. You heard it here first.”
Thanks for contributing to the fear mongering.
One thing to keep in mind about hospital costs is that a lot of this is smoke and mirrors.
Example–my coworker had a hysterectomy a month ago. She gets the bill. $36,000, Like, Yow!
But….blue cross just writes off $32,000 right off the bat. just tells the hospital “You ain’t getting it.” And the hospital just bends over and takes it.
Now if she were uninsured they would bill her the full amount. And she would not pay it. So the hospital would eat the cost, again.
The end result is that, on paper at least, the hospital loses millions of dollars every year, if you look at services rendered vs income generated but somehow they manage to stay open. It all seems like some kind of shell game to me.
The ones I feel bad for are the doctors in private business like my ex-wife who had to ditch her business and go work for a hospital. On paper she was making big bucks but in reality the insurance company would just pay whatever they wanted and the poor people just wouldn’t pay at all.
Not a great system but despite having a merely moderately paying job I can be certain that myself and my family are covered reasonably well. I’m going to want some airtight guarantees before taking a leap into a new system.
“Okay, I work at Wal-Mart, so believe me, I know what its like to deal with low wages. That being said, I DO NOT want the minimum wage raised. Why? Where do you think companies are going to get the extra revenue to pay for it? Are they just going to pay the extra money and not worry about it? No, they’re going to raise the prices of their merchandise. And that helps people a lot…right?”
Actually, it would. Because, look at it this way. The prices at places where paying wages (such as, yes, Wal-Mart) are kept low because they’re not paying their employees (i.e. YOU) good wages.
So, the wages go UP, and they can respond in one of two ways: increase prices, or let their profit margin take a ding.
MEANWHILE, your purchasing power at real businesses, where the costs are location, equipment and merchandise goes up because you have more money.
Not a great system but despite having a merely moderately paying job I can be certain that myself and my family are covered reasonably well. I’m going to want some airtight guarantees before taking a leap into a new system.
Heh. A point I ENTIRELY understand.
“Been off for a while, and I’m back. So….
Healthcare: 2 observations:
#1. Peter, you might remember years ago when I was talking with you about Isaac’s birth and we were comparing notes.”
I was actually thinking of you, Joe, when I asked about Canadians and their opinions on the matter. I remember it very well. You and I had gone to a hockey game, and seconds before the first puck was thrown out (or whatever you’d call it) you got paged because your son was in the hospital, and we hadda book out of there. And I remember you telling me all the health problems he’d had, and how if you were under the American healthcare system, you’d practically be broke. Instead, not a cent had it cost you. No deductibles. No instances where the hospital did a $1000 procedure, insurance would only cover $500, and you had to pay the difference. It was 100% covered. I was in awe of the simplicity of it.
PAD
Not a great system but despite having a merely moderately paying job I can be certain that myself and my family are covered reasonably well. I’m going to want some airtight guarantees before taking a leap into a new system.
That’s all well and good, but why is health care in our country tied to employment? What about the people who don’t have work or are working only part time? And do you know how much your employer is picking up? My husbands work covers the first $892.00 per month. Depending on the plans offered we get to pay the rest. (of course we have an alternative and do not need his works plan, since we get military retirements Tricare at $460.00 per year) Why can’t there be a plan that can cover everyone for $460.00 per year? Both figures are for a family, not an individual. And each insurance has doctors you can select from, but no insurance allows you to go to the doctor of your choice. The doctor must be chosen from the list of those who accept your particular insurance. So, you want to keep waht you have instead of fixing the mess that the greedy insuarance companies have made of our system? Why?
“Not a great system but despite having a merely moderately paying job I can be certain that myself and my family are covered reasonably well. I’m going to want some airtight guarantees before taking a leap into a new system.”
What does “reasonably well” mean? I sincerely hope this never ever happens, but what if someone important you gets seriously ill? How would you feel if the treatment for this person was simply more then you could afford?
Would going into severe debt or bankruptcy because it is the only alternative, sit well with you?
What about discovering that there may be better treatments or hospital care available, as long as you are in the upper-most income bracket?
I could never live with the idea that if only I had more money, better care and treatment would have been the result.
