cavanami Posted September 7, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 7, 2010 OK, let the gov do the health care, as we can be assured of the fine job they will do, same as social security! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTT Posted September 7, 2010 Report Share Posted September 7, 2010 Those figures look lower than any I've seen in a long time. I usuually hear about 16% of GDP for the US. Here are some more numbers (I don't know how it'll format): Country↓ Life expectancy↓ Infant mortality rate↓ Physicians per 1000 people↓ Nurses per 1000 people↓ Per capita expenditure on health (USD)↓ Healthcare costs as a percent of GDP↓ % of government revenue spent on health↓ % of health costs paid by government↓ Australia 81.4 4.2 2.8 9.7 3,137 8.7 17.7 67.7 Canada 80.7 5.0 2.2 9.0 3,895 10.1 16.7 69.8 France 81.0 4.0 3.4 7.7 3,601 11.0 14.2 79.0 Germany 79.8 3.8 3.5 9.9 3,588 10.4 17.6 76.9 Japan 82.6 2.6 2.1 9.4 2,581 8.1 16.8 81.3 Norway 80.0 3.0 3.8 16.2 5,910 9.0 17.9 83.6 Sweden 81.0 2.5 3.6 10.8 3,323 9.2 13.6 81.7 UK 79.1 4.8 2.5 10.0 2,992 8.4 15.8 81.7 USA 78.1 6.7 2.4 10.6 7,290 16.0 18.5 45.4 Life Expectancy vs Health Care Spending in 2007 for OECD Countries. The data source is http://www.oecd.org and the image was built at http://flagscatter.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_compared#Cross-country_comparisons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unit731 Posted September 7, 2010 Report Share Posted September 7, 2010 Differences could be the year data collected. Health Care Costs Comparison. Here is a comparison of the United States' healthcare costs versus those of selected other countries in 2006: UNITED STATES: 15.9 pct of GDP, $6,657 per capita BRAZIL: 7.9 pct of GDP, $371 per capita CANADA: 9.7 pct of GDP, $3,430 per capita CHINA: 4.7 pct of GDP, $81 per capita FRANCE: 11.1 pct of GDP, $3,807 per capita GERMANY: 10.7 pct of GDP, $3,628 per capita Sadly, too many listen to the garbage and hate inuendos on Fox News with the likes of Beck, O'Reilly, and Hanity. And those Teabaggers and Teanuts probably never read a newspaper in their lives. But they certainly do love to listen to the Obama hate mongers - perpetrators of mis-information. All or most in the US think they are "middle Class" but in reality - most are dirt poor. I have traveled across US many times and I sometimes take only state highways/roads. My guess is that half of US live in upkeep challenged single wide modulars - and barely getting by. One trip I stopped by the IMUS Ranch in Ribera, New Mexico. What a contrast. Serious contrast and serious poverty in Ribera, New Mexico. I doubt if Imus ever stops by at the local store in Ribera, New Mexico - because of the poverty viewed. And it appears he has contributed zero to that town. His not-for-profit probably pays zero in real estate taxes. I once drove from west to east on Route 2 in Minnesota. The closed busineses and poverty viewed was obscene. I once drove from east to west in Mississippi on state route 98. And even worser poverty. Stopped in many a small town and almost every shop on Main Street was boarded up. The contrast between the haves and have nots is great - once off the beaten path. And as I stated above. The Repubs do not want any change in the health care as their buddies are making too much money on the old flawed system. Reform takes money out of the pockets of the overpaid executives of the multitude of health insurance companies and cuts the dividends paid to the wealthy stockholders of such. There should be no PROFIT built into any health care system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Rather than start a new thread, forgive me for ressurecting this one since it has to do with Obama. Bob Woodward has a new book out about Obama http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/world/asia/22policy.html "Obama's Wars" I love Woodward's books. I've read just about all of them that have to do with Presidents. I'm amazed at the access he gets as well as the inside info. I saw Woodward on CNN talking about Obama and his white house staff. He said he thinks his staff has let him down. That he needs to look outside his circle for more knowledge and insight. Woodward seems to like Obama. Had nice things to say about him. If the book is not negative enough for some that may be a reason. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 My big concern about Obama was that he'd be another Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter surrounded himself with outsiders, largely people with little experience - as he was himself. Obama seems to be surrounded with Chicago folks he has known for years. From this side of the big pond at least, it looks like history is repeating itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted September 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 Obama is surrounded with bankers, Wall Street Azzholes and lobbyists! Only Rahm Emanuel is from Chicago but looks to be heading back to Chi Town to make a run to be mayor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizardKing Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 My big concern about Obama was that he'd be another Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter surrounded himself with outsiders, largely people with little experience - as he was himself. Obama seems to be surrounded with Chicago folks he has known for years. From this side of the big pond at least, it looks like history is repeating itself. Maybe true, but Paul Volker led us out of that economic mess, NOT Ray-gun (who I'll only give credit for keeping Volcker on after transition). Jimmy gets dogged by the tightie righties (mostly the uneducated ones), but his GDP increase (over his tenure) was better than Ray-guns. Hardly surprising, since Dem POTSUS' always score better than GOPers in that regard. At least in my lifetime... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bust Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 Actually the recession bottomed early in the Reagan presidency. And LK is right, Volcker got America back on track by slashing interest rates big time and big money had no where else to go but back into stocks and funding America's companies in the process. I also don't credit Clinton for the '90s boom as well. That was an internet boom. He did the smart thing by getting out of the way for the most part. Reagan as well, although the defense build up didn't help and it was unecessary. Carter's main problem was the Iran hostage crisis. The economy was bad and that hurt him but the country had no self pride and Reagan gave the country that. He was the cowboy and we needed a stronger symbol at the time to some folks. For me Obama's biggest mistake was tackling heath care so early. It gave his opponents fuel. Something of that size and scope your tackle in second term. He should have kept it simple. Jobs. Simple as that. Concentrate on jobs. Jobs in the swing states specifically. Its politics but the first 4 years are about getting re-elected. The second term is about getting a name in the history books. Every president fears being a Millard Filmore or Franklin Pearce. Worst yet, Herbert Hoover or Richard Nixon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 Bust, always there to remind us what's really important. :content: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.