jackson33

As said before, the Chinese economy which is tied to the US$ and a good share of trade is up again today, 50% over the past couple months (10k to near 15K). Also anything between 7-9k DOW is the current trading range, even if classified volatile. http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?showchartbt=Redraw+chart&D4=1&DD=1&D5=0&DCS=2&MA0=2048&MA1=0&CF=32&DB=1&DC=1&symbol=%24INDU&nocookie=1&SZ=0&CP=0&PT=7 What may be interesting is the 100 day MA, which the DOW is currently ignoring and activity IS on the increase. These could mean good things, but there are some bad things still pending.... This weeks FED Prime overnight was holding at .5%, while 30 year fixed home loans are around 4.25%, while money supply is increasing at an unrealistic pace (the value of goods/services compared to available money). As I understand the current theory, the FED will print money to cover all the current stimulus programs and/or expenses over the budget, removing it as the economy increases. This leads to the Income Tax Revenues which are running about 25% below expectations and those expectations were already down from the time the Budget was based on, which indicated an acceptable 1.7T deficit. If that deficit is increased by a shortfall of 25% in overall revenue (likely), printing money will do nothing, borrowing impossible at current interest rates and hyper inflation will set in...IMO. Now if the DOW or especially other exchanges (less reliant on foreign trade) continues to increase and individual company reports continue to beat expectations (really set low), it may mean an artificial crisis or that my worst fear was correct, it was never a major problem in the first place. That the confidence of the consumer, in turn business was manipulated into believing something (don't know what or why) that did not exist. For the record the blame would go to Paulson and the Federal Reserve and carried over by the current administration as an excuse for an agenda. If the quarterly reports continue report LESS than expectations (meaning today most are making nothing or losing) added to the above inflationary scenario, you are looking at DOW 4/5000, unemployment at 10/14%, inflation at 10-12% and probably no means to barrow anything by the end of THIS YEAR. Obviously I hope a recovery is in progress, actions by Paulson did work with regards to Banks/Financial and the stimulus programs will enable many State and Local governments to recover from a year or two of lost tax revenues and a the trickle down will be back to the Federal, which will be forced to cease extreme spending... Jake; I don't know your age, but IMO selling now (or at 10K) if held from highs of 18 months ago, would be foolish unless needed to live off. Two, five maybe it will take 10 years and a revolution, but the economy will recover. If it did not, whatever your dollar value is, would be meaningless or a small fraction to what the cost of living would be. I have maintained 10% of what little I have in silver bullion since the early 1990's, but would be hesitant to advise that today.

jackson33 Veteran Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,178 darkness??? ---------------------------------------- in responding to so many i find myself wondering why light, light speed and is so finite in many explanations. could "darkness" be something other than the absence of light? if so, couldn't it have a speed? even light as we know it, is not required for life. many things grow and live deep in the oceans where no light has ever been. it is sustained from heat with in the planet and what that heat creates. that heat was not caused from any light or effects of light. couldn't a planet exist in dark space, with life. mass creates heat from with in, not necessarily from outside sources? couldn't a planet in this darkness with an atmosphere maintain a temperature suitable for most life, even that of earths inhabitants? i understand our science is based on the affects of our sun on earth with reference of green leaves to solar power, but take out planet earths core and atmosphere, there is no life. .......................................................... The above is from another forum, a few years back which received quite a few replies...What was interesting is the apparent accepted idea that darkness is an absence of light or an effect what we visualize from Electromagnetic Energy, then a reasonably small portion of the scale. No doubt, at least in my mind, is that if our visual concept of light was somehow different, then light as we understand it, could be darkness and darkness could be light. Distance stars then appearing as black spots in a sea of light as that energy traveled to this other concept. I know none of this is interesting to you, but I was looking for opinions on resistance to energy limitation to speed/velocity, that darkness could be this resistance, an entity so to speak, rather than an absense...

