You make my point sirrah...
They are the same Drugs, from the same companies... and most of them are US. Why are you the ones getting ripped off?
Broken
You make my point sirrah...
They are the same Drugs, from the same companies... and most of them are US. Why are you the ones getting ripped off?
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
Yen?
I have to agree with RF on a few points here. If I were of average or below average income I would much rather live here in Canada. Canada also has government sponsored health care. For a middle income family in the US, which doesn't have the luxury of healh care benefits from work, or can't afford private insurance, the cost is astronomical. I may have to wait a little longer to see the right doctor here, but I don't have to mortgage my house to do it. Education is more affordable here, although not as cheap as in the UK.
If I were above average income and health care wasn't an issue for me, and education costs were nothing, I would rather live in the US, where citizens are not as penalized for earning money. Here, the more you make the more you pay - in everything. You pay health taxes so those who make less than you can get free health care. You pay higher income taxes so those who make less than you don't have to. You pay higher unemployment benefits, even though most who make good wages are less likely to claim unemployment, you pay more in Canada Pension benefits, even though by the time you retire, there probably won't be any benefits left to give. So yes, if I were rich, I'd rather live in the US where I get to keep a little more of my hard earned money.
Last edited by NikkiD; 12-12-2004 at 09:38 PM.
Poster
I reiterate, I CAN go elsewhere to get items at a cheaper price, nothing is stopping me from doing that.Originally Posted by Rat Faced
As an aside to what Nikkid said, people are always saying "you have no universal health care". This is correct, BUT no one ever seems to mention any alternatives that the poor have. For example, free clinics. Which a lot of these are NOT funded by tax dollars.
Broken
The money still has to come from somewhere...
YOU may be able to go to Mexico easily, someone from Hawaii can't...
The people near to the Border of Canada go there, the people near the Border of Mexico go there. However most people arent near enough to the Border of either country to make the Time/Effort worth while.
The point about "Free Universal Healthcare" is... your Government spends MORE % of GPD on Healthcare than any European Nation. Where is this money going? Its a LOT more than is required FOR a Universal Healthcare system.
If the Government was NOT spending this money, then it would make sense... but it is.
Here are some figures for you... 1990, however things havent changed that much.
Country %GDP spent on Healthcare
United_States__________________12.1__
>___________________________(1996=13.6)_
>===========================================
>Canada________________________9.3_
>France________________________8.8_
>Sweden________________________8.6_
>Germany_______________________8.1_
>Switzerland_____________________7.7_
>Italy___________________________7.7_
>Norway________________________7.4_
>Japan__________________________6.5_
>United_Kingdom__________________6.2_
As you can see, nearly TWICE the amount of GDP than the UK spent on Healthcare. Your population is 6 times as great, your economy is much MORE than 6 times as great as the UK's.... You actually spent THREE times as much per capita in 1990 than the UK did.
On top of this, you paid Health Insurance...
Last edited by Rat Faced; 12-12-2004 at 10:02 PM.
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
Looking for loopholes
J2
I have, you will not be surprised, one or two reservations about the article.
Firstly, it is a little odd for an economist to nail his political colours to a mast in the opening two words of a piece.
Secondly, there is an element of making a virtue out of necessity in "talking up debt" This is never a good starting point.
The simple fact is that any administration would rather not have that level of debt and particularly not one that is rising at a fairly consistent speed. This would suggest a structural difficulty that needs addressing. There are two main options - stop the outflow (either through direct taxation or through indirect taxation) the other is to cut back government spending. Neither are easy or palatable. Bush has tried to stimulate the economy through tax cuts in the hope that a more vigourous economy will help self-right the imbalance. I am not convinced that this will provide the solution looked for.
The dollar is being allowed to sink because this will limit demand for imports - making them more expensive and in turn making US exports more affordable. This is, however, a double edged sword as commodities like oil are traded in dollars making them cheaper for competitors like China whose only really significant costs are energy ones.
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum
Looking for loopholes
They do tend to have prettier teeth tho ...
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum
Broken
Little bit of a difference in the teeth of a Hollywood Heartthrob and a HillBilly I would think...
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
Looking for loopholes
Little bit of a difference in the teeth of a Hollywood Heartthrob and a HillBilly I would think...
*cue Deliverance music*
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum
Poster
So if you are not a Hollywood heartthrob you are a hillbilly? sheesh....
there is no god
Rat has a point. It's good to be a rich or at least well off American, But not so on minimum wage or in a job that doesn't subsidise your health insurance....those people would see their standard of living rise if they lived under the UK system.
The wealthy or comfortable would see little difference.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks