2008 US Presidential Elections

[Hidden_Hunter]

Originally Posted by jayhawk

Why is it that hospitals in States bordering Canada are full of Canadians in for surgery? We all know why, it is because Canada has socialized medicine, and the poeple who can pay, come here. Meanwhile, uncle Ted, good working man that he is, has to wait 6 months for a transplant because that is how it is with socialized medicine. For the people in Britian, I am sure that you could spend a great deal venting your spleen about healthcare.

Can't say I agree with you on that one and I find your transplant scenario difficult to beleive, elective surgery perhaps but a transplant?

[Firecat]

You can have the greatest doctors, staff, and equipment in the world...but what good is that if you can't afford it?

[anti-net]

Originally Posted by jayhawk

Why is it that hospitals in States bordering Canada are full of Canadians in for surgery? We all know why, it is because Canada has socialized medicine, and the poeple who can pay, come here. Meanwhile, uncle Ted, good working man that he is, has to wait 6 months for a transplant because that is how it is with socialized medicine. For the people in Britian, I am sure that you could spend a great deal venting your spleen about healthcare.

I'll begin by venting my spleen! - the NHS is not perfect, its actually a bit shit. But should we kill it off? Hell No! The issue with the NHS is since I returned to the UK in 1998 as a young child, During that time there was a very ambitious PM called Tony "I love fucking up the UK" Blair who thought that "Targets" and cutting budgets was somehow and good idea. and now my local hospital that was one of the best in the country its now one of the worst. So, its always poor leadership.

Also, on Socialism isn't good for a country, look at Norway which is run by a social democrat goverment, it has been the top of The Economist quality of life ranking for years now. social democracy isn't all bad....

[GM_IV]

Originally Posted by jayhawk

Why is it that hospitals in States bordering Canada are full of Canadians in for surgery? We all know why, it is because Canada has socialized medicine, and the poeple who can pay, come here. Meanwhile, uncle Ted, good working man that he is, has to wait 6 months for a transplant because that is how it is with socialized medicine. For the people in Britian, I am sure that you could spend a great deal venting your spleen about healthcare.

The reason why theres such a long waiting list for transplants is because everyone who needs one is on the list. Those who have the money of course do not want to wait and go to the US because not everyone who needs a transplant in the US could afford it, thus no wait times. Also if there is a risk of you dying because your still waiting for a transplant you will be bumped up. Technically the argument can be turned around since Americans near the border still buy drugs in Canada even with the higher dollar. Canada subsidizes some expensive drugs and also allows generic drug manufacturers to further lower costs. The lower health care costs for companies is also a major incentive for doing business here, the earliest form of outsourcing from the US was because of this, despite Canada's rather high standard of living.

While I haven't needed to use the health care system in Canada, quite a few members of my family have. Since then, I had a much greater respect for the system as a whole as it put life over all other priorities including costs. Realizing the costs of surgery and especially the cost of rehabilitation, technically my dad's family despite its size should have been bankrupt trying to care for my grandmother since she needed lots of rehab to walk again. When my grandmother on my mother's side needed similar treatment it should have bankrupted my mother's side. Politically there isn't a single party in Canada liberal or conservative who could even think about cutting the or replacing current system unless they never want to form the government. 2-tier health care is a term that prevented conservatives from getting elected years ago. If one wants to criticize theres quite a lot of problems in Canada's health care, but of all things to me its one of the few things that make it worth living in this country.

[M3lover]

Originally Posted by anti-net

I'll begin by venting my spleen! - the NHS is not perfect, its actually a bit shit. But should we kill it off? Hell No! The issue with the NHS is since I returned to the UK in 1998 as a young child, During that time there was a very ambitious PM called Tony "I love fucking up the UK" Blair who thought that "Targets" and cutting budgets was somehow and good idea. and now my local hospital that was one of the best in the country its now one of the worst. So, its always poor leadership.

Also, on Socialism isn't good for a country, look at Norway which is run by a social democrat goverment, it has been the top of The Economist quality of life ranking for years now. social democracy isn't all bad....