Tens of thousands of pounds, means at least 20k (about US$30k). Not sure what your Tax Rate is for the health system, but most range in the 1-2%. You will likely never repay the system for the services rendered. However, the security factor alone, in your case is worth a great deal and I am not here to argue what already exist. I do not know the intricacies of needs in the UK or in fact the limitation on migrations under the European Union, if even applicable. What I do know is what people that have studied in England, were/are British Subjects and since become advocates opposing UHC for the US. Mark Steyn the most often quoted, Stuart Varney with Fox Business another and hundreds of testimonials of people that have left socialist governments of various degree from around the world, migrating to the US for just that reason. The population in the UK was around 50M in 1950 (US 140M) and today in the UK 61M (51M in England, 8M+ in London) and 306 million in the US. We have one State alone with 36M (California), one area with 20 million (LA/Orange County) with entirely different medical needs than probably 20 other States and any two cities may have completely different medical needs. I just don't see how any current National System could possibly unite all these differences into one viable program. Responsibilities under your definition is the epitome of my arguments and from two angles. If a person wishes to Smoke, do drugs, drink excessively, drive a motor cycle over 30 auto, play football it is not then the my responsibility to protect them from the effects of their choice. Then, I do smoke, did drive a truck, even owned a small trucking company (when the profession was rated second most deadly) paid the exorbitant insurance cost and todays tobacco tax, but do not hold or think I should be given universal acceptance to what effects this has or will cause on my health. Oh yes; Our poor people (medicaid) and those on SS/Medicare, which are paid cash benifits also pay a portion for what is already furnished health care. CHIP's or most child care is not and those not recieving any assistance simply go to the nearest clinic or Hospital for health aid, ingrown toenail to a heart attack. Bear's Key; Nobody files chapter 13, for paying Insurance Cost and filing does not absolve TAX debt to government in the US. (agreements can and often arranged while under chapter 13). Each State has it's own system, I'll use Michigan for this; Among consumer chapter 7 debtors who file on a typical day, there are about: -- 133 who owe at least $75,000 in credit card debt; -- 191 others who owe between $50,000 and $75,000 in credit card debt; -- 32 with over $50,000 in medical debt; -- 18 who owe at least $500,000 in unsecured debt; -- 500 who are either retired or disabled; -- 200 who are age 70 or older. From; http://www.freshstartbankruptcylawyers.com/Michigan-Bankruptcy-Laws-Bankruptcy-Court.htm Note on a typical day 700 of 1000 filings under chapter 7 are either retired or disabled or over the age of 70. Chapter 7 Liquidation Under the Bankruptcy Code The chapter of the Bankruptcy Code providing for "liquidation," ( i.e., the sale of a debtor's nonexempt property and the distribution of the proceeds to creditors.) What this infers to me is salvation of transferable estate values, not the afford ability of medical services or what was previously an expense. That is the person or the executor of a persons estate drains the asset value first, then files to make that person eligible for certain care not covered under Medicare (special assisted or full service institutions). It is a guess (I Don't know) but feel the same stuff goes on in the UK where certain services are not available under their Health care Program, but will be under circumstances no matter how achieved.

WAS IT FREE?. Who paid for those Doctors/Surgeons Educations, the Hospitals or the high tech equipment in the. Who paid for your office calls, medications, your hospital stay and no doubt some cost while recovering? If Good Health is a right, then doing anything not considered healthy should be a criminal offense. Playing some sport (you might get injured), driving a car (might be involved in an accident), working (pick a problem) eating/drinking (pick the product) over indulging per your personal physical structure. Top this off with parental responsibility who should have aborted you, knowing some genetic combination might have given a 10% possibility of this or that. Your health issues are personal and the responsibility should be yours (once 18 or so) to get the best of what you were born with, in the world you live in... IMO.

The average cost per person in the US for medical care is about 7,800/person/year. Based on total cost ($2.4T in 2007) and 306M people. Since illegal make up a said 20 million+, I'll assume a great deal are not covered. Then the US Insured are under Medicare, Medicaid, VA, CHIPS and Government Employees. http://www.pnhp.org/blog/2008/08/26/census-bureau-on-the-uninsured/ Highlights Both the percentage and number of people without health insurance decreased in 2007. The percentage without health insurance was 15.3 percent in 2007, down from 15.8 percent in 2006, and the number of uninsured was 45.7 million, down from 47.0 million. The number of people with health insurance increased to 253.4 million in 2007 (up from 249.8 million in 2006). The number of people covered by private health insurance (202.0 million) in 2007 was not statistically different from 2006, while the number of people covered by government health insurance increased to 83.0 million, up from 80.3 million in 2006. The percentage of people covered by private health insurance was 67.5 percent, down from 67.9 percent in 2006. The percentage of people covered by employment-based health insurance decreased to 59.3 in 2007 from 59.7 percent in 2006. The number of people covered by employment-based health insurance, 177.4 million, was not statistically different from 2006. ---------------------------- Keep in mind, folks that are laid off etc., do not choose to buy insurance or maintain their previous group insurance, then become ill are not likely to qualify for NEW coverage or very expensive could increase the cost of the uninsured...

