chavez to nationalize cement

[yavoon]

and the commie hits keep rolling.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080404/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_cement_nationalization

"CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez on Thursday ordered the nationalization of Venezuela's cement industry, saying his government cannot allow businesses to continue exporting raw materials needed to help tackle a domestic housing shortage."

viva la revolucion!

[TexanBob]

Probably wants some political enemies not to float back up to the surface.

[loborugger]

Meanwhile there continues to be shortages of pretty much everything in his country. This guy is the POSTER child for why centrally managed economies dont work.

[cutthemdown]

Venezula will be in bad shape when Chavez is done.

[TallyBronco]

Nationalizing construction is a bad thing, but nationalizing health care is a good thing?

[Spider]

Nationalizing construction is a bad thing, but nationalizing health care is a good thing?

why would national health care be bad ?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Nationalizing construction is a bad thing, but nationalizing health care is a good thing?Well, our system of healthcare isn't working too well and getting worse every year.

[W*GS]

Well, our system of healthcare isn't working too well and getting worse every year.

Whereas nationalizing health care would make it all better? Snort.

[Spider]

Whereas nationalizing health care would make it all better? Snort.

How would it make it worse ? snort

[W*GS]

How would it make it worse ? snort

Think United States Postal Service.

[Spider]

Think United States Postal Service.

No you wont Bull**** your way out of this one asshole .... give me reasons ... tell me what bad will happen .....

[W*GS]

Government bureaucrats will replace corporate bureaucrats as determiners of who gets what treatment, i.e., rationing of health care will take place. Our taxes will increase and service will decrease. The real downside is that since the government will have a monopoly on health care, we as consumers won't have the choice of seeking another provider.

Anyone who believes that waving the magic wand of nationalization over health care will make all its problems go away is gravely sick in the head.

[Spider]

Government bureaucrats will replace corporate bureaucrats as determiners of who gets what treatment, i.e., rationing of health care will take place. Our taxes will increase and service will decrease. The real downside is that since the government will have a monopoly on health care, we as consumers won't have the choice of seeking another provider.

Anyone who believes that waving the magic wand of nationalization over health care will make all its problems go away is gravely sick in the head.

show me proof of this , I cant take your word for anything .show me where this will happen

[Spider]

you mentioned the US mail , but we have DHL , Fed Ex, UPS .... How come ?

[Spider]

Lets see we have public schools , yet Private schools , we have our military , but yet we have Mercs also ..... I think what we have here is a clear case of W*GS overreacting again

[W*GS]

Look at the history of the costs of Medicare/Medicaid, ol' Spidey, and reflect on the level of service and efficiency they provide.

Then tell us how sucking everyone into those programs will magically make them all better.

[Spider]

Look at the history of the costs of Medicare/Medicaid, ol' Spidey, and reflect on the level of service and efficiency they provide.

Then tell us how sucking everyone into those programs will magically make them all better.

dont give me your bull**** , give me facts , I gave some to you .... you used the US Mail as an example , I showed you we have DHL , Fed Ex , UPS .. now give me facts .. no more of your fairy world bull****

[Spider]

Look W*GS you are the one that snorted at Beerslug , now back your **** up with facts , none of your fairy tale bull**** .......

[W*GS]

I already laid out the facts, ol' Spidey. Look into them yourself.

[Spider]

I already laid out the facts, ol' Spidey. Look into them yourself.

give links .......Cause your drama queen rant doesnt pass as fact ....

[Falconer]

I have been in three different VA hospitals, and I would say that is what scares me most about government run healthcare. Then again I am not really in favor of the government running most things.

[Spider]

I have been in three different VA hospitals, and I would say that is what scares me most about government run healthcare. Then again I am not really in favor of the government running most things.

Been to for profit hospitals ? Things are not better ...... Mersa is on the rise , wrong surgeries , missed doeses of Meds , over dosing , Misdiagnoses of injuries , the long waits etc ......

[Falconer]

Been to for profit hospitals ? Things are not better ...... Mersa is on the rise , wrong surgeries , missed doeses of Meds , over dosing , Misdiagnoses of injuries , the long waits etc ......

You are asking me of all people if I have been to for profit hospitals? Come on Spider, you know I go to hospitals at least once a month if not more. You are right though, many of the things going on in hospitals make you think twice before just accepting what they tell you. I will also admit that I only have been to a very small sample of VA hospitals, and they might have been below par. However, what I witnessed there was worse than any other hospital I have been in.

It's not that I think that privatization is a panacea. It is just that for some reason government seems to muck up most things they put their fingers in.

[Spider]

You are asking me of all people if I have been to for profit hospitals? Come on Spider, you know I go to hospitals at least once a month if not more. You are right though, many of the things going on in hospitals make you think twice before just accepting what they tell you. I will also admit that I only have been to a very small sample of VA hospitals, and they might have been below par. However, what I witnessed there was worse than any other hospital I have been in.

It's not that I think that privatization is a panacea. It is just that for some reason government seems to muck up most things they put their fingers in.

6 in one hand a half dozen in the other , but Our health care system is one of the most expensive , should we be settling for sub par treatment at the prices we pay ?

[TexanBob]

I think if you nationalize health care in the U.S. (and Hillary's plan is a no-opt state-run plan), you will see the best doctors moving out of the country. Why stay in the U.S. and make a fixed salary that the government tells you is all you can earn when you can move off shore and set up your own practice where you can earn as much as your skills will allow?

Spidey, if national health care is so wonderful, why do Canadians cross the border to come to the U.S. for needed operations instead of Americans crossing to receive Canadian care? Americans cross over to get cheap Canadian drugs but the Canadians come here (if they can afford it) to avoid their own doctors.

Imagine where all the best lawyers would go if you had nationalized legal care where all legal fees were paid by the state and lawyers were told there was a cap on how much they could charge for their services. The same is going to happen with doctors under HillaryCare.

[Spider]

I think if you nationalize health care in the U.S. (and Hillary's plan is a no-opt state-run plan), you will see the best doctors moving out of the country. Why stay in the U.S. and make a fixed salary that the government tells you is all you can earn when you can move off shore and set up your own practice where you can earn as much as your skills will allow? ROFL! move where ?

