COMMENTS: 107
National Health Insurance Now, Not Later
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Environment headlines via email.
To paraphrase our former President, Richard Nixon, "you're not going to have America's healthcare system to kick around forever."
Health Insurance has been a political football in this country for decades. It's been on every politician's laundry list, in one form or another, in every election. There have been employer plans; there have been government plans; city, state and federal plans. It's been brought up again and again in every State of the Union address, year after year. Despite all the talk and attention by both parties, census figures show that a record 46.6 million Americans, including 8.3 million children, have no health insurance at all, at a time when the cost of health care has gone through the roof. How can they afford to see a doctor or fill a prescription?
Are we going to go on talking the talk and getting ripped off by Big Insurance forever? Why can't we have what every other industrialized nation in the world enjoys -- some form of national health insurance?
That may be the first question some Democratic Congressman or Senator may ask now that they have a majority in both houses of Congress -- but I doubt it.
A look back at the endless squabble over health care in this country will reveal where this timidity comes from. It all began with the bug-a-boo of "Socialized Medicine" raised by the American Medical Association after World War II when they saw their "fee-for-service" system being threatened. The system was: You go to the doctor, you get a service and you pay a fee; and that's the way they wanted to keep it, by God!
But after the war, something new was blowin' in the wind. People like Henry Kaiser, the auto maker and ship builder, came up with a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) for his employees. You pay a small monthly fee, you get your entire medical and hospital needs free of any other charges.
The city of New York jumped right in with HIP (Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York), a pre-paid health plan for city employees. "Socialized medicine!" screamed the AMA. Physicians and surgeons manned the battle stations. Many saw their seven figure incomes taking flight.
Other HMOs mushroomed around the country. And then, in 1965, President Lyndon Johnson made "medical care for the aged" part of his Great Society package. We know it today as Medicare. Then came Medicaid, medical care for the indigent. The flood gates were opened. For the first time, huge amounts of government money started pouring into the health care system.
The insurance industry knew a good thing when they saw it. Organized medicine, the AMA and its state and county medical societies, did not -- paralyzed by the fear of government intrusion.
Insurance companies relished the enormous cash flow of government money emanating from Medicare and Medicaid and other government programs like Champus, medical coverage for servicemen and their families.
Insurance companies set up their own private plans, yes, HMOs, to sop up all that loose cash. They turned pre-paid plans into their opposite -- not "socialized medicine" for the people but corporate welfare for the insurance companies. Through the years, they increased premiums and cut services, raking in billions in profits instead of providing not-for-profit medical services to their subscribers. The doctors allowed themselves to be co-opted and blind-sided. They allowed the pre-paid plans to get away from them. Their fear of "socialized medicine" dimmed their vision.
Instead of "socialized medicine" the doctors got privatized sweatshops where some doctors can't make medical decisions without the approval of an HMO bureaucrat. Managed care became mismanaged medicine.
The epitome of outrage was Hillary and Bill Clinton's opportunistic brainstorming of a National Health Plan in 1992. They devised a government health plan they knew would never work. They dangled it before the nation. They were too politically sophisticated not to know they were playing right into the hands of the insurance companies.
The Clintons set the national health care movement back a generation. Now, Hillary Clinton is running for president in 2008. What's her health care program? More of the same. Single payer? No way.
The current health insurance system violates the very essence of the insurance principle -- the widest coverage for the least cost. The larger the pool, the more efficient the system.
In the current US system, there are literally tens of thousands of different, and overlapping, health care organizations generating a blizzard of paperwork in an administrative wilderness creating enormous waste -- thousands, if not millions of people pushing paper around. They are driving doctors, trying to do a job, up the wall with the different forms needed to be completed in order to get paid, to say nothing of patients fighting their way through a jungle of obstacles trying to get the health care they need.
A single payer system would eliminate all that.
One administrator or "payer" -- yes, a government supervised agency, would collect all health care fees and pay out all health care costs. In a single payer system, all hospitals, doctors and other health care providers would bill one entity for their services. Every US citizen would be covered. It's been done successfully in most "civilized" countries. Why not here?
US health care is in crisis, today. The system just isn't working, for anybody, except, maybe the health insurance industry and their HMOs that are siphoning off whopping profits. But doctors aren't happy. Patients are burdened more and more with increasing co-payments. Health care costs continue to skyrocket. And 47 million people remain uninsured. Sooner, if not later, the system will crash. Must we wait for that to happen?
Stay up to date with the latest Environment headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MAD on Feb 2, 2007 4:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So let me get this straight:
47 million people go uninsured in the wealthiest industrialized nation in the world, the only one which does not guarantee access to healtchcare as a right of citizenship, and the system "will" crash? I think that ship sailed quite some time ago, Alternet!