For some interesting statistics on the currently insured, uninsured and the reasons you might read this; http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml One often mis-quoted fact is that when you lose your job, you lose your policy, which under law is your choice, but you will have to pay for it...Being employed for a job, which includes GROUP (operative word) Health Insurance Coverage is a benefit offered by that Company and can be maintained for certain periods of time, no more than 102% of what the Company paid, after being fired, laid off or the demise of the Company. There are thousands of forms of available coverage under health and hundreds that can be adapted to group coverage. Example; A person in one community can gather 20 or more families, already insured or not and present an Insurance Company those profiles and will be offered a price per on a particular plan. If say a $1k, annual deductible and for 100 healthy families, they would be offered premiums dwarfing many Company Policies, far below what any may be paying. If and it's possible a few have existing problems or several are elderly, those same premiums would be equal to less than that of many Company policies. If you become ill, are injured or in some manner disable while under any coverage, according to State Laws, that coverage MUST be maintain, not necessarily for new problems or for family members, but rarely are they discontinued. http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/health-plans/cobra.htm The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) gives workers and their families who lose their health benefits the right to choose to continue group health benefits provided by their group health plan for limited periods of time under certain circumstances such as voluntary or involuntary job loss, reduction in the hours worked, transition between jobs, death, divorce, and other life events. Qualified individuals may be required to pay the entire premium for coverage up to 102 percent of the cost to the plan. .......................... If you become ill, are injured or in some manner disable while under any coverage, according to State Laws, that coverage MUST be maintain, not necessarily for new problems or for family members, but rarely are they discontinued. As for Government vs. Private Sector coverage, it is really not comparable. Private Sector will take your premiums, invest, put to work and create some incomes, traditionally 6-10%/year, where government can do nothing but hold the cash or spend hoping for an increased GDP (annual revenues, on ave. 1-2%/per). The private sector, especially in the US is extremely efficient where Government is notoriously inefficient. Don't kid yourself, when it becomes an issue of cost/effective (it will), as Insurance Companies do today, government will be forced to do later and there will be no alternative. Government today is that alternative (safety net) if no other alternative is available. Flood insurance along the gulf cost or along major unprotected water ways, made financing homes, impractical without flood insurance, when insurance companies became unable to pass on cost to not flood prone home owners. Government stepped in and backed or offered the coverage. Same for fire insurance in or near forest, particularly in California. Government, working with the Medical and Pharmaceutical Industry in the US, TODAY have programs traveling the US and in fact the world, to inform, treat and dispense medications/treatments for all kinds of things. I hardly think anyone is going to be left to die from a curable problem in the US, so long as the last resort is not government. Wal Mart, with its purchasing power (truck load/rail car orders), a distribution system and Store Locations already is furnishing medications at fractions of previous cost and is now testing diagnostic centers/clinics around this country. We have Medical Facilities that have closed, gone specialized, profitable today and would go National at the first sign of a Private Medical System.

What ever the persons reality is, is what the dream will a dream will be. For instance, I have zero sense of smell and don't recall ever dreaming of a smell or in fact food. The mind reflects reality as known, not whats percieved... Thought you might like to see some testimonials of those that became blind or have never seen, as sighted people do....http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/11187 Noticed on the previous thread, some one mentioned B/W dreams over in color, which about 15% do dream in B/W, yet are not color blind. There were many errors however and thought the most current studies would be interesting to you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream

Yes, I saw it and had already reviewed the Switzerland plan years ago. 5. Switzerland: Its Former System Resembled Ours "Since 1994, everyone now must buy health insurance - with the state paying for the poor. And insurance companies can't make a profit on basic care." It takes me an hour to change my sound system from TV to my computer set up and then back, so if addressed apologize. What is the penalty for not purchasing Health Insurance (Massachusetts, under a forced purchase is an added tax) and does coverage to avoid penalties have a minimum. As mentioned, anyone can purchase 'Catastrophic Insurance' (covers only costly ailments) or a large number of reasonable cheap policies for limited coverage and affordable to most not currently insured. As for the other systems; There is no private sector Insurance Company that can exist and not make a profit. It could be Church run, Government Run or some "Charitable Trust Fund', with no recourse to the consumer for failure. A Private Sector Insurance Company, in the process of taking peoples money for future possible problems (then for profit) is somehow using that money to make money. iNow; I suppose you have Auto Insurance and I suppose it's you hope you never need to use it. That company (usually multi-faceted) will produce a profit, generate an economy, work employees while protecting your interest while driving a car. It should be no different for Health Insurance, which no one should actually want to use. While a policy is in effect, yes use of that policy abusive or needed will increase the cost, but if you become sick under that policy there are laws to prevent cancellation from that sickness, in most States that I am aware of... As for applying with a pre-condition, like old age then yes it will be hard to come by and it should be. It's called planning ahead for emergencies and has been practiced by generations of people. To your thread: The best example of what the Federal Government does with one simple act of compassion is explained from FDR's New Deal or SS act of 1935. What started out as a simple forced 1 (ONE) percent deduction of WORKERS pay, and later to be paid to THAT worker, at age 65 as turned into one giant pyramid scheme, nearing 5 Trillion in Federal Revenues since and over 4 Trillion in benefits, today sending out 41 million monthly checks... http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/society/A0861154.html For the record, people were not even expected to live to 65 when newborns had life expectancies of 59.9, white males 59.7 and black men 47.3 years. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html