Spidey, if national health care is so wonderful, why do Canadians cross the border to come to the U.S. for needed operations instead of Americans crossing to receive Canadian care? Americans cross over to get cheap Canadian drugs but the Canadians come here (if they can afford it) to avoid their own doctors. LOL again why use the Canadian model ???

Imagine where all the best lawyers would go if you had nationalized legal care where all legal fees were paid by the state and lawyers were told there was a cap on how much they could charge for their services. The same is going to happen with doctors under HillaryCare.
you have yet to provide any fact , just your opinion of what might or could happen

[BABronco]

I think if you nationalize health care in the U.S. (and Hillary's plan is a no-opt state-run plan), you will see the best doctors moving out of the country. Why stay in the U.S. and make a fixed salary that the government tells you is all you can earn when you can move off shore and set up your own practice where you can earn as much as your skills will allow?

Spidey, if national health care is so wonderful, why do Canadians cross the border to come to the U.S. for needed operations instead of Americans crossing to receive Canadian care? Americans cross over to get cheap Canadian drugs but the Canadians come here (if they can afford it) to avoid their own doctors.

Imagine where all the best lawyers would go if you had nationalized legal care where all legal fees were paid by the state and lawyers were told there was a cap on how much they could charge for their services. The same is going to happen with doctors under HillaryCare.

I was going to say watch spider go lalalalala no a fact lalalalala, but alas he already did.

[Spider]

I was going to say watch spider go lalalalala no a fact lalalalala, but alas he already did.

So why dont you take up the argument then ,...Tell me what countrys we will ose our doctors to Hilarious! this should be good .Better yet show me some real facts about the evils of National healthcare ....

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Better yet show me some real facts about the evils of National healthcare ....

Chirp, chirp, chirp.

[W*GS]

LABF doesn't hear anything only because he plugs his ears...

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1938572&postcount=16

[Spider]

Chirp, chirp, chirp.

I expected that .. Squirrle headed bastards hike up their skirts , scream evil , yet they dont know a damn thing about it ...... I have dated prom dates smarter then these empty headed bastards

[TexanBob]

I can't offer "facts" about something that hasn't happened yet. But ask yourself why so many doctors we encounter today are not white anglos? Why are they not going back to their homeland to practice medicine there? The answer is simple. Here is where they can make the big bucks.

Ever been to Mexico? As soon as you cross the border, there are people in the streets hawking everything you can't buy in America... like freon... as well as offering sharply discounted medical and dental services because regulations there are practically non-existent. Malpractice lawsuits? LOL! No need for them to buy huge malpractice insurance policies because nobody is going to have the means to beat them in court.

So, right now, doctors in Mexico have all the prestige of a back-alley abortionist but I guarantee you that if the U.S. nationalizes health care and then rations it (which is inevitable), you will see clinics pop up all over the Mexican border offering everything from breast augmentation to open heart surgery because the doctors will have the freedom to set their own prices and take their own risks without a nanny-state government telling them what they can and cannot do and at what price they will charge for their work.

If nationalized health care is so great, why did Fidel Castro fly in people from Spain to operate on him instead of his "great" public health care system?

[cutthemdown]

no way the govt will ever be telling hospitals how much they can charge. No way they will be telling Doctors how much they can charge. Anyone who thinks any President can change that is very misinformed and very naive.

The most the govt could do is set up a plan to help people pay for medical care. A way for everyone to get insurance etc. A way to offset costs for major medical expenditures through no interest loans etc. I don't know what it will be if it gets done but I can say for sure the govt won't tell hospitals and doctors how much medical care costs.

Private owned hospitals will not be going away.

[Spider]

I can't offer "facts" about something that hasn't happened yet. But ask yourself why so many doctors we encounter today are not white anglos? Why are they not going back to their homeland to practice medicine there? The answer is simple. Here is where they can make the big bucks.

Ever been to Mexico? As soon as you cross the border, there are people in the streets hawking everything you can't buy in America... like freon... as well as offering sharply discounted medical and dental services because regulations there are practically non-existent. Malpractice lawsuits? LOL! No need for them to buy huge malpractice insurance policies because nobody is going to have the means to beat them in court.

So, right now, doctors in Mexico have all the prestige of a back-alley abortionist but I guarantee you that if the U.S. nationalizes health care and then rations it (which is inevitable), you will see clinics pop up all over the Mexican border offering everything from breast augmentation to open heart surgery because the doctors will have the freedom to set their own prices and take their own risks without a nanny-state government telling them what they can and cannot do and at what price they will charge for their work.

If nationalized health care is so great, why did Fidel Castro fly in people from Spain to operate on him instead of his "great" public health care system?

So all of our Doctors will move to Mexico for a better life ......ROFL! Never in my life did I thought I would hear someone say that ........why use Cubas .... Keep shooting Texan Bob ,you are getting close ...... My mom side comes from wealth , why not ask me where they go

[Spider]

And yes I been to Mexico , and no I really dont want to talk about it , I went over without a guide . and If I hadnt been a thug , I probably wouldnt have made it back

[kappys]

no way the govt will ever be telling hospitals how much they can charge. No way they will be telling Doctors how much they can charge. Anyone who thinks any President can change that is very misinformed and very naive.

The most the govt could do is set up a plan to help people pay for medical care. A way for everyone to get insurance etc. A way to offset costs for major medical expenditures through no interest loans etc. I don't know what it will be if it gets done but I can say for sure the govt won't tell hospitals and doctors how much medical care costs.

Private owned hospitals will not be going away.

You're kidding me right? Medicare and Medicaid already dictate how much a doctor can charge for his services. sure you can bill for more, but you won't get it. Then you're left with the choice of pursuing the patient for the entire sum you want to bill out or taking the pittance medicaid will give you and agreeing not to pursue further reimbursement. Medicaid is already charity care since it reimburses so poorly.

[Spider]

You're kidding me right? Medicare and Medicaid already dictate how much a doctor can charge for his services. sure you can bill for more, but you won't get it. Then you're left with the choice of pursuing the patient for the entire sum you want to bill out or taking the pittance medicaid will give you and agreeing not to pursue further reimbursement. Medicaid is already charity care since it reimburses so poorly.