I wonder how many other industrialized nations would stand by and watch as such a large percentage of children went without proper access to quality healthcare? Oh, that's right! Countries that aren't busy propping up their Military-Industrial Complex by spending a trillion + dollars on an illegal war of aggression can afford to fund universal healthcare. Silly me!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What The F*ck Are You Talking About? ----> HERE, HERE!!!
Posted by: stephenburnett
» Yes...I'm afraid they will stand by and watch
Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Yes...I'm afraid they will stand by and watch-NO -PROGRESS IS BEING MADE
Posted by: drricklippin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: allUneedislove on Feb 2, 2007 4:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way, socialized medicine has always been our only hope. LET'S DO IT!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Clinton Proposal
Posted by: cinattra
» RE: The Clinton Proposal
Posted by: Conservasaurus
» It's comforting to believe what you say, but wrong.....
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Conservasaurus.
Posted by: Grampop
Comments are closed-
Posted by: michaeltwatson on Feb 2, 2007 6:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Townes Watson, author of America's Tunnel Vision--How Insurance Companies' Propaganda Is Corrupting Medicine and Law.
www.StopMedicalError.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Single-Payer System Necessary For More than One Reason
Posted by: cinattra
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dikaiosyne on Feb 2, 2007 6:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» typical right wing troll attack
Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: Uncle Crabby
» you're an idiot
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: you're an idiot
Posted by: solrev
» RE: you're an idiot
Posted by: Uncle Crabby
» uncle crabby's idea's a good start along with
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: Jayzer
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: mjabele
» Who are the fools?
Posted by: CollD
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: B. Spoon
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hennep on Feb 2, 2007 6:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Europe has many diverse systems, all have evolved since WW2, America could learn, but its vested interests and arrogance will not allow it to happen without a lot of kicking and screaming.
The main problem facing social health care is the cost of drugs, unrealisticly raised expectations and the stupidity of the populations who elect to make them self ill by being overweight etc due to ignorance of basic health guidelines which are muddled by the corporates who just want a profit at any cost. Social health care is not just about hosptials and local doctors, its a two way street of responsibilities on both side, sadly we in europe have been infected by the American mentality where responsibility by the population has been eroded so corporations can get rich, thats why some have problems.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Comments on European system RE: look to europe
Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Comments on European system RE: look to europe
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: NoPCZone on Feb 2, 2007 6:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Veterans Administration & the Department of Defense (the Army, Navy & Air Force healthcare systems). Until Clinton screwed things up with TriCare (replacing CHAMPUS), families of servicemen & women had the closest thing to what a NAtional Healthcare System could be like. Despite TriCare it is still a very good system compared to the civilian sector.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CriminallySane on Feb 2, 2007 7:15 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact is, insurance companies take far more money out of the economy in general than they ever put back in "coverage" terms. Time for a change.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's also worth remembering...
Posted by: Jayzer
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Feb 2, 2007 7:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Lawsuit Abuse
Posted by: JERSEYDAN
» If you wanted to expose your agenda, you couldn't have done a better job of it...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» you can control bad doctors and corporations without Lawsuit abuse
Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Mop Cheese on Feb 2, 2007 7:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Governmental interventions intervene in the market, telling us that they're doing it for our own good.
Then problems pop up all over the place as a result.
Then, they tell us that, to fix the problems of capitalism, which were really caused by gov't intervention in the first place, they tell us they need to intervene for our own good.
And so on.
And so on, in an incestuous, amnesiac circle until we wind up with what canada has--people dying off because the get sent around a horribly inefficient system, and every doctor taking the last months of the year off because that's when their gov't mandated billing quota runs out.
Leave it be!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: patszar
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: patszar
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: Jim Shaw
» Do you guys get paid for this?
Posted by: McJulie
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: CriminallySane
» Ahem...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» Posting Reflects Why National Health Insurance Will Never Be.....
Posted by: CatDad
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CrystalD on Feb 2, 2007 8:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, we know that our healthcare system as it stands is a dog's breakfast. We desperately need a nationwide safety net of insurance for all. Now what do we do, where do we go, and who do we contact to get there?
No-one in our wealthy country should go uninsured. No-one needs to lack for health care. I'm making this one of my missions in life. Where do we start?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yes, we need single-payer health care. Now what do we DO?
Posted by: Jim Shaw
» RE: Yes, we need single-payer health care. Now what do we DO?
Posted by: South42
» RE: Yes, we need single-payer health care. Now what do we DO? HR 676!!!!!
Posted by: DCostello2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sprachenlehrer on Feb 2, 2007 8:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As for President Clinton's efforts and those of Hillary, I've seen some of the documents (at the Clinton Library in Little Rock) that came from the task force (or whatever it's called). Their hands were tied by the insurance industry, the pharmaceutical companies, and the medical profession. Every effort was blocked by these greedy sons-of-Satan. Perhaps the biggest obstacle was the use of the Constitutional provision that rights not specifically assigned to the Federal Government are reserved for the States. Thus, the federal effort was dead from the get-go.