Norway as an example should maybe be considered with a grain of salt, given their massive wealth in oil. So it's a little more "easy" for them being generous with their wellfare.

Denmark is more or less driven with a form of capitalistic communism based on one of the highest, if not the highest overall tax pressure in the world (40-60% income tax, 25% on goods, ~180% on cars etc.)
That has lead to a very small fraction of society that have very little, and a very small fraction that have very much.
You can become anything you want for free, free healthcare etc.
Here this seems to be a pretty good deal for most.

The americans seem to be very parenoid about their hard earned money going to someone else. But what you have to remember is that it works both ways. If you end up in a unfortunate situation yourself the state will be there for you.
That being said, a system like this would probably never fly in the US. The whole "every man for himself" thing is to grown in.

We have 8 different political parties, and that seems to work well I guess. They seem to counter each other to give a balanced goverment.

[RUU-CHAMA]

I recently visited the youtube site and went to their "face the candidates" segment. After spending an hour listening to what most of the candidates have to say on the different issues I must ask one question, what does Obama stand for? I sat there and listened to Romney give a plan about the economy, Julliani give a plan about energy ect: Then I went to Obama and all he was saying was 'we need change, we need change' and I'm saying, yes we need change but what are you proposing? I then went to the Clinton video and all it shows is people from the audience telling us what they think of her.

I know that the government is hemorrhaging money, that social security is about to come due, that the dollar is falling like a meteor, that our debt is astronomically high and that capitalism that drove the world to such advances is being laughed at and socialism is hailed as the best thing since sliced bread. I also know that instead of addressing these issues, its seems global warming is what Americans really should be worrying about. People just can't seem to understand that with all these things collapsing on us we cannot afford what the democrats are talking about and saying that we are the richest nation on earth means nothing (remember all those former rich people who thought they had money to burn). Thats why I think that you, Jayhawk, have a firm grasp on the issues.

Change is good, but change to what? If you are not being taxed enough and are going to vote for someone because they are charismatic go ahead, the road to hell has always been paved with good intentions.

[tigger]

Originally Posted by Firecat

You can have the greatest doctors, staff, and equipment in the world...but what good is that if you can't afford it?

Exactly. And there is a massive amount of the US population that cannot afford health insurance. All I can afford at present is shitty, basic HMO coverage, and that's only because I can get a deal as a student. This draws me towards the democrats, but like RUUCHAMA noted, they all seem to have some pretty fanciful ideas about global warming. There are much better things to be spending money on. And yeah, they all talk about "change" until their jaws hurt, but they don't really say anything at all.

Jayhawk, I had a similar mental conversation with myself back in high school. As far as I'm concerned, all the talk about racism and equality and blah, blah, blah only perpetuates the problem. We need to look beyond that if there's ever actually going to be any change. Damnit, now I'm yammering about change. Damn you Obama!

[British_Rover]

Originally Posted by IVIaster

That what I thought so. So why dont they put them on the same day to make it fair?

New Hampshire actually has it in their state constitution that they MUST have the first primary in the country. That is why Wyoming lost most of their delegates by pushing their Rep primary before New Hampshire.

[LurkerPatrol]

Wow Edwards really seems to have trouble finding a middle ground with his audience. He can't be gracious when he loses and is almost seeming desperate coming into South Carolina. Obama has slipped up and his naivety has come out of hiding a bit more. I know its bad to go back and forth and certainly I'm not going to say "well now I support Hillary even though I supported Obama last time". I do take back my previous statements about how heroic and a role model Obama seems to be. It's only been 2 states, so I think I'm going to wait it out and see who's better in terms of their plans rather than how shiny they look. Come super Tuesday I hope to have an answer as to who I will support (especially since I'll be voting). I have to give props to Hillary though for duking it out and taking all the flak about being a woman.

What do you guys think? Is it too early to root for one person or another?

[jetsetter]

Well, I have finally made a decision. It is McCain for me.



I would also accept

[Firecat]

I don't get why Giuliani has so much support nationally. All he talks about is 9/11, and it's rather disgusting. And it's not like he even did anything during that time that would make him a better or more experienced candidate than anyone else.