Hey it is cutthemdown . he is damn proud of his mental disability , he shows it off in every post he makes

[ant1999e]

If nationalized health care is so great, why did Fidel Castro fly in people from Spain to operate on him instead of his "great" public health care system?

:~ohyah!: Question of the day.:thumbs:

[Spider]

:~ohyah!: Question of the day.:thumbs:

It would be if someone suggested using Cubas system , but since no one didnt .. and there is more then 1 model of Universal healthcare .........Have ever wondered why no one that is against Universal healthcare brings up France or Italy ? I wonder why ? no they try to use the failed models as their examples .... Cant blame them though , they really dont have any other reason to be against Universal healthcare

[cutthemdown]

You're kidding me right? Medicare and Medicaid already dictate how much a doctor can charge for his services. sure you can bill for more, but you won't get it. Then you're left with the choice of pursuing the patient for the entire sum you want to bill out or taking the pittance medicaid will give you and agreeing not to pursue further reimbursement. Medicaid is already charity care since it reimburses so poorly.

medicare is only for people over 65 and it's just a way to cover people. Like I said govt will step in maybe and help people pay for it but it will never nationalize hospitals. They will still be privately run. And yes Medicaid is for poorer people but I thought we were talking about the whole country. Sure small segments of the population the govt may have programs for that but I was speaking more of regular Americans that currently don't qualify. I think medicaid you have to make less then like 700 a month or for a family of 8 1400 a month. Medicare is for people over 65. We are talking about Americans that make money but still don't have healthcare.

I agree completely that if the govt thinks either the Medicare, or Medicaid programs are a roadmap then we are in serious trouble.

[Spider]

medicare is only for people over 65 and it's just a way to cover people. Like I said govt will step in maybe and help people pay for it but it will never nationalize hospitals. They will still be privately run. And yes Medicaid is for poorer people but I thought we were talking about the whole country. Sure small segments of the population the govt may have programs for that but I was speaking more of regular Americans that currently don't qualify. I think medicaid you have to make less then like 700 a month or for a family of 8 1400 a month. Medicare is for people over 65. We are talking about Americans that make money but still don't have healthcare.

I agree completely that if the govt thinks either the Medicare, or Medicaid programs are a roadmap then we are in serious trouble.

what in the **** does that have to do with Medicare or Medicade capping the cost ?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Whereas nationalizing health care would make it all better? Snort.
Possibly. America's corporations are for the idea now because healthcare costs are eating them up. Private healthcare isn't working that's a for sure. The costs are increasing by double digits (percentage wise) almost every year

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

If nationalized health care is so great, why did Fidel Castro fly in people from Spain to operate on him instead of his "great" public health care system?

If the current corporate healthcare system in America is so great then why do more and more Americans have to go outside the U.S. for affordable healthcare and/or prescription drugs (or simply do without?)

I guess it's easy for you to ignore all those European countries whose nationalized healthcare systems are so successful in making your straw man argument.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I expected that .. Squirrle headed bastards hike up their skirts , scream evil , yet they dont know a damn thing about it ...... I have dated prom dates smarter then these empty headed bastards

:yep:

Of course, anyone who voted for Dim Son twice has a major credibility problem right from the outset. ;)

[elsid13]

I think if you nationalize health care in the U.S. (and Hillary's plan is a no-opt state-run plan), you will see the best doctors moving out of the country. Why stay in the U.S. and make a fixed salary that the government tells you is all you can earn when you can move off shore and set up your own practice where you can earn as much as your skills will allow?

Spidey, if national health care is so wonderful, why do Canadians cross the border to come to the U.S. for needed operations instead of Americans crossing to receive Canadian care? Americans cross over to get cheap Canadian drugs but the Canadians come here (if they can afford it) to avoid their own doctors.

Imagine where all the best lawyers would go if you had nationalized legal care where all legal fees were paid by the state and lawyers were told there was a cap on how much they could charge for their services. The same is going to happen with doctors under HillaryCare.


If your argument was true wouldn't we be seeing an influx of doctors from Western Europe and Canadian??? I will concede that many might not want to do thier residence again, and re-pass the medical boards but there would a clear indication that would see some flow into a "free" market.

BTW, from pure economic stand point it would probably increase resource allocation if there was some form of National Coverage since it would remove the Emergency Room congestion issue and reduce the cost of the work place health care programs.

[W*GS]

Possibly. America's corporations are for the idea now because healthcare costs are eating them up. Private healthcare isn't working that's a for sure. The costs are increasing by double digits (percentage wise) almost every year

Take a look at projected Medicare expenditures over the next decade.

[BABronco]

So why dont you take up the argument then ,...Tell me what countrys we will ose our doctors to Hilarious! this should be good .Better yet show me some real facts about the evils of National healthcare ....

I don't think we will lose doctors and nurses. However, fewer people will major in medicine.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukdental3.html
Very recent story in GB where a lady had to pull her own teeth because 12 dentists refused to see her.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukwomeninlabor.html
Women in labour are being refused entry to overstretched maternity units and told to give birth elsewhere, NHS hospitals admitted yesterday in response to an application under the Freedom of Information Act. They disclosed that maternity wards in almost 10% of trusts closed their doors to new admissions on at least 10 days last year. One trust in North Yorkshire closed 39 times between October and January because it did not have enough staff to provide a safe service.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukgrandma.html
A woman of 61 was refused a routine heart operation by a hard-up NHS trust for being too old.

Dorothy Simpson suffers from an irregular heartbeat and is at increased risk of a stroke. But health chiefs refused to allow the procedure which was recommended by her specialist.

The school secretary was stunned by the ruling.

"I can't believe that at 61 I'm too old for this operation," she said.

"A friend has had exactly the same thing done and it has changed his life.

"I feel as though I've been put out to grass and surely deserve better than this."

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukoneineight.html

One in eight NHS hospital patients still has to wait more than a year for treatment, the government acknowledged yesterday in its first attempt to tell the full truth about health service queues in England.

A Department of Health analysis of 208,000 people admitted to hospital in March showed 48% were wheeled into the operating theatre within 18 weeks of a GP sending them for hospital diagnosis. But 30% waited more than 30 weeks and 12.4% more than a year.
http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukharms2.html

LONDON (Reuters) - One in 10 patients admitted to National Health Service hospitals in Britain is unintentionally harmed and almost a million safety incidents, more than 2,000 of which were fatal, were recorded last year, according to a report on Thursday.

