On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Paul Tanner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:46 PM, kirby urner <email@example.com> wrote: > ...Our household benefits from Medicare as well >> as Social Security. >> > > Then why are you against increasing Medicare funding and spending so > that patients' out of pocket costs can do down as well as making it > available to everyone who wants to be on the program? >
I never said I was against increasing Medicare funding.
That's just your slovenly misdirected logic showing again (par for the course).
What I expressed was skepticism that your basket case weapons addicted Uncle Sam could be trusted to responsibly shift his priorities from attacking the defenseless (e.g. Panamanians) with expensive hardware (Apache helicopters in that case, in need of easy targets) versus actually getting serious about health care for his citizens.
You keep bringing up Sweden as if the Feds were anywhere close to that competent, and I think that's just a pipe dream on your part. There's no evidence the Americans have that level of social IQ. That's like expecting monkeys to type Shakespeare.
>> I don't think his Feds have the brains or the courage to be like >> Swedes and take care of people with health care needs. >> > > Your hatred of the US government blinds you to the truth, which is > that it is so capable and is doing so: >
I wouldn't call it hatred so much as pity for a sorrowful empire that has over-stretched and committed many gargantuan blunders.
If every high school had voting machines which students were welcome to study and use, if civics were taught, if public education were to train future presidents and all that entails, then maybe we'd be in a different position, and I've been advocating such things for decades.
I think there are ways to help Americans become smart enough, such that they actually get a working democracy. It's not just about funding though, it's about overhauling the curriculum (includes all media, not just wood pulp textbooks).
As long as the curriculum is so over-specializing and divorces science from technology from engineering from anthropology from math, then I think there's no hope of enough intelligent adults to achieve critical mass.
Critical mass has not been achieved to date, and I think it's because the curriculum is so poor, the math curriculum included.
You're typical in thinking it's all about money, and if we just dialed back to the Clinton era or something, that all would be well. Thinking it's all about money is one of the hallmarks of the overspecialized in that they don't think realistically about bread and butter issues.
They haven't studied General Systems Theory, only Economics (if that). Economics makes them dumb about the world. They're too far removed from the realities involved, too removed from science and engineering.
> Like I said, your hatred of our federal government has blinded you to > the truth that it has and still does much good even in just health > care, whether it in the delivery it via the VA hospitals or just > financing it via Medicare and Medicaid. >
I'm happy for whatever good it does, I just don't think it will ever approach Sweden's level of effectiveness in terms of intelligence or efficiency.
I think that's a mathematical impossibility given the low collective IQ of Americans more generally. They are too easy to bully and bamboozle. Americans are easy to fool and behave foolishly as a result. They live in relative misery compared to what they could have had by now, had they lived up to their true potential.
So I think it's more likely that Americans will continue to fall further and further behind as investors and planners continue to work around them, building up webs of trust in which the Americans are not included. Living standards will continue to increase faster elsewhere.
I'm not saying I want this to happen, I just think it's a logical consequence of a collapsed foreign policy and a legacy of elective first strike attacks on other sovereignties.
Americans have lost their credibility and gravitas and it's not clear to me that the USA as a sovereignty will continue to have much clout, or really has much today beyond the lipservice many give it (while snickering behind closed doors).
It's certainly very far from being a superpower if it ever was one.
We can see what happens though. My challenge to the Americans is to prove me wrong and to get their act together.
>> Good luck getting universal health care from such brainless >> warmongering numbskulls Paul, seems like a long shot. >> > > Yes, people like you standing in the way of expanding Medicare to all > who wish to be one it does make it more difficult to expand Medicare > to all who wish to be on it. >
I'm not standing in the way. I'm eager to improve STEAM education so we have fewer "adults" who think primarily in terms of money and think that's "mature".
> > Oh, sure, the conservative "let the states do it" mantra. > > Just like "the states" "did it" with respect to all of the following > further below - NOT! >
Alaska might have a better future getting closer to Russia. Washington might annex itself to Canada eventually. Texas could go its own way.
Already Canada has been a major source of affordable pharmaceuticals and many USAers take their retirement in Mexico, where care is more affordable. South Africa is attractive for similar reasons.
We'll see what happens.