I fault President Clinton, however, for not making it his Number One priority to issue an Executive Order to MAKE IT HAPPEN!!! Hell, the Federal purse-strings are used to mandate highway improvements, education standards, etc. in the various States. What's the difference?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: National Health Insurance is Long Overdue!
Posted by: willymack
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Feb 2, 2007 9:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The pertinent question is how the majority of us might come together in the humanitarian spirit and find a way to help those among that 15% who are unable to provide for themselves.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Headline should have read: "15% of people in the U.S. uninsured!"
Posted by: buffeliscious
» Something new or something better?
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Something new or something better?
Posted by: YogiBear
» Something new AND something better
Posted by: buffeliscious
» That's exactly what we have now. Why alter it dramatically?
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» Headline: 15% Uninsured, 31 MILLION MORE UNDER-INSURED
Posted by: sofla100
» RE: Headline: 15% Uninsured, 31 MILLION MORE UNDER-INSURED
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» Just "buy more insurance."
Posted by: YogiBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: godsbedamned on Feb 2, 2007 9:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anothernewbrother on Feb 2, 2007 10:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nonetheless, due to Congress' (and Americans') unwillingness to address the real, complex economic issues causing the healthcare crisis in America (incuding market distortation resulting from third-party (government and employer) payee schemes, government subsidies for some citizens (Medicare, Medicaid) but not for all, insurance industry subsidies (group plans written off taxes by big corporations, effectively corporate salary subsidies), partial market price controls (which drive up costs for those not on government programs at the expense of those on government programs), government inposed limitations on competition and the availability of healthcare services (yes, government does restrict how many hospitals and beds can be constructed and made available in a given regional area driving up the cost of hospital stays due to lack of competition and artifically restricted supply), and so forth, and so forth (I could write a book)), I suspect a nationalized system (whether it be healthcare directly, or healthcare insurance) is what we're likely to get.
As someone with many of complex and rare healthcare problems, who has had his private healthcare insurance cancelled after a major medical claim (with the full and complete blessings of Congress and government reguators), and who is currently uninsurable, and therefore dependent on an insurance-of-last-resort program (along with hundreds of thousands of other Americans who have had their health insurance cancelled with the blessings of Congress), you might think I would feel differently, but I have also seen the long term consequences for everyone (not just for myself) of what nationalization does to any industry and I know that in the long run it will only make the problem worse. I also don't want investment in new medical technology and new pharmaceuticals grinding to a halt in the face of nationlization. Nor do I like to think of my nieces and nephews dieing prematurately while they wait on years-long waiting lists for needed medical procedures (as often happens in countries with nationalized systems, where bureauocrats make healthcare decisions rather then doctors).
As the Chinese say, be careful what you wish for.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Caution...big pharma's look alike pills?
Posted by: mont
» RE: Caution...
Posted by: YogiBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anothernewbrother on Feb 2, 2007 10:44 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder how many of those who think a national system is the solution didn't even bother to read the above carefully, let alone give it any consideration. If they aren't willing to invest time and serious thought into a solution, why should we let them push through some candy-coated fantasy that will impact our lives for generations?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Caution (2)
Posted by: Mewsician
» RE: Caution (2)
Posted by: Mewsician
» RE: Caution (2)
Posted by: Mewsician
» Why Only America Then Without Socialized Health Care???
Posted by: sofla100
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Landbaron on Feb 2, 2007 11:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ZPaul on Feb 2, 2007 12:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a Spanish saying (Spain is a country with a Socialist government and a National Health System) that goes: 1) Salud. 2) Dinero. 3) Amor. People might debate whether to put Love in first place or not, but putting selfish economic interests before the health of a country, which is, IMO, a far more important "capital", is simply being small-minded and short-sighted.
If we do not all have access the health care, forget about talking about life quality of life. That is first and foremost. The idiots are the ones who don´t see this are the same ones who believe in pushing a U.S.-dominated "free market" on Latin America.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Health Care Should NEVER Be "Market-Based"HUMAN FLESH AND SOULS ARE NOT COMMODITIES
Posted by: drricklippin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 2, 2007 1:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Echo your statements.
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 2, 2007 1:34 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is my plan put forth in 1995
GROW UP AMERICA-A HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS- proposed by Richard. A Lippin MD*
-Stop prolonging death. It’s both expensive and dehumanizing at best, greedy and cruel at worst.
-Empower US citizens to assume increased individual responsibility for health and convince medical consumers that it is in their best interests not to assume the role of helpless, dependent victims/patients.