Such figures were "terrifying enough", the report by parliament's public accounts committee said, but the reality may be worse because of what it called "substantial under-reporting" of serious incidents and deaths in the NHS.

"To top it all, the NHS simply has no idea how many people die each year from patient safety incidents," Edward Leigh, the committee's chairman, said in a statement.

The committee found that some 974,000 patient safety incidents or "near misses", including 2,181 patient deaths, were recorded by the NHS but it stressed that under-reporting was a serious problem.

"(NHS) trusts estimated that on average around 22 percent of incidents and 39 percent of near misses go unreported, and that medication errors and incidents leading to serious harm are the least likely to be reported," the report said.
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/index.html?siteSect=105&sid=4059652
Switzerland’s hospitals may be the envy of the world, but rising health costs and patient numbers are increasingly putting the system under strain.

The situation is exacerbated by an ageing population, severe budget cuts in health care and a shortage of doctors.

Hospitals are reporting that they are full and that waiting times for operations have lengthened. Casualty departments say they are admitting more and more patients.

The situation is even more evident in summer, when families go on holiday, leaving older relatives behind.

“There are lots of patients who shouldn’t be in... hospital,” Sacha Pfaender, a junior doctor in internal medicine, who has worked at the Geneva University Hospital and two other hospitals, told swissinfo.

Hospital staff say people are increasingly turning to the casualty department instead of waiting for an appointment with the family doctor.

Bern University Hospital has recorded a three per cent jump in admissions over the past two years, and Geneva saw figures rise by four per cent in 2002.

According to the Federal Statistics Office, 1.39 million patients were treated in Switzerland’s 364 hospitals at a cost of SFr14.6 billion ($10.6 billion) in 2001.

Demand for healthcare

Doctors say that since obligatory health insurance was introduced in 1996, the Swiss seem to feel they have a right to health care. This tendency has increased as health insurance has become more expensive.

Pfaender says he has also noticed a change in people’s attitudes: as people have become better informed about health, they are demanding more expensive examinations, such as a scan.

A shortage of personnel is compounding the problem, putting pressure on both staff and patients.

“There are always a few patients waiting in the bathrooms or in the corridors,” Marco Bettoni, a cardiologist and former junior doctor at Geneva University Hospital, told swissinfo.
Staff cutbacks

Bettoni and others are also concerned about continuous staff cutbacks.

Hospital staff also regularly work long hours - between 70 and 80 hours a week. One young junior doctor at Lausanne University Hospital told swissinfo he sometimes worked a 36-hour shift.

Parliament is aware of the problems and in 2002 decided to limit working hours for junior doctors to 50 hours a week – a measure due to come into force in 2005.

Under pressure from junior doctors’ unions, most cantons have now implemented the agreement, but evidence suggests that it is not always respected by some hospitals, mainly for financial reasons.

According to Christophe Gapany, junior doctor at the children’s hospital in Lausanne, patients will continue to suffer unless the workload is reduced to fit into the 50-hour limit.
More medical students

Oliver Adam, from the Bern branch of Switzerland’s junior doctors’ association, says another problem is the drop in the number of people choosing to study medicine.

In 1998 there were almost 8,000 medical students, but this figure fell to just over 7,000 last year.

One solution to make up the shortfall has been to hire foreign doctors. Around 30 per cent of hospital doctors come from abroad, mainly from Germany.

But other European countries such as Germany, France and Britain are also suffering from a shortage of medics.



Now I am not going to say National Health care is an evil thing. It is nowhere close to evil. But it is a fantasy that will not work.

[Spider]

I don't think we will lose doctors and nurses. However, fewer people will major in medicine.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukdental3.html
Very recent story in GB where a lady had to pull her own teeth because 12 dentists refused to see her.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukwomeninlabor.html
Women in labour are being refused entry to overstretched maternity units and told to give birth elsewhere, NHS hospitals admitted yesterday in response to an application under the Freedom of Information Act. They disclosed that maternity wards in almost 10% of trusts closed their doors to new admissions on at least 10 days last year. One trust in North Yorkshire closed 39 times between October and January because it did not have enough staff to provide a safe service.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukgrandma.html
A woman of 61 was refused a routine heart operation by a hard-up NHS trust for being too old.

Dorothy Simpson suffers from an irregular heartbeat and is at increased risk of a stroke. But health chiefs refused to allow the procedure which was recommended by her specialist.

The school secretary was stunned by the ruling.

"I can't believe that at 61 I'm too old for this operation," she said.

"A friend has had exactly the same thing done and it has changed his life.

"I feel as though I've been put out to grass and surely deserve better than this."

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukoneineight.html

One in eight NHS hospital patients still has to wait more than a year for treatment, the government acknowledged yesterday in its first attempt to tell the full truth about health service queues in England.

A Department of Health analysis of 208,000 people admitted to hospital in March showed 48% were wheeled into the operating theatre within 18 weeks of a GP sending them for hospital diagnosis. But 30% waited more than 30 weeks and 12.4% more than a year.
http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/ukharms2.html

LONDON (Reuters) - One in 10 patients admitted to National Health Service hospitals in Britain is unintentionally harmed and almost a million safety incidents, more than 2,000 of which were fatal, were recorded last year, according to a report on Thursday.

Such figures were "terrifying enough", the report by parliament's public accounts committee said, but the reality may be worse because of what it called "substantial under-reporting" of serious incidents and deaths in the NHS.

"To top it all, the NHS simply has no idea how many people die each year from patient safety incidents," Edward Leigh, the committee's chairman, said in a statement.

The committee found that some 974,000 patient safety incidents or "near misses", including 2,181 patient deaths, were recorded by the NHS but it stressed that under-reporting was a serious problem.

"(NHS) trusts estimated that on average around 22 percent of incidents and 39 percent of near misses go unreported, and that medication errors and incidents leading to serious harm are the least likely to be reported," the report said.
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/index.html?siteSect=105&sid=4059652
Switzerland’s hospitals may be the envy of the world, but rising health costs and patient numbers are increasingly putting the system under strain.