John; I'm afraid your taking my arguments opposing UHC in the US or your notion that it works well for you, as an attack on Australian HC. I have already stated that it's my belief, US States should be involved and/or if their is an answer to maintain 'Choice' or if you prefer 'Free Market Principles', this would be the only viable approach. If HC is not a right (could argue either way), then IMO the US Federal Government, under its Constitution simply has no authority. I did insinuate possible better care on that Sky Slope, but to enhance a point. For all I know the best Doctor's on this planet may now be in your Country, mine, in England or reasonable equal everywhere. I doubt this, but not the point of this discussion. I have also said, near half our Doctors, practicing today in the US are foreign born and will add much innovation has come from this sector. You have said Medicare in Australia is based on reimbursement, which scares the heck out of me. If I have a heart attack and am required to pay expenses which could be $250k (my mothers medical bill in 1994 for just such an event) I may not have that much value and then to think Government (especially here) will determine the cares validity and reimburse me on what they consider valid expenses is simply not going to happen. On infant mortality, we are not happy with our record. I don't have an argument other than possibly 'lifestyle' why so many die before one year of age, but the issue has nothing to do with UHC. If anything is already UHC in the US it is a pregnant woman and the mother and child to birth and through 18 years for the child. http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2006/05/08/us_infant_mortality_rate_fails_to_improve.html Malpractice suits today are against individual institutions/doctors/policy or any number of issues. Medicaid/Medicare for instance list required test and procedures for certain problems. If it is determined, often is, that one additional test would have prevented say 10k deaths, no class action suit could be brought against the Federal Government. http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/sep2006/db20060913_099763.htm 1 Hawaii 80.0 2 Minnesota 78.8 3 Utah 78.7 4 Connecticut 78.7 5 Massachusetts 78.4 45 Tennessee 75.1 46 West Virginia 75.1 47 South Carolina 74.8 48 Alabama 74.4 49 Louisiana 74.2 50 Mississippi 73.6 51 District of Columbia 72.0 On statistics, this gives an idea how different States would compare to your international figures. The same would be true on any US stat, which is an average of all States. Yes, I though about your Aborigines and considered this when figuring your averages, which according to later charts are not much different than the US. There are significant demographic differences and in some cases work related jobs available, but will leave it to you to evaluate. For a general cost of living between two cities; http://www.ask.com/bar?q=Cost+of+Living+by+State&page=1&qsrc=121&ab=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bankrate.com%2Fbrm%2Fmovecalc.asp I picked a couple location in the US to show the differences of major towns. Small towns vary even more to metropolitan areas.

John; You certainly have made a good case, if for nothing else in support of the Australian HCS. Wish the mods would make this a new thread, but then it is related to a potential US UHC.... Strawman; No, generalized statistics are meaningless, when comparing totally different cultures/governments/involved risks and a number of factors. We have at least 41M (14%) Blacks and an unknown number of from the 6M declaring two races, whom for no reason of their own, have less life expectancy than whites or orientals. Studies in Cycle Cell and some thought immune system deficiencies are making great strides to the expectancies just 20 years ago. One example; Many Nations have 5-10 and up hospital beds per 1000 population, others have less than 1 or 2, but any statistic is meaningless with out knowing the percentage of those beds being used. In the US we have 3m, beds in Nursing Homes alone with a NATIONAL average of 84.2% occupied. Then we have scores of Hospitals that have gone specialized, catering to a particular group or medical need. Children's hospitals, Cancer, Heart decease and so on, who range rarely full (rehabilitation) to never full and long waiting list (usually children's). We also have 'For Profit' Hospitals/Clinics, Religious Sponsored Hospitals, City or State run facilities, VA Hospitals and many others. All all these counted? " Your infant mortality rate is nearly 50% higher than ours and would be the highest in the developed world." This statistic is based on LIVE BIRTH to one year. How many infants are born live around the world compared to the US. We just had a woman give birth to eight at one time, not one of which would have lived to the birth, much less to one year just 40 years ago. My point on our brightest students NOT choosing a medical profession, should be self explanatory. Even then, to qualify for Medical Schools in the US are already very high and there are just so many. Those standards to facilitate a UHC, will have to drop and IMO is not a good thing... We are a Confederation of States, we act like what we are and much of the opposition to UHC is based on those principles. Today I could visit the local Clinic, get a physical for about 40.00 and feel like I'm going to live forever. If I lived in NYC (or many others places than small town USA), it would cost me that much to get to a Clinic and up to 500.00 for that physical, much more if if to acquire a Class A Drivers License or Food Service Permit (in some States)...Single payer will eliminate that difference and I would bet NYC will not drop its price, mine would go up. I wasn't aware a person in any "Industrialized" Country, could sue their Government for damages, especially punitive where in the US can be very large numbers. ONE class action suit against the US Government (not permitted) would end everything if successful. Ref; Tobacco Company or Asbestos Related, hundreds of billions. John, I don't oppose UHC at the State Level. I sincerely believe something can be worked out, allowing Free Markets to exist and keeping the Medical Industry developing procedures, medical product development and pharmaceuticals for R&D. I think some form of mandated/compulsory insurance, based on an individuals or families need could be imposed, relieving a great deal of the pressure on cost inflation. Similar to the States and their Auto Insurance programs. Most of those so called 40 million uninsured are working class people, who for good reason just don't want to pay for all those that seem to need medical attention. If somehow tomorrow all those jumped into the system, the cost to those that are already in the system would drop in half, possibly much more. The only reason our cost are going up and yes at staggering rates is because, less and less are participating, whether for that new car or they think government will soon provide the care.