-Yet also recognize that we have medicalized America’s social problems. So we must provide healthy and safe jobs for all able citizens thereby reducing poverty and all its subsequent health impacts (possibly 1/3rd of Health Care Costs)
-Provide healthy environments including healthy air, water, soil and food.
-Rebuild America’s public health infrastructure to ensure we provide appropriate macro and individual interventions to especially low income citizens such as childhood and adult immunizations and response to man-made and natural catastrophes.
-Face the reality that a very large percentage of illnesses, injuries and hospitalizations are entirely preventable. Subsequently, the elimination of tobacco, alcohol, drug, medication and dietary abuse alone could immediately reduce medical costs by a factor of at least fifty percent.
-Incent and train physicians to maintain the health of patients and populations. Radical changes in provider re-imbursement and medical education strategies are necessary
-Recognize that early childhood preventive medical education can profoundly affect lifelong health behaviors.
*proposed in June of 1995
Revised January 2006/2007
Dr. Rick Lippin
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Some Clarification
Posted by: MAD
» RE: Some Clarification
Posted by: JERSEYDAN
» RE: Some Clarification-OK JerseyDan
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Some Clarification-OK MAD
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: PREVENTION IS OUR ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS FIASCO
Posted by: codenameA
» RE: PREVENTION IS OUR ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS FIASCO-SORRY code name A
Posted by: drricklippin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 2, 2007 1:35 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Canadian Life Expectancy: 80.2 years
American Infant Mortality: 6.4 deaths per 1000 live births
American Life Expectancy: 77.8 years
(Well, yes sir eee, that govimmint healthcare is so bad! you all can see that above can't you,....)
Once again, the idiots against national healthcare, proven wrong.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Maybe it's too cold for germs to live up there
Posted by: YogiBear
» Speaking as a Canadian here...
Posted by: MatthewSavage
» RE: Canadians Considerably More Healthy Then Americans!
Posted by: lucindawick
» RE: Canadians Considerably More Healthy Then Americans!
Posted by: sofla100
» Bad public health stats - the law of averages...
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Feb 2, 2007 6:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once I made $100,000 worth of enzyme (*retail price) in two days using about $500 worth of raw materials (true, I had access to a research lab back in those days...) - that's the reality.
Big Pharma's solution? They're so awash in cash they can afford to buy up all the generic manufacturers and take their products off the market - no kidding - and no one (well, I think Leahy is pissed off about the anthrax attack on his office and is trying to stick it to the pharma corps that were behind it, but that's just my guess) is talking about it.
Remember, it's just a few letters from BIG PHARMA to IG FARBEN - and if you don't know who they were, recall this helpful quote: "Farben was Hitler, and Hitler was Farben". They're the ones who built Auschwitz to provide slave labor for their Buna facilities.
IG PHARBEN - all you have to do is move the B and switch the MA to EN... and there you are.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Landbaron on Feb 2, 2007 7:16 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Feb 2, 2007 8:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The governor of Texas previously famous for taking public and private land, by eminent domain, and giving it to Sintra (a Spanish company with King Juan Carlos as major investor) to build the first leg of the tolled NAFTA Superhighway (The TransTexasCooridoor) and for wanting to take already build roads and 'converting' them into tolled roads has now pushed through a bill to REQUIRE vaccinations for all girls in Texas. Families, or individuals, CANNOT opt out but MUST be vaccinated. They CANNOT opt out for any reason whether religious/ethical, questions over the effectiveness or science, or other medical issues that might contraindicate vaccinations.
MERCK gave much money to Perry's campaign and to quote YahooNews:
"Merck spokeswoman Janet Skidmore would not say how much the company is spending on lobbyists or how much it has donated to Women in Government. Susan Crosby, the group's president, also declined to specify how much the drug company gave.
A top official from Merck's vaccine division sits on Women in Government's business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government."
Also, on this day they are beginning a "trial period" of sobriety checkpoints at random on public roads in Williamson County, TX as a test for state wide implementation.
RIP Freedom (once again.)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ALERT: Forced Vaccinations forced on the public in Texas
Posted by: Tikus
» RE: ALERT: Forced Vaccinations forced on the public in Texas
Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bohdan on Feb 2, 2007 10:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush will cut the taxes with a deduction ---then raise taxes to pay for it.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul, who will still have to pay in spite of the deduction.
Son of Voodoo Economics!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aztec on Feb 2, 2007 11:22 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now when corporations (as Bush made them) are above the law with the coercive power of the state at their backs, labor has been commoditized once again. Wages (even when the 431-1, executive pay to medium income is included) are the lowest percentage to gross profits than they ever have been. It's back to you work until you drop. The American Dream only existed during those post-war years, except for those who were able to benefit from the land and resources taken through the genocide of the Native Americans before that was completed in the 1890's.