The situation is exacerbated by an ageing population, severe budget cuts in health care and a shortage of doctors.

Hospitals are reporting that they are full and that waiting times for operations have lengthened. Casualty departments say they are admitting more and more patients.

The situation is even more evident in summer, when families go on holiday, leaving older relatives behind.

“There are lots of patients who shouldn’t be in... hospital,” Sacha Pfaender, a junior doctor in internal medicine, who has worked at the Geneva University Hospital and two other hospitals, told swissinfo.

Hospital staff say people are increasingly turning to the casualty department instead of waiting for an appointment with the family doctor.

Bern University Hospital has recorded a three per cent jump in admissions over the past two years, and Geneva saw figures rise by four per cent in 2002.

According to the Federal Statistics Office, 1.39 million patients were treated in Switzerland’s 364 hospitals at a cost of SFr14.6 billion ($10.6 billion) in 2001.

Demand for healthcare

Doctors say that since obligatory health insurance was introduced in 1996, the Swiss seem to feel they have a right to health care. This tendency has increased as health insurance has become more expensive.

Pfaender says he has also noticed a change in people’s attitudes: as people have become better informed about health, they are demanding more expensive examinations, such as a scan.

A shortage of personnel is compounding the problem, putting pressure on both staff and patients.

“There are always a few patients waiting in the bathrooms or in the corridors,” Marco Bettoni, a cardiologist and former junior doctor at Geneva University Hospital, told swissinfo.
Staff cutbacks

Bettoni and others are also concerned about continuous staff cutbacks.

Hospital staff also regularly work long hours - between 70 and 80 hours a week. One young junior doctor at Lausanne University Hospital told swissinfo he sometimes worked a 36-hour shift.

Parliament is aware of the problems and in 2002 decided to limit working hours for junior doctors to 50 hours a week – a measure due to come into force in 2005.

Under pressure from junior doctors’ unions, most cantons have now implemented the agreement, but evidence suggests that it is not always respected by some hospitals, mainly for financial reasons.

According to Christophe Gapany, junior doctor at the children’s hospital in Lausanne, patients will continue to suffer unless the workload is reduced to fit into the 50-hour limit.
More medical students

Oliver Adam, from the Bern branch of Switzerland’s junior doctors’ association, says another problem is the drop in the number of people choosing to study medicine.

In 1998 there were almost 8,000 medical students, but this figure fell to just over 7,000 last year.

One solution to make up the shortfall has been to hire foreign doctors. Around 30 per cent of hospital doctors come from abroad, mainly from Germany.

But other European countries such as Germany, France and Britain are also suffering from a shortage of medics.



Now I am not going to say National Health care is an evil thing. It is nowhere close to evil. But it is a fantasy that will not work.

Now thats more like it , no hiking up the skirt going drama queen ... yeah those are major concerns no doubt about it , and I know universal health care isnt perfect , but we have horror stories of our own here , and whats worse is Medial for companies , alot of Doctors are workmans comp doctors , they seem to be doing fine , workmans comp is expensive , but perhaps we could adopt a workmans comp program for everyone .......

[cutthemdown]

what in the **** does that have to do with Medicare or Medicade capping the cost ?

I was just pointing out that the groups of people covered by medicare and medicaid are small in comparison to the general population. Most people or under 65 and/or make more then the poverty level.

No way could govt cap the amount docs can charge for the whole population. Go ahead and think it will happen but I'm telling you it won't. Also the govt will never nationalize the hospitals that are currently privately owned. You can be cheap with the doctors by saying you have to take medicaid and medicare patients. At least that is not all 300 million of us. If you made them take everyone at those prices they would all go broke. It just doesn't make since to make our doctors work for nothing. It's one of those jobs thats so hard to get they deserve to be rich from it.

Listen I am all for govt figuring a way for universal healthcare. We are only rich country that doesn't have it and it makes since to try and get the country more healthy. Health=prosperity.

I just feel you can't do it by capping how much doctors and hospitals will get to make. If you do service will go down.

What it has to be is find a way to pay for it.

[Breaker]

I expected that .. Squirrle headed bastards hike up their skirts , scream evil , yet they dont know a damn thing about it ...... I have dated prom dates smarter then these empty headed bastards

Allow me a retort.

* Nationalized health insurance does not insure equal access to the health care system. Elderly people in Canada and the United Kingdom report much more difficulty in obtaining health care than U.S. seniors. While New Zealand's guidelines for treatment of end state renal failure imply that age should not be the sole factor in determining eligibility, they state that "in usual circumstances, people over 75 should not be accepted." To the terminal misfortune of that nation's elderly renal failure patients, New Zealand has no private dialysis facilities.

* Removing the medical sector from the free enterprise system tends to reduce the overall quality of health care. This makes sense because the market no longer drives companies to spend money on making new drugs and performing research into the human body because there is no profitable reason to do so. Study-upon-study has shown the quality of health care is typically higher in the U.S. than in any other nation, including those with nationalized health insurance. The United States has lower breast and prostate cancer mortality rates than New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, France and Australia.

* Germany, Sweden and Australia are now establishing free-market alternatives in an attempt to alleviate problems caused by their nationalized health care systems. Indeed, these countries are learning that the best course for provision of quality health care is not more patient power rather than more government power. This emphasis on patient power is the hall mark of the free market economy.

* the high level of administrative costs cited by advocates of publicly funded care arise out of the substantial level of government regulation that exists in the United States's health care sector. According to a Cato Institute study, this regulation provides benefits in the amount of $170 billion but costs the public up to $340 billion (Christopher J. Conover (4-10-2004). "Health Care Regulation: A $169 Billion Hidden Tax". Cato Policy Analysis 527: 1-32.). When compared to the entire cost of the war in Iraq (estimated at 509 Billion over the course of 5 years), the annual increased cost of Nationalized Health Care over the course of a similar 5 year span would be 845 Billion dollars.