Traditionally Congress passes hundreds of 'Bills' each session which never see a Senate Committee, much less floor debate/vote. It's a political game, where 435 members dependent on their single district for reelection (this case maybe 20) can say they followed through on some promise. If it were to be heard, passed Congress and for some reason the President signed the bill, you are indirectly correct. The FDA would be forced to make any Nicotine Product, either a prescription drug or outlaw it altogether. It's already been determined nicotine in any degree is harmful.

If I understand your position correctly, your basically adding to the problem that created the problem in the first place. To me this makes no sense and attempting to correct the original error should be the alternative answer. Health Care has not always been a problem in the US and highly regarded around the world for years. Medicare under SS, was for the most part an alternative to retirement packages or personal insurance, which was competitive with MC cost. There has been a two fold problem IMO that created the inflation of HC cost. One unquestionable cost has come from legal actions, generally class action against the industry as a whole. Some medical procedure, some medicine or some personal grievance against a hospital, doctor or both that generates millions/billions for some dissatisfied patien/group. This now has come to hundreds of test being performed on some possible minor problem at tremendous cost to both insurance cost and the consumer (strain on desire). Then along came government and mandating of unrealistic requirements on the industry. Pharmaceutical Companies are required years of testing, sometimes billions in cost and often denied approval for some possible or potential side effect, which has never proved to be preventable to every person, in the first place. Then since the early 1990's the entire medical system has been under attack, by our medically educated Congress and the people trying to solve a problem they have no business addressing. I won't bother you with the hundreds of medical facilities that have gone bankrupt or physicians who have gone specialty, dropped out altogether or the strain on the remaining. Solve the problem that created the problems if you like, but adding to it based on some very problematic systems around the world seems a bit over reactive. All I've seen here on this issue is a worldwide health care system, where nobody pays for anything and somehow we will save money. Sorry if that makes sense to anyone, but I don't buy it... As for my post; As I wrote to John, I felt his statistical analysis of and the assumption of the US HC was inaccurate at best. I don't like using International statistics to judge National performance for all the obvious reasons. Massachusetts system is already failing and tort law limitations in NC are creating a flood of Doctor moving into the State. This is a very deep subject and I have no idea how you expect it to follow such a narrow path with all UHC implies, from a starting point or not. Aside from that my post to you were in answer to your statements, if off topic.

Choice by the consumer can determine some perceived waste, but to the manufacturer of that style/method of some product, however more often then not it's a determined improvement over something else. It was no different when phonograph records were simultaneously going to 33rpm and 45's, from 78rpm or that CD's eventually took out both markets. Under socialism we would still be using 78's, no one to contest or produce otherwise and very much like 57-58 Chevrolet's still the most common car in Cuba, running or not...The US has grown from a $2 Trillion GDP 1980 to 15 T (48k/person) in 2008 for this reason and Cuba, who was near equals in 1957 holds onto a $144 Billion GDP 2008 (12K/person). That to me is 50 years of waste, not to mention the effects on Russia (hundreds of billions in aid) or to the US with 4 million new immigrants.