War is the wet-dream of capitalism. War creates it's own unquenchable demand for war machines and munitions needed for escalation and those destroyed, damaged or expended. Profit margins are fat because of war's exigencies, cronyism over competition, and bargaining with the greatest cesspool of fraud, waste and abuse, the War Dept., and a close second, the Fatherland Security Dept. And since Bush is privatizing government functions at breakneck speed, there will be no oversight of the plundering of the Treasury.
The US will never have universal health care. It's not compatible with the haves' ideology of the law of the jungle for the have-nots (the Gilded-Age rulers framed it scientifically as Social Darwinism) and the ideology of Greed .
Besides, the American people can't even get rid of the degenerate, lying, corrupt to the core, traitor, war criminal, war profiteer, mass murderer of Americans by failing to uphold US labor and health and safety rules and admitted felon who now occupies the White House. But then he's our first MBA; he can hardly be expected to have other than the morality and values he displayed when he ran Harkin Energy (using most of the tricks 'Kenny Boy' Lay used to run Enron) and of our Enron corporate executive culture. The only difference was that Bush had his daddy and the Saudi's (including the bin Ladens) to bail him out.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ANTI-ROBIN HOOD-EXCELLENT POST BUT BETTER DAYS ARE AHEAD
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: ANTI-ROBIN HOOD
Posted by: Trazom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rtdrury on Feb 3, 2007 12:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: demand better value
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Landbaron on Feb 3, 2007 10:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line on Feb 4, 2007 6:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Most working people can't afford to pay for medical care on their own.....
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Most working people can't afford to pay for medical care on their own.....
Posted by: richholland
» Totally agree
Posted by: YogiBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CollD on Feb 4, 2007 1:56 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Where is the choice?
Posted by: richholland
» RE: Where is the choice?
Posted by: CollD
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DCostello2 on Feb 5, 2007 9:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Kslip on Feb 5, 2007 3:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: one of these things is not like the other
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: B. Spoon on Feb 8, 2007 6:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CollD on Feb 8, 2007 3:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MAD on Feb 2, 2007 4:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So let me get this straight:
47 million people go uninsured in the wealthiest industrialized nation in the world, the only one which does not guarantee access to healtchcare as a right of citizenship, and the system "will" crash? I think that ship sailed quite some time ago, Alternet!
I wonder how many other industrialized nations would stand by and watch as such a large percentage of children went without proper access to quality healthcare? Oh, that's right! Countries that aren't busy propping up their Military-Industrial Complex by spending a trillion + dollars on an illegal war of aggression can afford to fund universal healthcare. Silly me!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What The F*ck Are You Talking About? ----> HERE, HERE!!!
Posted by: stephenburnett
» Yes...I'm afraid they will stand by and watch
Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Yes...I'm afraid they will stand by and watch-NO -PROGRESS IS BEING MADE
Posted by: drricklippin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: allUneedislove on Feb 2, 2007 4:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way, socialized medicine has always been our only hope. LET'S DO IT!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Clinton Proposal
Posted by: cinattra
» RE: The Clinton Proposal
Posted by: Conservasaurus
» It's comforting to believe what you say, but wrong.....
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Conservasaurus.
Posted by: Grampop
Comments are closed-
Posted by: michaeltwatson on Feb 2, 2007 6:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Townes Watson, author of America's Tunnel Vision--How Insurance Companies' Propaganda Is Corrupting Medicine and Law.
www.StopMedicalError.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Single-Payer System Necessary For More than One Reason
Posted by: cinattra
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dikaiosyne on Feb 2, 2007 6:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» typical right wing troll attack
Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: Uncle Crabby
» you're an idiot
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: you're an idiot
Posted by: solrev
» RE: you're an idiot
Posted by: Uncle Crabby
» uncle crabby's idea's a good start along with
Posted by: AdamG
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: Jayzer
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: mjabele
» Who are the fools?
Posted by: CollD
» RE: Careful....You might just get what you ask for.
Posted by: B. Spoon
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hennep on Feb 2, 2007 6:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Europe has many diverse systems, all have evolved since WW2, America could learn, but its vested interests and arrogance will not allow it to happen without a lot of kicking and screaming.
The main problem facing social health care is the cost of drugs, unrealisticly raised expectations and the stupidity of the populations who elect to make them self ill by being overweight etc due to ignorance of basic health guidelines which are muddled by the corporates who just want a profit at any cost. Social health care is not just about hosptials and local doctors, its a two way street of responsibilities on both side, sadly we in europe have been infected by the American mentality where responsibility by the population has been eroded so corporations can get rich, thats why some have problems.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Comments on European system RE: look to europe
Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Comments on European system RE: look to europe
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: NoPCZone on Feb 2, 2007 6:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Veterans Administration & the Department of Defense (the Army, Navy & Air Force healthcare systems). Until Clinton screwed things up with TriCare (replacing CHAMPUS), families of servicemen & women had the closest thing to what a NAtional Healthcare System could be like. Despite TriCare it is still a very good system compared to the civilian sector.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CriminallySane on Feb 2, 2007 7:15 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact is, insurance companies take far more money out of the economy in general than they ever put back in "coverage" terms. Time for a change.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's also worth remembering...