What if you lose your job? How well do you trust your insurance company? How many “air tight” guarantees doe you actually have now?
“I could never live with the idea that if only I had more money, better care and treatment would have been the result.”
So you aren’t an American? Or at least not a living one?
Becuae in American medicine, if you’ve got the money, you’ve got better care. That’s the way it works in America. Actually, that’s the way it works anywhere, if you can afford it, you can buy better treatment. May not be able to buy a cure, but the more money you have to spend, the better the care you can get. Simple fact of life there.
“So, you want to keep waht you have instead of fixing the mess that the greedy insuarance companies have made of our system? Why?”
Actually, what I said was “I’m going to want some airtight guarantees before taking a leap into a new system.”
I’m a firm believer of the idea that things actually CAN be made worse.
Again, a simple solution–let’s have a state or a few state try something new. If the improvements in health care are as good as people say they can be I’m sure people will flock to that state and the others will have to follow. If the state goes broke or raises taxes so high that people flee then I guess the added benefits aren’t worth it.
“I could never live with the idea that if only I had more money, better care and treatment would have been the result.”
Where is this not the case? Even some canadians have talked about how some of their countymen have traveled to other countries for treatment.Obviously, this is not an option for the poor.
If you have enough money you can hire your own personal doctor to follow you around. One of the benefits of having a lot of money, I guess.
So, the wages go UP, and they can respond in one of two ways: increase prices, or let their profit margin take a ding.
MEANWHILE, your purchasing power at real businesses, where the costs are location, equipment and merchandise goes up because you have more money.
Your arguement highlighted exactly why raising the minimum wage would be wrong. Unless I am reading it wrong.
Fred wrote: Again, my point in saying this wasn’t at all about the fact that he prays. It is with the implications of his words. His statement iplies “magical thinking”, which is one of the criteria for schizophrenia. Do I honestly think he has this? Nope, but it is dangerous thinking nonetheless.
Statements like this continue to reveal a belief that there is no “supernatural” realm. If it is ok for Bush to pray, why is it out of the realm of possibility for him to “feel” when people pray for him? Can it be proven? Of course not. Do you have to believe it? No. But it is patronizing to be told that “it is ok for you to say some empty words of prayer just so long as you don’t really believe they make a difference” (which is what some of you really seem to be saying in your comments about Bush and prayer).
Jim in Iowa
Fred wrote: Again, my point in saying this wasn’t at all about the fact that he prays. It is with the implications of his words. His statement iplies “magical thinking”, which is one of the criteria for schizophrenia. Do I honestly think he has this? Nope, but it is dangerous thinking nonetheless.
>Statements like this continue to reveal a belief that there is no “supernatural” realm. If it is ok for Bush to pray, why is it out of the realm of possibility for him to “feel” when people pray for him? Can it be proven? Of course not. Do you have to believe it? No. But it is patronizing to be told that “it is ok for you to say some empty words of prayer just so long as you don’t really believe they make a difference” (which is what some of you really seem to be saying in your comments about Bush and prayer).
>Jim in Iowa
The rest of that post explained why it is dangerous thinking. His “feeling” is used as justification for his behaviors and decisions, while his lack of “feeling” about dissenters’ prayers goes unaddressed.
I don’t claim to know or believe whether there is a supernatural world or not. Never been proven one way or the other to me, but I do know that your response doesn’t accurately reflect my statement.
Fred
Christina wrote:
>I know a family that live in Italy, which has a
> government controlled health care system. They had
> their first child there and they hated it so much
> that they came to the States for the birth of
> their second child. They also come here if they
> need serious medical attention.
I live in Italy and know how the italian health
care system works.
Usually when i hear people saying such things
about our health care system i can bet they are:
1) filthy rich;
2) snob and a little stupid.
I say they are filthy rich and quite dumb
because they think it’s better to fly oversea
and pay for everything instead of looking
around; there are private clinics
in Italy and in the countries nearby (i.e. Swiss)
at the same level of the best clinics in USA.
Even if you don’t have much money if you
are italian you can *choose* the public hospital
you want to go to.
