Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have no problem with doctors charging whatever they can get away with. I do have a problem with the AMA and similar groups limiting the number of medical schools to create a shortage of MDs with the intention of keeping those salaries so high. Doesn't that sound a bit like a monoply, which is banned by federal laws?

 

Furthermore, why the fark can I NOT use Medicare in Bangkok? There are several hospitals with international standards, US and UK trained Thai MDs. People fly here from all over the world to use them. I live here, but if I want to use my Medicare I have to fly to the US and pay US prices. That is absolute BOVINE DEFECATION. I'm a combat veteran and an ex-PC volunteer. I gave 7 years of my life to the US government. In return, I get treated like an unwanted relative.

 

Makes no sense to me either Flash but I guarantee you the AMA and the medical industry have a problem with it. They have successfully sold the BS that America is the only place you can get quality medical care. The run of the mill shit can be done anywhere on the planet pretty much. America still does the extremely difficult stuff (brain surgery, heart surgery, etc.) better than anyone else just about (although there are always new techniques and procedures and experiemental stuff that come out of France, Russia, Germany, etc. every once in a while).

 

I'm a free market guy myself. I have a cousin in Florida who is a surgeon. What we have in America is NOT the free market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have any problem with a plastic surgeon or a lasic surgeon or a dentist charging whatever they want to customers that are paying for their services out of their own pocket. For the vast majority of doctors in the part of the health care system through which they are paid either by insurance companies or the government, I do have a problem. The U.S. has a health care system where doctors are paid for performing procedures but not preventative medicine. They are paid when they conduct tests, the only reason that they do the tests is to protect their asses in case of a malpractice lawsuit. State governments control the number of insurance companies that can sell health insurance in each state, preventing insurance companies from competing inter state (and lowering insurance premiums). The idea of health insurance being tied to a job has long outlived its usefulness. I know people that can't get affordable insurance, and are put in very expensive "state medical pools," because of pre existing medical conditions. I know many people that stay at a job, particularly a government job, only for the health benefits. Why are health insurance benefits not taxable? It encourages businesses to keep its most valued employees by giving them expensive "Cadillac coverage" which isn't taxed and provides no reason for those people to not go to the emergency room for a hangnail (and run up health costs for all of us). The same goes to unions that provide the same coverage. On the other extreme are those that have no health insurance, who receive no care or crappy care under Medicaid. Or the self employed, that pay "full priced" health insurance rates. Where is the fairness of a health care system, where the rate that a person pays for health insurance is set by the type of job one has or the lack of political clout (or lobbyist) on has. Even if one is one of the "haves" in the current health care system, certainly, they are smart enough to see the current system is unsustainable. Why anyone would want to get rid of Obamacare and keep the present system is beyond me (except for seniors being scared by Doctors and insurance companies over changes in Medicare). By the way, Flash, its obvious that government doesn't extend Medicare beyond the U.S. borders because of the short term costs in doing so (and opposition from the AMA). Long term, it would be cheaper for insurance companies to pay for airline tickets to have Americans living in the U.S. to go to accredited medical centers for treatment and surgery (to say nothing about ex pats doing the same). I don't know how many senior citizens live outside of the U.S. but I'm sure that the government saves a ton of money by excluding them from using Medicare outside the U.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heath care in America is nothing short of a crisis situation but because of the religious right in the Republican party, stopping two guys getting married is of higher importance than health care...far higher.

 

The USA are the only industrialized Western country in which millions don't have even basic health insurance and in which a financially healthy middle class family can go bancrupt, because a family member becomes seriously ill (cancer, e.g.).

 

By the way in the USA the poor have much lower life expectance than the rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Voted for Obama ... BECAUSE HE'S BLACK

 

 

Barack Obama's politics meant nothing to Samuel L. Jackson because the "Pulp Fiction" star only voted for the president for one reason and one reason only ... because he's black.

 

In an interview with Ebony magazine, Jackson explained, "I voted for Barack because he was black. 'Cuz that's why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them ... That's American politics, pure and simple. [Obama's] message didn't mean [bleep] to me."

 

Jackson then went on to drop the N-word several times when discussing Obama, telling the mag, "When it comes down to it, they wouldn't have elected a [bleep]. Because, what's a [bleep]? A [bleep] is scary. Obama ain't scary at all. [bleeps] don't have beers at the White House. [bleeps] don't let some white dude, while you in the middle of a speech, call [him] a liar. A [bleep] would have stopped the meeting right there and said, ‘Who the [bleep] said that?' I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years, 'cuz he ain't gotta worry about getting re-elected."