While polling data indicate that US citizens are concerned about health care costs and there is substantial support for some type of reform most are generally satisfied with the quality of their own health care. According to a Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health in 2003, 86.9% of Americans reported being "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their health care services, compared to 83.2% of Canadians In the same study, 93.6% of Americans reported being "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their physician services, compared to 91.5% of Canadians (according to the study authors, that difference was not statistically significant). "Satisfaction with health care and physician services, Canada and United States, 2002 to 2003"

* It has also been noted that the largely free market system of health care in the United States has led to the faster development of more advanced medical treatment and new drugs, and that cancer patients in the United States for many forms of cancer, including those of the breast, thyroid and lung, have higher survival rates than their counterparts in publicly-funded health systems in Europe (A Story Michael Moore Didn't Tell, Washington Post, 18 July 2007) Some analysts have pointed out the difficulty of comparing international health statistics. In particular, the mortality rates for cancer in the United States is at about the same level as many other countries, suggesting that the higher survival rates are a function of the way cancer is diagnosed (http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2007/10/rudy-and-social.html) Many have theorized that public care systems, in which there is more bureaucratic government involvement and less financial incentive in the health care industry, lead to less motivation for medical innovation and invention (Pipes, S. Border Crossings, Pacific Research Institute, October 17, 2003. Retrieved September 18, 2006)

The United States, with its partly free-market health care system, is the world leader in medical innovation (Tyler Cowen, "Poor U.S. Scores in Health Care Don’t Measure Nobels and Innovation", The New York Times, October 5, 2006). According to economist Tyler Cohen quoted in The New York Times, the American system leads in converting new ideas into workable commercial technologies, and the research environment in the United States, compared with Europe, is richer, more competitive, more meritocratic and more tolerant of waste. Cohen argues that the American government could use its size to bargain down health care prices, but in the longer run it would cost lives because of the reduced innovation. Cohen argues that one reason America's leadership in innovation does not translate into relatively higher life expectancy is that other wealthy countries also benefit from US medical innovations.

Whoops looks like LABF and Spider don't have a clue what they are talking about.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

When compared to the entire cost of the war in Iraq (estimated at 509 Billion over the course of 5 years), the annual increased cost of Nationalized Health Care over the course of a similar 5 year span would be 845 Billion dollars.

While polling data indicate that US citizens are concerned about health care costs and there is substantial support for some type of reform most are generally satisfied with the quality of their own health care. According to a Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health in 2003, 86.9% of Americans reported being "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their health care services, compared to 83.2% of Canadians In the same study, 93.6% of Americans reported being "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their physician services, compared to 91.5% of Canadians (according to the study authors, that difference was not statistically significant). "Satisfaction with health care and physician services, Canada and United States, 2002 to 2003"


Whoops looks like LABF and Spider don't have a clue what they are talking about.Really?

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, most Americans, or 54 percent, are now dissatisfied with the overall quality of health care in the United States (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/US/healthcare031020_poll.html) — the first majority in three polls since 1993, and up 10 points since 2000.

-----------------------------------------------------------
In 2007, total national health expenditures were expected to rise 6.9 percent — two times the rate of inflation.1 Total spending was $2.3 TRILLION in 2007, or $7600 per person.1 Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4.2 TRILLION in 2016, or 20 percent of GDP.1

In 2007, employer health insurance premiums increased by 6.1 percent - two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,100. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,400.2

Experts agree that our health care system is riddled with inefficiencies, excessive administrative expenses, inflated prices, poor management, and inappropriate care, waste and fraud. These problems significantly increase the cost of medical care and health insurance for employers and workers and affect the security of families.

National Health Care Spending (http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml)

* In 2007, health care spending in the United States reached $2.3 trillion, and was projected to reach $3 trillion in 2011.1 Health care spending is projected to reach $4.2 trillion by 2016.1
* Health care spending is 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense.3
* In 2005, the United States spent 16 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health care. It is projected that the percentage will reach 20 percent by 2016.1
* Although nearly 47 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens.3
* Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.4

Take a look at projected Medicare expenditures over the next decade.I've posted the numbers here before in the "Bush Medicare Fraud Program" thread.

[baja]

Crapy thread!

If you really want a solution for medical care on a personal level do this;

http://www.oneradionetwork.com/?tag=annie-jubb

and than this;

http://www.juicefeasting.com/92Days/92DayProgramOutline/tabid/96/Default.aspx

Take responsibility for your own health

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Really?

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, most Americans, or 54 percent, are now dissatisfied with the overall quality of health care in the United States (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/US/healthcare031020_poll.html) — the first majority in three polls since 1993, and up 10 points since 2000.

-----------------------------------------------------------
In 2007, total national health expenditures were expected to rise 6.9 percent — two times the rate of inflation.1 Total spending was $2.3 TRILLION in 2007, or $7600 per person.1 Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4.2 TRILLION in 2016, or 20 percent of GDP.1

In 2007, employer health insurance premiums increased by 6.1 percent - two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $12,100. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,400.2

Experts agree that our health care system is riddled with inefficiencies, excessive administrative expenses, inflated prices, poor management, and inappropriate care, waste and fraud. These problems significantly increase the cost of medical care and health insurance for employers and workers and affect the security of families.

National Health Care Spending (http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml)

* In 2007, health care spending in the United States reached $2.3 trillion, and was projected to reach $3 trillion in 2011.1 Health care spending is projected to reach $4.2 trillion by 2016.1
* Health care spending is 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense.3
* In 2005, the United States spent 16 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health care. It is projected that the percentage will reach 20 percent by 2016.1
* Although nearly 47 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens.3
* Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.4

I've posted the numbers here before in the "Bush Medicare Fraud Program" thread.

:D

You would think right-wing disinfo artists like Breaker would just give up after making fools of themselves enough times.

[Spider]

Allow me a retort.



Whoops looks like LABF and Spider don't have a clue what they are talking about.

I cut the rest of your post out cause it is bull**** , for more serious ailments , my moms family goes to france and Italy , and they are not spring chickens . But besides that , I wanted to take a second here and congratulate you , being as stupid as you are is no easy feat , it is clear you worked long and hard at this .....

[BABronco]

Now thats more like it , no hiking up the skirt going drama queen ... yeah those are major concerns no doubt about it , and I know universal health care isnt perfect , but we have horror stories of our own here , and whats worse is Medial for companies , alot of Doctors are workmans comp doctors , they seem to be doing fine , workmans comp is expensive , but perhaps we could adopt a workmans comp program for everyone .......

The downside seems a lot more dominate than the positive.