If you know an hospital is understaffed or
overcrowded you can choose another
(sometimes it happen, funding is
from national, regional and provincial healt
care administration, but the hospital
administrators are local, it can make a
difference in the level of service).
I won’t go deeper about the local differences
(i’m from northen Italy, southern Italy
has more problems with corrupt burocrats
and other vultures like that) but if
you look around you will find public hospitals
with very skilled doctors and top level
service overall (both in northen
and southern Italy).
The best thing is, when you are ill you don’t
have to worry about money, of fight with your
insurance to get the cure you need and not
the cure they will pay for, you just have
to worry about your health.
It’s not all roses and flowers but IMHO
it works well compared to other alternatives.
The rest of that post explained why it is dangerous thinking. His “feeling” is used as justification for his behaviors and decisions, while his lack of “feeling” about dissenters’ prayers goes unaddressed.
Fred,
I apologize if I misunderstood what you meant.
Let me put it this way:
If the supernatural is similar to classic “pagan” religions with multiple gods, etc., your point is valid. Why does Bush feel one side and not another.
If the supernatural is closer to the “Christian” world view where there is one supreme “God” who is not a “genie in the bottle” but a supreme person, then what Bush said makes sense.
You don’t have to agree with Bush that he can “feel” prayers, but it fits his worldview that he would not feel opposing prayers.
Ultimately, I would suggest Bush does not just pray and then act based on a vague feeling. Bush’s actions are rooted in some deep religious convictions based on his understanding of the Bible. When he referenced prayer, it was in two regards. First, he is not so arrogant that he things his interpretation of the Bible is correct. He prays about it and takes things before God. Second, his subjective feelings he referenced were people bringing him before God asking for him to have wisdom, safety, success, etc. Both understandings are the classical Christian belief about prayer and how it works.
Jim in Iowa
Jim:
>If the supernatural is closer to the “Christian” world view where there is one supreme “God” who is not a “genie in the bottle” but a supreme person, then what Bush said makes sense.
Makes sense, but still scares the hëll out of me. Guess that’s one way to save me. 😉
>You don’t have to agree with Bush that he can “feel” prayers, but it fits his worldview that he would not feel opposing prayers.
Opposing prayers by millions of people who practice the same religion as him. It fits his worldview, but my original point was that his worldview is small-minded and dangerous.
Practice all one wants. I’ve known some wonderful people of faith. The most wonderful were those who did not ascribe to the belief that they were the absolute moral leaders of the world and all those who disagreed were casually and quickly dismissed. This, imo, is where Bush has hurt himself and our country the most. This dismissal of others, whether world leaders, entire nations or individual voters and citizens of the U.S., will be the reason that Bush loses, if he does.
Fred
“So you aren’t an American? Or at least not a living one?
Because in American medicine, if you’ve got the money, you’ve got better care. That’s the way it works in America. Actually, that’s the way it works anywhere, if you can afford it, you can buy better treatment.”
Me: Proud Canadian, all the way (with American family). While wealth = better health care in the US, that is not the way it works “anywhere”.
Under our system the wealthy can not buy better treatment or jump to the head of the line. If they choose to go elsewhere to have the same treatment so be it, but the question is, is the same treatment, paid out of your own pocket better?
If a person needs a potentially life-saving treatment that is only available is the US for example, the Government picks up the tab. However for someone who decides to get knee surgery in the US as opposed to waiting up here, then they are on their own.
What I don’t understand is how people can feel comfortable trusting an insurance company, which will look for every opportunity not to pay for care, and will always chose the cheapest option as opposed to the best option, when it comes to matters as important as health care.
I bet everyone on this board has some true tale of terror involving an insurance company.
(mine: my best friends’ father paid extremely high premiums for his life insurance because of his poor health. He wanted the insurance to pay off his mortgage so his son’s family could have his house once he passed.
He paid these premiums for 11 years. When he died 2 years ago the insurance company did not pay out 1 cent because the father (Charles) had signed the wrong line on the policy because of his deteriorating eyesight.
The insurance company accepted his money every month for 11 years but provided him with no coverage. I urged my friend to sue, but they did not have the money to cover the mortgage let alone hire a lawyer)
I know the mantra is the States is “anything Government run is run poorly and a private enterprise re: big business could run it better/more efficiently” but that is just very effective rhetoric for a political party when it serves their needs.