Posted by: Jayzer
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Feb 2, 2007 7:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Lawsuit Abuse
Posted by: JERSEYDAN
» If you wanted to expose your agenda, you couldn't have done a better job of it...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» you can control bad doctors and corporations without Lawsuit abuse
Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Mop Cheese on Feb 2, 2007 7:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Governmental interventions intervene in the market, telling us that they're doing it for our own good.
Then problems pop up all over the place as a result.
Then, they tell us that, to fix the problems of capitalism, which were really caused by gov't intervention in the first place, they tell us they need to intervene for our own good.
And so on.
And so on, in an incestuous, amnesiac circle until we wind up with what canada has--people dying off because the get sent around a horribly inefficient system, and every doctor taking the last months of the year off because that's when their gov't mandated billing quota runs out.
Leave it be!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: patszar
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: patszar
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: Jim Shaw
» Do you guys get paid for this?
Posted by: McJulie
» RE: Bah Humbug
Posted by: CriminallySane
» Ahem...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» Posting Reflects Why National Health Insurance Will Never Be.....
Posted by: CatDad
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CrystalD on Feb 2, 2007 8:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, we know that our healthcare system as it stands is a dog's breakfast. We desperately need a nationwide safety net of insurance for all. Now what do we do, where do we go, and who do we contact to get there?
No-one in our wealthy country should go uninsured. No-one needs to lack for health care. I'm making this one of my missions in life. Where do we start?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yes, we need single-payer health care. Now what do we DO?
Posted by: Jim Shaw
» RE: Yes, we need single-payer health care. Now what do we DO?
Posted by: South42
» RE: Yes, we need single-payer health care. Now what do we DO? HR 676!!!!!
Posted by: DCostello2
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sprachenlehrer on Feb 2, 2007 8:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As for President Clinton's efforts and those of Hillary, I've seen some of the documents (at the Clinton Library in Little Rock) that came from the task force (or whatever it's called). Their hands were tied by the insurance industry, the pharmaceutical companies, and the medical profession. Every effort was blocked by these greedy sons-of-Satan. Perhaps the biggest obstacle was the use of the Constitutional provision that rights not specifically assigned to the Federal Government are reserved for the States. Thus, the federal effort was dead from the get-go.
I fault President Clinton, however, for not making it his Number One priority to issue an Executive Order to MAKE IT HAPPEN!!! Hell, the Federal purse-strings are used to mandate highway improvements, education standards, etc. in the various States. What's the difference?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: National Health Insurance is Long Overdue!
Posted by: willymack
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Feb 2, 2007 9:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The pertinent question is how the majority of us might come together in the humanitarian spirit and find a way to help those among that 15% who are unable to provide for themselves.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Headline should have read: "15% of people in the U.S. uninsured!"
Posted by: buffeliscious
» Something new or something better?
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Something new or something better?
Posted by: YogiBear
» Something new AND something better
Posted by: buffeliscious
» That's exactly what we have now. Why alter it dramatically?
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» Headline: 15% Uninsured, 31 MILLION MORE UNDER-INSURED
Posted by: sofla100
» RE: Headline: 15% Uninsured, 31 MILLION MORE UNDER-INSURED
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» Just "buy more insurance."
Posted by: YogiBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: godsbedamned on Feb 2, 2007 9:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anothernewbrother on Feb 2, 2007 10:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nonetheless, due to Congress' (and Americans') unwillingness to address the real, complex economic issues causing the healthcare crisis in America (incuding market distortation resulting from third-party (government and employer) payee schemes, government subsidies for some citizens (Medicare, Medicaid) but not for all, insurance industry subsidies (group plans written off taxes by big corporations, effectively corporate salary subsidies), partial market price controls (which drive up costs for those not on government programs at the expense of those on government programs), government inposed limitations on competition and the availability of healthcare services (yes, government does restrict how many hospitals and beds can be constructed and made available in a given regional area driving up the cost of hospital stays due to lack of competition and artifically restricted supply), and so forth, and so forth (I could write a book)), I suspect a nationalized system (whether it be healthcare directly, or healthcare insurance) is what we're likely to get.