[cutthemdown]

So let me get this straight. You liberals think you will vote in Obama, get nationalized healthcare, higher taxes, pull out of Iraq, and talk with leaders from countries like Iran, let them build nukes and everything is going to be peachy?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

So let me get this straight. You liberals think you will vote in Obama, get nationalized healthcare, higher taxes, pull out of Iraq, and talk with leaders from countries like Iran, let them build nukes and everything is going to be peachy?

Sounds like a simpleton's grasp of the issues.

Footsteps already posted an interview in which Obama laid out his positions and plans.

[Dukes]

So let me get this straight. You liberals think you will vote in Obama, get nationalized healthcare, higher taxes, pull out of Iraq, and talk with leaders from countries like Iran, let them build nukes and everything is going to be peachy?

Yes that is what they think

[cutthemdown]

Yes that is what they think

ok I was just checking.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yes that is what they think

Knock down that straw man - it's the only way you can delude yourself into thinking your way works.

[Dukes]

ok I was just checking.

Everything will be all better once Bush is out. I promise.


Signed,

Liberals.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Everything will be all better once Bush is out. I promise.


Signed,

Liberals.

Funny - when attempting to give Reagan credit for the Clinton economy, republi-cons like you always argue that the effects of a president's policies aren't fully realized until after he's gone.

Liberals should be able to point you to this same argument as Bush's chickens come home to roost over the next decade.

[Dukes]

This is about the time you show your true ignorance. Because I'm against one side(Liberals), I must be a "Bush watercarrier" or whatever catchy phrase you're using this week.

[cutthemdown]

The next Presidents honeymoon lasts until about 15 seconds after he is sworn in. I think McCain it would be easier for him because he hasn't promised to pull out of Iraq.

This is what happens if we leave Iraq:

Saudi Arabia already said they will fund the Sunni militias if we leave them to Iran and Sadr Mehdi Army. Not to mention Turkey would probably just take over the Kurdish area sparking a total war there also. That doesn't even consider what Syria might do, hell maybe just invade because we all know Obama won't do anything. He doesn't want to fight here, he pulled the troops out, he ain't sending them back. Hell let's just let Turkey wipe out the Kurds, Saudi Arabia and Iran fight a proxy war, the whole gulf gets shut down and then Spider can pay 10 dollars a gallon for diesel.

Sounds good to me me.

Or we can do the sane thing. Stay and finish the job. Give the Iraqi people the chance we promised them, help there govt get stable, fight Iranian influence, keep the Saudis happy, keep Turkey happy. Most importantly get that oil money flowing to rebuild Iraq.

To me rebuilding Iraq with Iraqi oil money should be the key. The next president must do whatever it takes to secure the oil, get it flowing, get that 60-70 billion a yr they are making off it going to the people. I don't know how to do it but we need someone who does. I just don't see Obama being the guy. It has to be McCain.

[cutthemdown]

Funny - when attempting to give Reagan credit for the Clinton economy, republi-cons like you always argue that the effects of a president's policies aren't fully realized until after he's gone.

Liberals should be able to point you to this same argument as Bush's chickens come home to roost over the next decade.

no we give Bush SR credit for the Clinton economy not Reagan. Reagan is the one who saved us from the Jimmy Carter post Vietnam bummer era. You know tear down this wall!!!!! That was great stuff.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Because I'm against one side(Liberals), I must be a "Bush watercarrier" or whatever catchy phrase you're using this week.

Emphasis on "against one side."

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

no we give Bush SR credit for the Clinton economy not Reagan.

ROFL!

That's even more hysterical.

Failing this, the cons give Newt and the GOP-controlled Congress credit, eh?


Reagan is the one who saved us from the Jimmy Carter post Vietnam bummer era. You know tear down this wall!!!!! That was great stuff.

Red Ink Reagan was the one who paved the way for the "greed is good" ethic that got us in the economic mess we're in today (and took credit he didn't really deserve for the collapse of the old Soviet Union.)

[Dukes]

Emphasis on "against one side."

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

If you say so.........


<a href="http://s25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/?action=view&current=MyPoliticalCompass.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c80/nvrsumr/MyPoliticalCompass.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Um, how does your position on the chart disprove my point?

[W*GS]

Don't worry, Dukes. LABF will try to crucify you based on your position, but his position is some sort of mistake or not really indicative of his socialist beliefs.

LABF is, as per usual, a hypocrite.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Everything will be all better once Bush is out. I promise.
Signed,
Liberals.You forgot some people... Signed,
half of the Republican base, a huge majority of the Independents and most every other American with any education and common sense.
This is about the time you show your true ignorance. Because I'm against one side(Liberals), I must be a "Bush watercarrier" or whatever catchy phrase you're using this week.Almost all Bush "watercarriers" now claim to be anything but one but I don't blame you or them for that.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You forgot some people... Signed,
half of the Republican base, a huge majority of the Independents and most every other American with any education and common sense.

:giggle:

It's funny to watch the neo-cons lump all these groups under the heading of "liberal" in their desperate attempts to maintain their cognitive dissonance.


Almost all Bush "watercarriers" now claim to be anything but one but I don't blame you or them for that.

Their impressions of Peter denying Christ never fail to amuse me. :D

[Bronco Bob]

Venezula will be in bad shape when Chavez is done.

It wasn't exactly Switzerland before Chavez came along.

[Bronco Bob]

I think if you nationalize health care in the U.S. (and Hillary's plan is a no-opt state-run plan), you will see the best doctors moving out of the country. Why stay in the U.S. and make a fixed salary that the government tells you is all you can earn when you can move off shore and set up your own practice where you can earn as much as your skills will allow?


Where exactly would these doctors move to? Canada? England? France?
Russia? China? Just about every civilized country in the rest of the world
already has some form of national health care, and even on a fixed salary
these doctors aren't going to make the money they'd make here in
Bangladesh or Kenya.
[/QUOTE]


Imagine where all the best lawyers would go if you had nationalized legal care where all legal fees were paid by the state and lawyers were told there was a cap on how much they could charge for their services. The same is going to happen with doctors under HillaryCare.