The US military is Government run and is very impressive, Homeland security is important enough that the government handles it, and health care for every American citizen should be considered just as important in my opinion.
“Windsor” Tunnel vision, eh Marc?
“Under our system the wealthy can not buy better treatment or jump to the head of the line. If they choose to go elsewhere to have the same treatment so be it, but the question is, is the same treatment, paid out of your own pocket better?”
Sure they can jump to the head of the line, they just leave Canada and come to the US for treatment.
The government won’t provide health care in the US because the same corporations that run the Insurance companies buy and pay for the politicains and they propose and kill whatever legislation works out best for them.
In America, if you don’t have health insurance, you dámņ well better be rich. Just walking in the door of the hospital can wipe out your life savings.
It’s not that Americans prefer insurance companies, it’s just we have no alternative.
Time to salvage the Iraq mess and health care by taking over Iraq permanently and using the oil of the country to fund universal health care for all Americans…
I make less than the poverty level for the San Diego metropolitan area ($26,000/yr, in case you’re interested). My wife is considered permanently disabled, due to severe depression, anxiety disorder, and PTSD. I can’t afford the insurance offered where I work – thankfully, we’re poor enough to qualify for Medicare. Right now, she’s in UCSD Hospital with an extremely bad double infection of one kidney (E. coli and something else – didn’t catch), which is complicated by her diabetes (and I’m becoming amazed by how few people know what happens when bacteria hit a sugar-rich medium, like a diabetic’s bloodstream). She’s getting excellent care, undimmed by the fact that the hospital’s going to have to reclaim all their costs from the state. (On the other hand, since I don’t have any disabilities, my Medicare coverage comes with a $1200 deductible. I try very hard not to get sick.)
Jonathan, let me say right off that I hope things get better for you and your wife, I know a little of what it is like to have a loved one with some serious medical issues.
Bladestar: I liked the “Windsor tunnel vision” line :).
Irony: I’ve been all through the states several times but I haven’t traveled to Windsor.
I don’t know if it’s a matter of semantics or not, but if person leaves their own country to get health care, then they aren’t jumping the line at least in their country of origin. (maybe that’s just how I rationalize it, who knows?)
I think I may have misunderstood the thought process concerning The U.S.-style health care system. I was under the impression that Americans don’t want a Government paid-for system.
If it is really a case of being at the mercy of the insurance corporations’ wishes then it would appear to be a hopeless situation.
All I know is that you shouldn’t let anyone tell you that a paid-for-by-taxes health care system can’t/doesn’t work, that it is an evil communist idea, that it means your taxes would sky rocket.
(placing the starting threshold of middle-class income at $30 K / year/ person, my wife and I do quite well and are significantly above that threshold and we both get tax refunds every year)
There are more countries then just mine that use this type of system quite well, and The U.S. of A. has quite a proven track record for being innovators, I’m sure they could make it work
The idea of using Iraq’s oil to finance the U.S. health care would at least be more honest then what is going on now. 🙂
It’s sort of an interesting thing to see one poster say that at $26,000/yr they are making “less than the poverty level” while the very next posetr says they are doing quite well at the “middle class” income of $30,000/yr.
One of the resons I get nervous when someone proposes to “tax the rich” is that “rich” is a very subjective term. By what standards? Even someone at the poverty level here is quite possibly in the top 1% of the worldwide standard. (as I like to tell my students on the first day, just by going to college they are instantly in the top 1% of the educationally elite).
Peter wrote:
” You and I had gone to a hockey game, and seconds before the first puck was thrown out (or whatever you’d call it) you got paged because your son was in the hospital, and we hadda book out of there. And I remember you telling me all the health problems he’d had, and how if you were under the American healthcare system, you’d practically be broke.”
Actually, it was the Rangers-Jets game if you recall and we had just sat down behind the Jets bench when my name came over the P.A. (I thought I had won something….darn it!). So off we tore to the arena office and subsequently to the van outside wherein you got to endure a healthy dose of my emergency driving capability (honed on the streets of Manhattan!), causing many white knuckles and a certain pasty color and consistency to the rest of your body, but we made it across town in about seven minutes give or take and you managed to hold down your dinner.