As someone with many of complex and rare healthcare problems, who has had his private healthcare insurance cancelled after a major medical claim (with the full and complete blessings of Congress and government reguators), and who is currently uninsurable, and therefore dependent on an insurance-of-last-resort program (along with hundreds of thousands of other Americans who have had their health insurance cancelled with the blessings of Congress), you might think I would feel differently, but I have also seen the long term consequences for everyone (not just for myself) of what nationalization does to any industry and I know that in the long run it will only make the problem worse. I also don't want investment in new medical technology and new pharmaceuticals grinding to a halt in the face of nationlization. Nor do I like to think of my nieces and nephews dieing prematurately while they wait on years-long waiting lists for needed medical procedures (as often happens in countries with nationalized systems, where bureauocrats make healthcare decisions rather then doctors).
As the Chinese say, be careful what you wish for.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Caution...big pharma's look alike pills?
Posted by: mont
» RE: Caution...
Posted by: YogiBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anothernewbrother on Feb 2, 2007 10:44 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder how many of those who think a national system is the solution didn't even bother to read the above carefully, let alone give it any consideration. If they aren't willing to invest time and serious thought into a solution, why should we let them push through some candy-coated fantasy that will impact our lives for generations?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Caution (2)
Posted by: Mewsician
» RE: Caution (2)
Posted by: Mewsician
» RE: Caution (2)
Posted by: Mewsician
» Why Only America Then Without Socialized Health Care???
Posted by: sofla100
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Landbaron on Feb 2, 2007 11:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ZPaul on Feb 2, 2007 12:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a Spanish saying (Spain is a country with a Socialist government and a National Health System) that goes: 1) Salud. 2) Dinero. 3) Amor. People might debate whether to put Love in first place or not, but putting selfish economic interests before the health of a country, which is, IMO, a far more important "capital", is simply being small-minded and short-sighted.
If we do not all have access the health care, forget about talking about life quality of life. That is first and foremost. The idiots are the ones who don´t see this are the same ones who believe in pushing a U.S.-dominated "free market" on Latin America.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Health Care Should NEVER Be "Market-Based"HUMAN FLESH AND SOULS ARE NOT COMMODITIES
Posted by: drricklippin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 2, 2007 1:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Echo your statements.
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 2, 2007 1:34 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is my plan put forth in 1995
GROW UP AMERICA-A HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS- proposed by Richard. A Lippin MD*
-Stop prolonging death. It’s both expensive and dehumanizing at best, greedy and cruel at worst.
-Empower US citizens to assume increased individual responsibility for health and convince medical consumers that it is in their best interests not to assume the role of helpless, dependent victims/patients.
-Yet also recognize that we have medicalized America’s social problems. So we must provide healthy and safe jobs for all able citizens thereby reducing poverty and all its subsequent health impacts (possibly 1/3rd of Health Care Costs)
-Provide healthy environments including healthy air, water, soil and food.
-Rebuild America’s public health infrastructure to ensure we provide appropriate macro and individual interventions to especially low income citizens such as childhood and adult immunizations and response to man-made and natural catastrophes.
-Face the reality that a very large percentage of illnesses, injuries and hospitalizations are entirely preventable. Subsequently, the elimination of tobacco, alcohol, drug, medication and dietary abuse alone could immediately reduce medical costs by a factor of at least fifty percent.
-Incent and train physicians to maintain the health of patients and populations. Radical changes in provider re-imbursement and medical education strategies are necessary
-Recognize that early childhood preventive medical education can profoundly affect lifelong health behaviors.
*proposed in June of 1995
Revised January 2006/2007
Dr. Rick Lippin
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Some Clarification
Posted by: MAD
» RE: Some Clarification
Posted by: JERSEYDAN
» RE: Some Clarification-OK JerseyDan
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Some Clarification-OK MAD
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: PREVENTION IS OUR ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS FIASCO
Posted by: codenameA
» RE: PREVENTION IS OUR ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS FIASCO-SORRY code name A
Posted by: drricklippin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 2, 2007 1:35 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Canadian Life Expectancy: 80.2 years
American Infant Mortality: 6.4 deaths per 1000 live births
American Life Expectancy: 77.8 years
(Well, yes sir eee, that govimmint healthcare is so bad! you all can see that above can't you,....)
Once again, the idiots against national healthcare, proven wrong.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Maybe it's too cold for germs to live up there
Posted by: YogiBear
» Speaking as a Canadian here...
Posted by: MatthewSavage
» RE: Canadians Considerably More Healthy Then Americans!
Posted by: lucindawick
» RE: Canadians Considerably More Healthy Then Americans!
Posted by: sofla100
» Bad public health stats - the law of averages...
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Feb 2, 2007 6:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once I made $100,000 worth of enzyme (*retail price) in two days using about $500 worth of raw materials (true, I had access to a research lab back in those days...) - that's the reality.