John; I will get attacked for going off topic, but feel the need to address your premise of US Health Care and statistical averages. Hopefully it links into UHC not being practical for the US... If I understand you, any person in Australia from anyplace on the planet is going to receive paid care, by the State and you pay a portion of those cost through taxes. What happens if I charter a plane from LA to Sydney, with 300 patience needing some costly service hard to get in the US? What if a Chinese person or Indian did the same from their country and so on...Are you suggesting this should be the norm for any ailment and/or the responsibility for every Nation to the rest of the world. I don't think so... On any given day in the US, the entire population of Australia (about 21M) is visiting or in the US, traveling, for political reasons (diplomats), doing business, education/school, shopping, working (legal/illegally) or for any number of reasons. Additionally there may be hundreds of thousands that are here for paid medical treatment or where like treatment is not available, at home location. As for your statistics and I argue this point endlessly; The US more so than anyplace on this earth is a diverse society and made up of 50 individuals States each with very different medical systems and/or demographics. If you pick one stat, say longevity, I'll find one to multiple States with the highest rated stat for that category. Blacks for instance live on average 73 years and the men less than 70, where white women live 80 years. However Blacks live on average 30+ years longer than many African averages and Oriental Women live on average 89 years in the US, far above Asian averages. We have societies here, that will not go to a doctor for any reason (Christan Scientist) and others that practice any number of alternative medicine. Suicide, auto accidents and hundreds of human activity ways of life or work related all factor into what determines longevity and the US is incredibly accurate on compiling statistics than most every country. Rather than argue this I'll just ask; If you were 18-22, with a good educational record and checking out career possibilities. would you commit to an additional 10 years or more (At least 4-6 years medical school plus specialty if desired, plus no less than 6 years internship in a medical facility) for a shot/chance of earning the average 200k annual compensation and the threat over the past 20-30 years of working under Federal Government rules and the known cost of practice liability or become a lawyer or some other profession??? iNow, no one in the US is forced to choose between Health Care Food or for that matter shelter, utilities or a number of essentials. They may have to choose between a boat, new car, vacation and buying insurance, but thats about it... Getting right to the problem; The cost of any service, if set by the market will reduce itself (if allowed) to what the public can afford. If the cost were affordable to the total the cost would naturally rise or as described, the extent of coverage would increase. Auto insurance, in the US is the best example of how the system works and would add as essential to as HC in the US. For those that have no means to afford or become a burden/liability on the system, some State governments requires Auto Insurance Companies to reduce rates (risk drivers may increase rates, but accessible), increasing the cost to the rest, BUT does not furnish. Another would be life insurance, which is really cheap for a 20-50 yo and government is not involved in any way.

Capitalism is public ownership and operation of business... Socialism is government ownership and operation of business.. 'laissez-faire' is a French term usually meant indicate as no government or as little as possible 'LAW or regulation' imposed on any business, often called 'Free Market' Capitalism. Consider a scale 1-100, Pure Socialism (ie Cuba) being one and where no government control exist 100 (there are none), the US has been dropping from 98-99 from the late 19th Century to probably 80 or so today, while many European Systems have dropped much further. Russia today for instance would be around 50, China 40, both embracing a form of Socialistic (Controlled) Capitalism. If anything then it's not an either or, but to whats best acceptable to achieve what ever the goal may be. Socialism also infers equalization of all people of one society, with it's own scale. Cuba has about 11 million people, of which 10 1/2 million have about equal assets (no middle class) and the US has a still viable large middle class, which is the measure of a healthy economical system, or was before Obama. Nobody and no business is subservient to the President. The President is the leader of a GOVERNMENT (one of three branches), that branch established to enforce/protect the Constitution and Laws of the Union of States, not one State or one person. This may not make much sense in all thats currently being said or going on, but IMO what should be... Now Congress does have authority to make law or regulate whatever they please to and these usually involve the President signing off on the issue. If he/she will not, the Congress than can over ride the executive and has many time over our history. Corporations, in fact your home town mom and pop grocery or barber, cater (do business) with individuals. If that customer base, keep in mind all sizes, is environmental concerned, or concerned about anything that barber or Company is going to address those ideas or eventually go out of business. Now Capitalism also encourages competition, which of course socialism wants nothing to compete with. If a 7/11 pops up next to your M/P Grocery, plays to the National Concerns of 7/11 and your local plays to your concerns, who will win... Decreased waste increase efficiency, otherwise know as 'productivity' is the base of Capitalism and controlled by competition. Since the US is and has been number one in productivity for decades, I would think it has applied to our economy. Again socialism, without competition (no place else to go) is not the least bit concerned with cutting cost/waste or increasing efficiency. Why should they... I totally believe the consumer, who are individuals, have every right to purchase and choose products or services as they see fit with out fear of other opinions. I drink beer and smoke, my little old lady neighbor thinks I am wasteful, while she may spend more on dog/cat/bird food than I would think appropriate, but would argue her right. Same for that 6 foot 400# guy I see at the store buying cookies, ice cream and boxes of frozen hamburgers.

Insuring a car, home, business, health or some form of all encompassing 'Umbrella Policy' have different values to degree to one person/family to the next. You can insure your car at your States Minimum Liability, to cover replacement (if paid off) or to cover any number of drivers. Same for your home and their is no requirements to insure for liability, fire, flood if paid off. Health Insurance can be no deductible to 20k deductible, can cover only cancer to anything medical including a check up. It's a choice and with any use of the policy can mean an increase in premiums. Government is incapable of determining needs of any two families and cannot afford to cover every person for all needs and simply said limit access for anything. Insurance Companies didn't go into business last week, they have a track record. They do pool every participating member's money, invest and HOPE, they can cover any catastrophic event, pandemic and to date have done a pretty good job. Government on the other hand, through Medicaid/Medicare has a very poor record. Each member has the same choices of any other member and pays the same price (if any). Any Clinic/Hospital Emergency Room staff will tell you people on these programs are the first to seek out and use medical care for the least of problems, while those with needs are often ignored but certainly delayed. My main concern with any Government Universal Health care system, whether in a US State or from a country outside the US is quality. Even in the US today, with about 4-500k practicing physicians the average wages are under 200k, nearly half already foreign born (educated in US, stayed and not trying to insult) and most of the highly qualified have limited service to a specific illness (heart/respiratory/rehabilitation etc) work out of Hospitals that are specialized and have left general practice already. John; I don't know where your getting your information. NO person, while in the US, for any reason and without regards to Nationality is ever refused 100% Health care. For about 100.00 as an Australian I am sure you can buy a short term policy covering your family while here, but it's not mandatory for entry or wouldn't have much bearing on the service received. For instance, when I travel in Mexico, I buy auto insurance, which covers medical cost if needed and the auto, need not be involved. If your hurt on the Sky Slopes, they don't first ask your Country of origin and go from there, but will service your injury, possibly by a better medical staffs than available in your home town and worry about the payments after alls well again. I might suggest, if and when the US goes universal, you may have to wait a little while for service while the ambulance is busy getting the latest sore throat to a hospital or if at the hospital, wait while a series of sore throats are taken care of for fear of being labled....

