Poor George

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex H+29 July 2004 - 22:50--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H @ 29 July 2004 - 22:50)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> j2k4 - Crap. Bush could do many things right (never running for office in the first place would have been a good start, but we&#39;ll leave that as a cynical and jaded comment from an Australian who has nothing to do with US domestic politics anyway).

What if Bush said, "This administration is going to provide free health care of a world class standard to every person in this country, citizen or not".

And then actually did it.

Why not have actual goals to achieve, instead of blanket statements like "The United States is now more secure." ?

An interesting idea would be "failure criteria" - every policy has criteria, such as if it costs more than X, or doesn&#39;t achieve X% reduction in (something bad) or doesn&#39;t achieve X% increase in (something good), or fails to meet preset performance standards, and make a named person, politician or official, responsible.

Many people will say, "But if they don&#39;t do a good job, we&#39;ll just vote for someone else". Does any one have true confidence in this approach that we currently use, or would the addition of failure criteria help bring some accountablity to western democracies?

<!--QuoteBegin-SuperJude™
"Hey if you are against the oil industry don&#39;t drive an S.U.V."

---

Hahaha - Why don&#39;t more people think that logically? [/b][/quote]
That article was cynical pull anything out of the air crap.


As as Bush doing a good job. I give him an D.

....unless you are rich, then it&#39;s a B.

You see, if you are rich then you got a nice tax break

Quote:

---

then it&#39;s a B

---

that you then passed along in the form of new job creation

Quote:

---

I give him an D

---

We also must give kudos for the rather mandatory security measures put in due to the worst attack on our mainland. <_<

I think last month terrorists were planning to attack. I was given a LAVENDER warning and I then took precautions. <_<

This seems like an extension of WMD "imminent threat".

We seriously can&#39;t fault the Prez for not finding Bin Laden.
Hell, he couldn&#39;t find WMD and there was a camera from space taking pictures of &#39;em.......apparently. <_<

As far as admitting that he fucked in Iraq, well it would do him well with someone looking to vote for him but can&#39;t get past the 900+ that are dead.

We all already know he fucked up. Best ta say it., or :01: :angry: GTFO&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; :angry: :01:

....of our faces claiming we committed our armed services to "get rid of a dictator".

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex H@29 July 2004 - 21:50
What if Bush said, "This administration is going to provide free health care of a world class standard to every person in this country, citizen or not".

And then actually did it.

---

Then we could be like Canada, eh?

Would you say Canada is a splendid example of a National Health Care System?

I have mentioned in this forum that I&#39;m going to be paying massive medical bills for the rest of my life, but if I were a Canadian citizen, the likelihood is that I would not have to pay the bills, not because of National Health Care, but because I would be dead.

Such a deal.

This calls for a new thread, I think.

Having a National Health Service doesnt stop people being able to go Private if they wish too.

It actually makes it cheaper to go private, as the Medical Insurance Companies have to compete against the free stuff.

I can have full cover Private Medical Insurance for around &#036;40 per month, if i wished to follow that route.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+30 July 2004 - 20:27--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 30 July 2004 - 20:27)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Alex H@29 July 2004 - 21:50
What if Bush said, "This administration is going to provide free health care of a world class standard to every person in this country, citizen or not".

And then actually did it.

---

Then we could be like Canada, eh?

Would you say Canada is a splendid example of a National Health Care System?

I have mentioned in this forum that I&#39;m going to be paying massive medical bills for the rest of my life, but if I were a Canadian citizen, the likelihood is that I would not have to pay the bills, not because of National Health Care, but because I would be dead.

Such a deal.

This calls for a new thread, I think. [/b][/quote]
The French and Germans have a very good Health Care system.

:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Biggles+30 July 2004 - 15:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Biggles @ 30 July 2004 - 15:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@30 July 2004 - 20:27
<!--QuoteBegin-Alex H

---

Quote:

---

@29 July 2004 - 21:50
What if Bush said, "This administration is going to provide free health care of a world class standard to every person in this country, citizen or not".

And then actually did it.

---

Then we could be like Canada, eh?

Would you say Canada is a splendid example of a National Health Care System?

I have mentioned in this forum that I&#39;m going to be paying massive medical bills for the rest of my life, but if I were a Canadian citizen, the likelihood is that I would not have to pay the bills, not because of National Health Care, but because I would be dead.

Such a deal.

This calls for a new thread, I think.

---

The French and Germans have a very good Health Care system.

:lol: [/b][/quote]
Yes, and they&#39;re broke.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@30 July 2004 - 13:27
Then we could be like Canada, eh?

Would you say Canada is a splendid example of a National Health Care System?

I have mentioned in this forum that I&#39;m going to be paying massive medical bills for the rest of my life, but if I were a Canadian citizen, the likelihood is that I would not have to pay the bills, not because of National Health Care, but because I would be dead.

Such a deal.

---

Are you suggesting that countries with social healthcare systems have a higher death rate or are somehow less well trained?
I know for a fact that you have not personally experienced such systems but your satement is totally ridiculous even if it was said in jest.
We spoke of my fathers experience with similar ailments as yours in private but i have to say his treatment on the british national health was first rate and free to him at point of service as are his medications that he needs to take for the rest of his life.... just the drugs here would cost him nearly &#036;20 k per anum.(not all related to the heart condition)

As rat pointed out full private healthcare is a lot cheaper in the Uk than here so if one wanted to go that way it is within reach. The treatment is the same in fact the NHS performs many private procedures...the only difference is that the treatment is quicker for less pressing treatment and one might not get a private room with satelite tv or 5 star resturant standard food. oh and you can choose your own date for treatment and not be told with private

I have never understood what is so repulsive about non profit healthcare

Quote:

---

This calls for a new thread, I think.

---

I tried that before and you were conspicuous by your abscence in the debate

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@30 July 2004 - 14:27


Would you say Canada is a splendid example of a National Health Care System?

---

Based on my mother&#39;s treatment for breast cancer while living in Edmonton, yes, I would.

It would seem I am out-numbered.

You know, it&#39;s funny-

All the current threads, taken in toto, would seem to reflect a communal belief here that all that is wrong with the U.S. could/would be corrected by Bush losing the election.

Good luck, ya&#39;ll.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@30 July 2004 - 19:24


All the current threads, taken in toto, would seem to reflect a communal belief here that all that is wrong with the U.S. could/would be corrected by Bush losing the election.

---

Not true.

I would however, consider it an absolutely necessary first step in the right direction.

Poor old George. He is only, after all, a figure head; a puppet on a string.