If the USA manages to hold itself together, maybe that will be because it got smarter and more compassionate, and that might be a good thing.
> Never mind learning from history. > > Never mind that the federal government doing good via federal > legislation and/or federal courts AGAINST what so many states wanted > to do is why we have these facts: The "whites are the master race" > Confederacy - the actual precursor to German Nazism - did not last in > the US. Jim Crow laws were killed. Segregation was killed. Civil > rights greatly expanded. The environment was saved from a very bad and > worsening situation, and from there we have much improvement - see the > Clean Water Act and its followup as an example:
I don't think you've studied history much. The "master race" dogma permeated the North as well and lots of research into Eugenics that inspired Hitler and his contemporaries was funded by such as the Rockefeller Foundation.
Read 'War Against the Weak' by Edwin Black if you want more of the history there.
> "Let the states do it"? > > There has never been anything standing in the way of them doing it. > Yet the vast majority them never do, with many of them dragged kicking > and screaming by the federal government to doing the right thing. >
Nor were the Feds barred from taking their responsibilities seriously as health care providers. Lets look at Katrina. Lets look at BP's attack on the Gulf. Doctors have been seeing lots of cases resulting from exposure to Correctsit. How are the Feds responding even now?
Lets look at a pie chart and see what their priorities are instead.
Lets add up all the elective wars and subtract every killing committed in those wars as one less American life saved, i.e. when you add up what's done by Medicare, make sure you subtract every family member killed by a bomb or drone that was made by Americans to be used against others.
> Even now, we still have 41 states letting the vast majority of their > homeless (because this vast majority do not have children under 18) > and also vast numbers of their working poor rot, REFUSING to let these > people get health care assistance or food assistance, REFUSING to let > these people on Medicaid or Food Stamps.
These are the same people that get elected to the Federal government. Like I said, prospects are not looking good for Americans.
> > I again point out the facts for those who are ignorant of the facts: > The vast majority of the health care needs of these above people are > NOT met by the emergency rooms (ERs)! The ERs do do NOT give the vast > majority health care care to these people above! Why? Because they are
Having worked around hospitals and having family working in an ER, I don't believe I'm unfamiliar with the facts.
I do know my friend Nick, essentially homeless but with friends, was able to get kidney dialysis for some months thanks to a Nixon Era law which gives even the indigent access to kidney dialysis. He was also able to get a place to live through social services. He held on for a few months in this condition.
I took him to the ER myself when he showed up from Seattle, trusting Providence more than University of Washington I suppose. Choice is a good thing.
> > I mean, good God, even just this obscenity of these above horrors > experienced by these above homeless and otherwise poor people people > in all those states and the obscenity of why these horrors persist - > and that the states did nothing with respect to mandated even just ER > care - should be enough for anyone who actually has a conscience to > see that the conservative mantra "let the states do it" is just plain > evil. >
Yes these are the same heartless / stupid / slow Americans who get elected to the Federal government.
I don't know how you expect this hellish backward destructive nation to ever become another Sweden.
Maybe, with better education, but that could take decades.
> For the people of the vast majority of states, for all these areas I > mention above and more, history has proved that the federal government > is the only hope for getting the job done in terms of meeting all that > growing unmet need being created by the incapability of the private > marketplace and private charity to getting the job done.
I'm guessing their fate will be to die in the streets then, cold and uncared for.
I've been urging more nations with Peace Corps type operations to send teams to North America to help out. You say such charitable activities could never make up for what the states and Feds are not doing, and I tend to agree.
But I just don't think the Feds have it in them to take health care more seriously. That's not why people go to Washington DC. They want to feather their own nests. They want a slice of the pie. They take money from their paymasters and craft legislation full of loopholes.
Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm not standing in the way of Americans getting their act together. I just see little evidence that they're able to do so. I'm looking at the track record. These people hate health care don't they. They eat bad foods, smoke a lot, are malnourished, and they wreak havoc beyond their borders, killing and maiming without discipline and for no good reasons. They even murder doctors. What else can I say?
Their collective IQ is just too low for such challenges, I think that's manifestly obvious. But maybe they can still learn from other countries.
I'm glad you've picked Sweden as a role model, unrealistic as that is.