Big Pharma's solution? They're so awash in cash they can afford to buy up all the generic manufacturers and take their products off the market - no kidding - and no one (well, I think Leahy is pissed off about the anthrax attack on his office and is trying to stick it to the pharma corps that were behind it, but that's just my guess) is talking about it.
Remember, it's just a few letters from BIG PHARMA to IG FARBEN - and if you don't know who they were, recall this helpful quote: "Farben was Hitler, and Hitler was Farben". They're the ones who built Auschwitz to provide slave labor for their Buna facilities.
IG PHARBEN - all you have to do is move the B and switch the MA to EN... and there you are.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Landbaron on Feb 2, 2007 7:16 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Feb 2, 2007 8:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The governor of Texas previously famous for taking public and private land, by eminent domain, and giving it to Sintra (a Spanish company with King Juan Carlos as major investor) to build the first leg of the tolled NAFTA Superhighway (The TransTexasCooridoor) and for wanting to take already build roads and 'converting' them into tolled roads has now pushed through a bill to REQUIRE vaccinations for all girls in Texas. Families, or individuals, CANNOT opt out but MUST be vaccinated. They CANNOT opt out for any reason whether religious/ethical, questions over the effectiveness or science, or other medical issues that might contraindicate vaccinations.
MERCK gave much money to Perry's campaign and to quote YahooNews:
"Merck spokeswoman Janet Skidmore would not say how much the company is spending on lobbyists or how much it has donated to Women in Government. Susan Crosby, the group's president, also declined to specify how much the drug company gave.
A top official from Merck's vaccine division sits on Women in Government's business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government."
Also, on this day they are beginning a "trial period" of sobriety checkpoints at random on public roads in Williamson County, TX as a test for state wide implementation.
RIP Freedom (once again.)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ALERT: Forced Vaccinations forced on the public in Texas
Posted by: Tikus
» RE: ALERT: Forced Vaccinations forced on the public in Texas
Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bohdan on Feb 2, 2007 10:21 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush will cut the taxes with a deduction ---then raise taxes to pay for it.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul, who will still have to pay in spite of the deduction.
Son of Voodoo Economics!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: aztec on Feb 2, 2007 11:22 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now when corporations (as Bush made them) are above the law with the coercive power of the state at their backs, labor has been commoditized once again. Wages (even when the 431-1, executive pay to medium income is included) are the lowest percentage to gross profits than they ever have been. It's back to you work until you drop. The American Dream only existed during those post-war years, except for those who were able to benefit from the land and resources taken through the genocide of the Native Americans before that was completed in the 1890's.
War is the wet-dream of capitalism. War creates it's own unquenchable demand for war machines and munitions needed for escalation and those destroyed, damaged or expended. Profit margins are fat because of war's exigencies, cronyism over competition, and bargaining with the greatest cesspool of fraud, waste and abuse, the War Dept., and a close second, the Fatherland Security Dept. And since Bush is privatizing government functions at breakneck speed, there will be no oversight of the plundering of the Treasury.
The US will never have universal health care. It's not compatible with the haves' ideology of the law of the jungle for the have-nots (the Gilded-Age rulers framed it scientifically as Social Darwinism) and the ideology of Greed .
Besides, the American people can't even get rid of the degenerate, lying, corrupt to the core, traitor, war criminal, war profiteer, mass murderer of Americans by failing to uphold US labor and health and safety rules and admitted felon who now occupies the White House. But then he's our first MBA; he can hardly be expected to have other than the morality and values he displayed when he ran Harkin Energy (using most of the tricks 'Kenny Boy' Lay used to run Enron) and of our Enron corporate executive culture. The only difference was that Bush had his daddy and the Saudi's (including the bin Ladens) to bail him out.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ANTI-ROBIN HOOD-EXCELLENT POST BUT BETTER DAYS ARE AHEAD
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: ANTI-ROBIN HOOD
Posted by: Trazom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rtdrury on Feb 3, 2007 12:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: demand better value
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Landbaron on Feb 3, 2007 10:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line on Feb 4, 2007 6:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Most working people can't afford to pay for medical care on their own.....
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Most working people can't afford to pay for medical care on their own.....
Posted by: richholland
» Totally agree
Posted by: YogiBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CollD on Feb 4, 2007 1:56 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Where is the choice?
Posted by: richholland
» RE: Where is the choice?
Posted by: CollD
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DCostello2 on Feb 5, 2007 9:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Kslip on Feb 5, 2007 3:01 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: one of these things is not like the other
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: B. Spoon on Feb 8, 2007 6:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CollD on Feb 8, 2007 3:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
California Carbon Trading Allows Timber Companies to Sell CO2 Credits for Their Worst Logging Practices
How to Answer the Dumb Things Climate Deniers Say
Why Is Obama Trying to Prop Up a Doomed 'Nuclear Renaissance'?