[Hidden_Hunter]

Originally Posted by Firecat

I don't get why Giuliani has so much support nationally. All he talks about is 9/11, and it's rather disgusting. And it's not like he even did anything during that time that would make him a better or more experienced candidate than anyone else.

none of them talk about why their better, obama just rattles on about change and Hillary well....

[LurkerPatrol]

Originally Posted by Firecat

I don't get why Giuliani has so much support nationally. All he talks about is 9/11, and it's rather disgusting. And it's not like he even did anything during that time that would make him a better or more experienced candidate than anyone else.

Yeah, but he only has limited supporters wherever he goes (at least that's what we're seeing now in Iowa and NH). Hopefully he doesn't go up in terms of votes from this point onwards. He may get more support in FL (which he's putting all his chips on), but let's cross our fingers and hope that its no more than that. Btw, no offense Jetsetter, just putting my thoughts out there just as you are

[Firecat]

McCain has no problem with the US being in Iraq for 100 years...

+ YouTube Video

Such a continued presence will only cause more trouble down the road.

[vegasrebel29]

Originally Posted by RUU-CHAMA

I recently visited the youtube site and went to their "face the candidates" segment. After spending an hour listening to what most of the candidates have to say on the different issues I must ask one question, what does Obama stand for? I sat there and listened to Romney give a plan about the economy, Julliani give a plan about energy ect: Then I went to Obama and all he was saying was 'we need change, we need change' and I'm saying, yes we need change but what are you proposing? I then went to the Clinton video and all it shows is people from the audience telling us what they think of her.

I know that the government is hemorrhaging money, that social security is about to come due, that the dollar is falling like a meteor, that our debt is astronomically high and that capitalism that drove the world to such advances is being laughed at and socialism is hailed as the best thing since sliced bread. I also know that instead of addressing these issues, its seems global warming is what Americans really should be worrying about. People just can't seem to understand that with all these things collapsing on us we cannot afford what the democrats are talking about and saying that we are the richest nation on earth means nothing (remember all those former rich people who thought they had money to burn). Thats why I think that you, Jayhawk, have a firm grasp on the issues.

Change is good, but change to what? If you are not being taxed enough and are going to vote for someone because they are charismatic go ahead, the road to hell has always been paved with good intentions.

Did you ever stop to think that all of those things you just mentioned are related?

[jetsetter]

Originally Posted by Firecat

McCain has no problem with the US being in Iraq for 100 years...

That is one of the reasons I support him. Iraq has been fairly messed up for decades, a few years of us being there will not fix it. I want to be there for 100 years, I want huge military bases and thousands of troops. I want a presence in the Middle East for as long as we can manage it.

[Firecat]

Originally Posted by jetsetter

That is one of the reasons I support him. Iraq has been fairly messed up for decades, a few years of us being there will not fix it. I want to be there for 100 years, I want huge military bases and thousands of troops. I want a presence in the Middle East for as long as we can manage it.

Okay. But don't shed any tears when more buildings drop in New York City. Or claim that the reason people hate the United States is because of its freedom or whatever other nonsense.

or maybe it will be New New York City when it happens.

[tigger]

Originally Posted by jetsetter

Iraq has been fairly messed up for decades, a few years of us being there will not fix it. I want to be there for 100 years, I want huge military bases and thousands of troops. I want a presence in the Middle East for as long as we can manage it.

... Why?

Yes, Saddam was pretty screwy, but Iraq was stable before. I don't agree with our going there in the first place (and all of this administrations bullshit reasons only add to my anger), but we intentionally went in there with 'one hand tied behind our back'. If you're going to fight a war; fight to win. Use overwhelming force and end the conflict as soon as possible, set up a stable puppet government and then leave. Especially in the case of the middle east, leave asap. The whole reason Osama got on this whole anti-Western bent is because of US bases in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War. Why continue to provoke fighting? To perpetuate the whole "military-industrial complex" and a bunch of nutty republicans campaigns? That's the only reason I can see for staying there.