Seriously though, I didn’t mention the part about Isaac having eight subsequent operations to do a shunt and the complications that this involved. All costing us nothing. He hasn’t needed the shunt for years and it’s been absorbed, but we used to joke that if he didn’t get a cold by the time he was 35, he’d be just breaking even! Well guess what? Since those days, Isaac has been ill exactly one time that I can remember, and that was for one night. I think it was something he ate. This guy just does NOT get sick. Period. It’s very bizarre, but I wish we could find out what it is and patent it. That’s fifteen years of illness-free living.
And of course ot be banal about things, the real disappointment that night was not being able to sing both national anthems at the tops of our lungs. We will get that opportunity at a later date. just you watch!
Marc: I think I may have misunderstood the thought process concerning The U.S.-style health care system. I was under the impression that Americans don’t want a Government paid-for system.
If it is really a case of being at the mercy of the insurance corporations’ wishes then it would appear to be a hopeless situation.
Some of us would much rather have health care be a government benefit for all than be at the mercy of the insurance companies. People here are so worried that they won’t be able to pick their doctor or that if the government gets a hold of healthcare it will be inefficient. Never mind that the insurance companies now dictate to your doctor what care you are allowed. Never mind about all the money that goes for administrative costs to keep the insurance companies going, instead of lowering medical costs. Politicians who get nice fat contributions to their campaigns (and probably other perks we aren’t privy to) use scare tactics to keep Americans from demanding what most other civilized countries have.
Bill: It’s sort of an interesting thing to see one poster say that at $26,000/yr they are making “less than the poverty level” while the very next posetr says they are doing quite well at the “middle class” income of $30,000/yr.
I lived in the panhandle of Florida for 10 years. I bought my home for $72,000 and sold it for $86,000. My property taxes on a third of an acre were about $600.00 per year. I now live in Washington state. I bought a comparable home to the one I had in Florida for $180,000, and my property taxes on our postage stamp sized yard is over $2000.00 per year. The cost of living in the south is very low, and as you can see by the value of the home I sold for only $14,000 more after 10 years, the cost does not rise too fast. My home here has gone up in value over $20,000 in only 3 years. So I can see how someone making $30,000 in one part of the country could be comfortable and someone in San Diego could be have financial difficulty. California’s cost of living is outrageous.
Sorry, the italics should have been off after “well at the “middle class” income of $30,000/yr.”
Bill Mulligan: “It’s sort of an interesting thing to see one poster say that at $26,000/yr they are making “less than the poverty level” while the very next poster says they are doing quite well at the “middle class” income of $30,000/yr.”
Actually I CLEARLY stated a per/person income of $30K/year was the just the STARTING threshold of middle class income. If your students followed along with your lectures/instructions this poorly how would you grade them?
To make it clearer: think of the middle class income level as ranging from the bottom $30k/individual to $70-$75K per individual.
I also stated that my wife and I both on an individual basis earn significantly above that $30K-each threshold.
While obviously no one is going to fully state their annual income, I will try to clarify that my wife and I would both be closer the higher end of the middle-class range I mentioned, then the lower end.
If the other poster meant that he and his wife’s combined income was around $26 K then I think most would consider that low income.
This uneasiness about taxing the wealthy is just a smoke screen. It would be easy to pick a number and say anyone earning this much swag is definitely doing better then most people in the country. Example: any one earning in the top 2% should count.
Comparing income and educational levels to some world standard is nonsense. It’s comparing apples to oranges.
For what it’s worth, income tax should be a flat tax; one rate for everybody with NO loopholes. That results in those who can pay more doing so, and those who are just barely getting by paying less in a simple, fair way.
In terms of health care, I do remember hearing politicians suggesting that some sort of government-run health insurance be put in place only for those Americans that don’t have/can’t afford health insurance, or recently became unemployed. I wonder if that wouldn’t be a quicker, easier solution to implement.
It would be easy to pick a number and say anyone earning this much swag is definitely doing better then most people in the country.