 

Smacks of ... Obama needs to Black it up.

 

My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago the premier of my home state appointed a prominent member of the Aboriginal community as governor. (A purely ceremonial position).

It wasn't a success but I'll always remember while partaking of a refreshing ale in an inner city Adelaide pub on a hot Saturday afternoon, an extremely drunk Aborigine entered the bar and was refused service.

As he was leaving he turned to us and, with enormous dignity, said... "my cousin, he your fucking gubner". :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Voted for Obama ... BECAUSE HE'S BLACK

 

 

Barack Obama's politics meant nothing to Samuel L. Jackson because the "Pulp Fiction" star only voted for the president for one reason and one reason only ... because he's black.

 

In an interview with Ebony magazine, Jackson explained, "I voted for Barack because he was black. 'Cuz that's why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them ... That's American politics, pure and simple. [Obama's] message didn't mean [bleep] to me."

 

Jackson then went on to drop the N-word several times when discussing Obama, telling the mag, "When it comes down to it, they wouldn't have elected a [bleep]. Because, what's a [bleep]? A [bleep] is scary. Obama ain't scary at all. [bleeps] don't have beers at the White House. [bleeps] don't let some white dude, while you in the middle of a speech, call [him] a liar. A [bleep] would have stopped the meeting right there and said, ‘Who the [bleep] said that?' I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years, 'cuz he ain't gotta worry about getting re-elected."

 

Smacks of ... Obama needs to Black it up.

 

My link

 

 

LOL...I saw that article as well. So did a large percentage of blacks. No surprise there. Personally, I would prefer if people voted according to what issues are important to them but it isn't so.

 

For the most part, many people vote their 'group'. Black church members always always vote Democrats. White fundamentals almost always vote Republican. Unions were almost always Democrat for a time but many in the rust belt will vote Republican now, ever since Reagan, so called 'Reagan Democrats'.

 

Its tantamount to a guarantee that California will vote Democrat for President while Alabamans vote Republican. Gays vote Democrat and Mormons vote Republican. Irish-Americans voted for JFK overwhelmingly. Italians voted for the Mondale/Ferarro ticket overwhlemingly.

 

It is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/12/house-transportation-bill-rail-drivers_n_1271644.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=321726,b=facebook

House Transportation Bill 'Technical Correction' Would Strip Workers Of Pay Protections

A little-noted provision in the House Republicans' controversial energy and transportation bill would strip several thousand workers within the rail-industry of their federal minimum-wage and overtime protections, potentially making low-wage jobs pay even less.

Listed in the bill under the heading "Technical Correction," provision 6602 would exempt several companies who transport rail workers from their obligations under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the 1938 law that guarantees basic worker rights. The carveout would allow a handful of boutique contractors to pay no overtime to their drivers who haul rail workers between worksites, often driving long distances of 300 miles or more…

 

The House's transportation committee, which is chaired by Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) and approved the bill, did not return a request for comment from The Huffington Post. Officials at several of the companies that could potentially benefit from the change -- including Professional Transportation, Inc., RailCrew Express and Coach America -- also did not respond to requests for comment…

It isn't merely Democrats who are angered by the transportation plan put forth by House Republicans. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who was a Republican congressman before taking the helm at the department, last week declared it "the worst transportation bill I've ever seen during 35 years of public service," saying it "hollows out" the department's top priority of safety and "guts" the administration's transportation efforts of the last three years.

"This is the most partisan transportation bill that I have ever seen," LaHood told Politico.

The $260 billion, five-year bill calls for more highways and toll roads to be paid for with offshore drilling. In addition to cutting funding for bike and pedestrian projects, the bill would slash subsidies for Amtrak by 25 percent; privatize food and drink vending on Amtrak trains while guaranteeing such sales with taxpayer money; and substantially increase the size of trucks allowed on roadways, a potential boon for the trucking industry but a change that's opposed by environmental groups.

 

Anytime I see things like this from either party you know some lobby group has paid someone off. Disgusting. Things should be part of a bill or not part of a bill on its own merit, irrespective of the money behind but its the times we live in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...