I don't know what Jillette claims as a party affiliation, but if he claims Libertarian, I doubt they would endorse his views on Mr. Obama. He could be a Free Market Capitalist, but if he does claim this, he could not then turn around and say destroying it could be something good. Think I'll stick with Al Franken as the best Comedian/Politician, since he at least has had some success, even if ill gotten. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_Jillette

The way I read it; Any couple making 100k can either pay a FLAT 10% rate or up to 10k (another means to EZ Forms) or use deductions where taxes are paid on what bracket you end up in. Example; A person earning 50k, using EZ would pay 5k or given the Standard deduction. In order to equal that 5k due, filing with deductions he/she would have end up with a taxable amount (after deductions) of about 36,500 (using 2008 brackets and tax. Most filers would be better off filing with deductions and I am sure both Capital Gains & Dividend income would eliminate using the Standard deduction, as it currently does. Mr. Skeptic; As today up to 100k for a couple would be 10k and then 25% on any amount over 100k. Since not mandatory to take the Standard Deduction, there is no discrimination. So much already depends on what deductions are available. If you and your wife earn a total of 120k per year, do not own a home or have many deductible expense, that 15k tax debt, could sound very appealing. Today tax on brackets over 32550 are 25% having already owed 4k on the 32K. So if your Gross Adjusted income was 90k, most likely under the above scenario, you would owe 18788, saving 3788.00. Keep in mind no one is talking about payroll taxes, which are neither deductible or counted in income are based from the first dollar earned up to 97k per PERSON. So if you and your wife earned 120k, neither over 97k, you or your employer had already paid about 19k in taxes, if self employed all by you if both employed no less than 9k. http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

Cute, Pangloss; I kind of expect Limbaugh to try something like this today, though he has said never again...In 91, he claimed to have changed his mind and supported Clinton for President. Think it shut down the entire US Telephone system... Factually, movements have occasionally popped up from time to time, from both major parties, but I don't think ANYONE feels an Amendment to abolish A22, would ever pass and certainly would never be ratified by the required 38 States. Usually it's a well like President, stimulating these movements (Eisenhower, JFK, Reagan, Clinton), however even if possible, ratification would have not applied to previously elected people. Truman for instance, instigated and got A22 passed and later ratified, but REMAINED eligible to run and hold office for life... The latest Congressional move, I am aware of; http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Democratic_leader_defends_push_to_abolish_presidential_term_limits_No_Bush_f_0705.html

I suppose your looking for a Republican version, (Plan) similar the the proposed 'US 2010 Budget' which is an Executive obligation, a proposed budget for the operation of government. There won't be one and this is not the responsibility or obligation of either Party in Congress. They both, the Republicans and Democrats can propose amending/changes/altering or refuse to accept as offered, in total. The executive in turn can revise there plan, make changes and resubmit to Congress. They (Congress) refused to accept (tabled) the Bush budget for 2009, offering no explanation, funding government operations for the duration of his term, with out a budget... Both sides the isle, in the current debate are questioning the 2010 proposal and will go through the process, neither submitting a formal budget to compare. I don't know any other way to explain the process or what your want to see and the arguments for change are well documented, whether in crayon, use of 'White Faces or circles'..............IMO. Neither party is standing on high ground, with regards to fiscal responsibility. Both playing politics and probably fearing a backlash from any perceived cuts in the Obama Budget. As I recall, an accusation was made on NASA, NSA or programs in the name of science, which Obama was said to increase and is just not true.