Well, when you start hitting that 6 figure mark, you SHOULD be doing better than some people, regardless of where you live. If not, your personal standard of living is set far too high.
But in general, it doesn’t seem like many people compare income with the standard of living in said area. Having lived in southern Iowa, you could live well enough on $25k/year there. But in Denver? Forget about it.
Marc, I said that $26k was the poverty line for the San Diego metroplex. In some parts of the country, you can be comfortable on that kind of money. Here, where the average price for a house is over half a million dollars, and you can’t get a two-bedroom apartment outside the slums for under $1000/mo, $26k is poor. I don’t make quite that much. Due to her disabilities, my wife can’t work – hard to hold down a job when stress makes you break down and either hide from everyone, or attempt suicide…
“So why not move?” I hear you cry. (Well, I;ve heard other people cry that, anyway.) Okay, smart guy, where exactly am I supposed to come up with the money to move my family any great distance? Remember that until that magical day of departure comes, we’ve still got to pay for food, rent, electricity, and gas (water and trash come in the rent, thankfully). Remember also that our autistic daughter has some special needs, which also cost money. At the end of the month, I’m still left scrambling to cover necessities (the computer I got secondhand, free, from the only practicing Communist I’ve ever met). There’s nothing left over afterward for such fripperies as moving to a less-expensive part of the country. I’m trying to remain upwardly mobile, but around here, unless you’ve got a Ph.D. in biochemistry, it’s not easy…
George Bush never seems to perform exceedingly well in debates. This is probably because he really isn’t very good at public speaking. Frankly, though, I wish neither Bush nor Kerry would become president.
For those of you who missed it, here is part of an AP story:
“The fact that Senator Kerry is a person of faith is something that might help voters who are undecided,” McCurry said.
Kerry has been explaining it more in recent weeks as he campaigns in socially conservative areas like rural Ohio. At a town hall meeting Saturday in Xenia, he talked about taking his rosary into battle during the Vietnam War. “I will bring my faith with me to the White House and it will guide me,” Kerry said.
So my question is, will all of you who were upset that Bush brings his faith into the White House have a problem with Kerry? (I suspect not since in practice his stated faith does not currently guide him.)
Jim in Iowa
Sorry to be jumping in very late, but I only just got caught up on all the discussion. (Hëll, we saw the debate a few days late as it was.)
Jim,
I will say that I’m disappointed by Kerry’s statement, yes. Entirely too much of this entire campaign has seen each candidate try to out-macho and out-religion the other, and I think both tactics are unhelpful to say the least.
However, I’m a lot less disturbed by Kerry saying he’ll let his faith guide him, because he has EXPLICITLY said that he will not legislate an article of his faith solely on the basis that it’s an article of his faith. Bush, on the other hand, employs generals who refer to Iraq as a war against Satan.
Kerry explicitly acknowledged atheists and agnostics during two of the debates. Lisa looked at me and said, “hey … we exist!”
On the other hand, back around 1991 Bush pere explicitly stated that “this is a Christian nation” and that he didn’t consider atheists citizens.
Not real hard for me to see a difference there.
As for your previous statement that
First, he is not so arrogant that he things his interpretation of the Bible is correct. He prays about it and takes things before God.
Considering that Bush said outright during the last debate that “the Almighty wants us all to be free”, it certainly sounds to me as if he believes he knows God’s will outright. Now, that’s not the same thing as “his interpretation of the Bible” — but in my view, it’s significantly worse. He’s basically claiming that he can speak for God.
Let’s recall that he said to a meeting in the Middle East last year that “God told me to strike at al-Qaeda.”
I do not want someone in office who believes they get specific instructions to kill from a higher power. Not the Son of Sam, who got it from a dog; and not the son of George, who gets it from a god. One could argue that only a mild case of dyslexia separates the two. 🙂
TWL
Welcome back Tim. Hope this means the baby is sleeping through the night and you have time to get back on the computer. 😀
Only occasionally. 🙂 (Actually, she’s gotten pretty good most of the time of late — it’s just that we’re also in the first-quarter grading crunch at school…)
TWL
I live at 14573 Commonwealth in Seattle. Been up here before?