Nothing Republicans offer would be considered by the Democratic Congress or Executive, in the first place. Then we have NO IDEA, what revenues will be, when either budget is considered. Projected revenues are all over the board and if the 'worst' become reality your talking deficits far beyond the projected 9+ Trillion over 10 years. To offer the extreme example, if in 2017 the deficit on the National Debt was 22-25T and our GDP was 15T or back to 2008's, your talking massive inflation long before 2015, a devaluation (deflation) of all assets. The inflation/deflation scenario, would make the Great Depression seem like a prosperous period in the US. http://www.gop.gov/solutions/budget/road-to-recovery-final This site offers the best Republican response, is 19 pages (need adobe) but worth a read IMO. Full of figures and some interesting Charts. Using your own argument which I happen to agree with; In the US no law is permanent. NM, many States ans most Educational Boards today do not allow Creationism to be taught AS SCIENCE. Just as I feel, R v W, as a Womans Right, will never be overturned, teaching Creationism along side most any science, simply makes no sense. As for my comments to 'Bettina'; I don't know when I have spent more time, trying to be objective to a poster. I find her comments, interesting and YES typical to this time periods youth, though she articulates MUCH better than most. As for your insults related to my age and/or opinions, yes they come from people that have long been gone, most over 200 years ago. They, not me, are responsible for a Government that has given generations of one society to change with circumstances, yet maintaining the 'Individualism Spirit' which is my hope she, you and future generations to enjoy.

Suppose I should have phrased "EVEN as a Conservative", but my point was while it's being assumed Democrats have some moral authority over the issue, there are many of us that in other camps that favor legalization. As for Libertarian Philosophy, and again even as a strict Constitutional Conservative, I feel they are to restrictive to change which I believe was intended by the founders. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged . "Regardless of what you think about the personal non-medical use of marijuana, do you think doctors should or should not be allowed to prescribe marijuana for medical purposes to treat their patients?" % Should 73 Should not 21 Don't know 6 This was interesting to me and why I believe the US Justice Department is not all over California prosecuting, guess millions. If 3/4ths of people feel it can be prescribed, knowing how many addictive drugs are already being prescribed (the reason not over the counter), whats the difference. I would bet, trying MJ by Americans is much higher than 50%, especially for the Baby Boomer's, which may be 80%+...opinion...

I don't believe you feel, people from another place should be in charge of what is taught in your school. People of your State do have the right, each State having it's own system to influence and the Federal through National Testing try to influence the major subjects. Here in NM they settled the problems years ago, NO Creationism or Intelligent Design is taught in Public Schools... http://www.thefreelibrary.com/New+Mexico+rejects+effort+to+add+creationism+to+science+standards-a0109028003 My sincere congratulations on number one VOTING your first opportunity and second RESEARCHING all the candidates. Again however, you and millions of young folks have a great deal to learn about how different Agenda driven groups can and have influenced your current understandings. In my days of learning it was to many people, we were headed for an ice age and only they could save us. Well they are mostly gone, we have three times the number of people on the planet and now I understand were heating up and we have to listen to new people with new ideas and new means to save the human species. I don't understand what a violent religion could be, in the US. Huckabee and Palin, have strong viewpoints on more than just religion and have made their comments on abortion or other related issues, but follow the same laws everyone does. As far as I know Freedom of Religion is still followed in Alaska and Arkansas...I am whats called agnostic, don't believe in anything religion has to offer and have reached the point of no longer caring. BUT, when my folks died 01-03, one child and two ex-wives and untold numbers of religious friends, my thoughts turn to their beliefs in life, not mine. Greed and Socialism; There are around 60,000 Corporation in the US that are publicly owned. They hire and pay many of the employed, don't force anyone to work for them, provide a variety of products and services we all take for granted, not to mention the millions of 'mom and pops' all over this country. Is that really greed... Socialism in short is equalization of all citizens, by taking from some and giving to others, regardless who has done what for the total. It forms from greed and those that have not done well and punishes those that have. If you succeed in your future and you do something with whatever talents you have, do you honestly believe I am entitled to part of your rewards in life or that if you fail (seriously doubt) that someone should give up part of their success to make you equal to them?

I have no idea, where Rush Limbaugh came into this discussion and I don't oppose bumper stickers. I do oppose profiling or that a State Agency, made such a profile part of a strategy. I'll add IMO, law enforcement people(prosecutors to police/highway patrol) tend to be conservative and many probably voted for Barr, Paul etc.... I don't keep up on the KKK, the various types (agenda) of said militias or for that matter Islamic Camps. If you feel membership is a personal right, that's fine with me, so long as no laws are breached...

Interesting; Why not look at it this way? When Obama was running for the Democratic Nomination, he addressed DEMOCRATS. When he became President, he became the leader of the American People of which about half are Democrats. As a Conservative, I favor legalization of pot, possibly other currently illegal drugs. Although MJ use laws are no longer enforced to a degree once were, far to many other wise law abiding citizens, have spent time in some prison, filled the over stressed legal systems, had careers interrupted or forced to change for a relatively minor crime. As for a majority/minority issue; Wording of all polls reflect major difference in results and results are rarely equal to recent polls. Said another way, I'm not sure the majority, if all were known, would in fact vote against legalization. http://www.pollingreport.com/drugs.htm