Not sure why you are picking on Hillary. Her plan gives you the option of
staying with your own private insurance company if you want.
So in that regard it isn't a national healthcare system, just a subsidized
system for people who can't afford to buy there own insurance.
We already have that kind of a system with lawyers.
You know, the part where the cop arrests you and says "You have the
right to speak to an attorney. If you can't afford an attorney one
will be provided for you."

[The Lone Bolt]

The next Presidents honeymoon lasts until about 15 seconds after he is sworn in. I think McCain it would be easier for him because he hasn't promised to pull out of Iraq.

This is what happens if we leave Iraq:

Saudi Arabia already said they will fund the Sunni militias if we leave them to Iran and Sadr Mehdi Army. Not to mention Turkey would probably just take over the Kurdish area sparking a total war there also. That doesn't even consider what Syria might do, hell maybe just invade because we all know Obama won't do anything. He doesn't want to fight here, he pulled the troops out, he ain't sending them back. Hell let's just let Turkey wipe out the Kurds, Saudi Arabia and Iran fight a proxy war, the whole gulf gets shut down and then Spider can pay 10 dollars a gallon for diesel.

Sounds good to me me.

Or we can do the sane thing. Stay and finish the job. Give the Iraqi people the chance we promised them, help there govt get stable, fight Iranian influence, keep the Saudis happy, keep Turkey happy. Most importantly get that oil money flowing to rebuild Iraq.

To me rebuilding Iraq with Iraqi oil money should be the key. The next president must do whatever it takes to secure the oil, get it flowing, get that 60-70 billion a yr they are making off it going to the people. I don't know how to do it but we need someone who does. I just don't see Obama being the guy. It has to be McCain.



Not to worry. If either Obama or Clinton reach the WH, I predict that they will listen to US officials in Iraq, Iraqi politicians, and our military, and then go before the American people and say "I know I promised a quick exit from Iraq during my campain, but consulations with Iraq's leadership as well as with the US military have led me to conclude that our presence there will be required for much longer. Sorry folks!"

I can't wait to see the far-left blow a fuse on this one. I'm getting the popcorn ready.:~ohyah!:

[W*GS]

It wasn't exactly Switzerland before Chavez came along.

On the other hand, how badly has Chavez screwed up such that despite $100/bbl oil, Venezuelans are suffering from shortages of basic foodstuffs?

[Rohirrim]

Not to worry. If either Obama or Clilnton reach the WH, I predict that they will listen to US officials in Iraq, Iraqi politicians, and our military, and then go before the American people and say "I know I promised a quick exit from Iraq during my campain, but consulations with Iraq's leadership as well as with the US military have led me to conclude that our presence there will be required for much longer. Sorry folks!"

I can't wait to see the far-left blow a fuse on this one. I'm getting the popcorn ready.:~ohyah!:

Neither Clinton nor Obama have promised a quick pull out. I believe Obama is talking 16 months on his website. Clinton has talked about beginning the pullout "immediately" but the numbers are vague. Who knows what that means? One platoon? A brigade?

As the Iraqi "leadership" has already shown, you can talk to them two years ago, this year, or five years from now. You'll get the same total inaction. We are idiots to just sit there, dangling on their hook. But as long as we have some fat cats making money on the deal, we'll stay. Maybe Billary or Obama will get cut in on the Halliburton pie. Then we'll still be there in 8 years. You can guarantee it.

[kappys]

On the other hand, how badly has Chavez screwed up such that despite $100/bbl oil, Venezuelans are suffering from shortages of basic foodstuffs?

Not that surprising. hard to turn away from an export driven economic model including export driven agriculture to one that feed's it own people without farm imports from the US. I think it was predictable.

[cutthemdown]

It wasn't exactly Switzerland before Chavez came along.

This is true.

[cutthemdown]

Like I was pointing out USA will not be allowed by the international community to just pull out. Some sort of force has to be there to help the Iraqi Govt maintain control and provide security. The Saudis have a lot of pull with the USA govt and they will be pushing for us to stay. Turkey will pushing for us to stay because they don't the Kurds being able to create there own country. That is what happens if we pull out to soon. The Kurds will just declare Kurdistan a country and Turkey will probably invade.

We have to stay, leaving would be a huge mess 10 times worst then Iraq has been of late.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Like I was pointing out USA will not be allowed by the international community to just pull out. Some sort of force has to be there to help the Iraqi Govt maintain control and provide security. The Saudis have a lot of pull with the USA govt and they will be pushing for us to stay. Turkey will pushing for us to stay because they don't the Kurds being able to create there own country. That is what happens if we pull out to soon. The Kurds will just declare Kurdistan a country and Turkey will probably invade.

We have to stay, leaving would be a huge mess 10 times worst then Iraq has been of late.where did you hear this, at a UN revival meeting? There is NO international coalition there now so who would pretend to tell us what we can do or can't do? And no, we don't have to stay in that sh*thole.

[kappys]

Like I was pointing out USA will not be allowed by the international community to just pull out. Some sort of force has to be there to help the Iraqi Govt maintain control and provide security. The Saudis have a lot of pull with the USA govt and they will be pushing for us to stay. Turkey will pushing for us to stay because they don't the Kurds being able to create there own country. That is what happens if we pull out to soon. The Kurds will just declare Kurdistan a country and Turkey will probably invade.

We have to stay, leaving would be a huge mess 10 times worst then Iraq has been of late.

Since when have we cared about the international community?

[cutthemdown]

where did you hear this, at a UN revival meeting? There is NO international coalition there now so who would pretend to tell us what we can do or can't do? And no, we don't have to stay in that sh*thole.

I'm basing it on the facts. Saudi Arabia already told our govt they would have to fund the Sunni's if we left Iraq to the Iranians. It's just how it would be. Because we don't want to piss Saudi Arabia off any new President will have more pressure then they understand right now as a candidate to please the Royal Family. Second the UN will demand something be in place to help maintain security. A quick pullout will simply not be possible.

Of course I didn't mean they can force us. I mean Saudi Arabia saying stay or we will fund a Sunni Insurgency and oil flow may be disrupted will force the President to re-think a hasty exit that leaves Sunnis to the Iranians and the Mehdi Army.

[cutthemdown]

Since when have we cared about the international community?

we are about Turkey because they are Nato. We care about the Saudi Royal family because they are oil laden. Those countries will be the 2 major factors blocking a quick withdraw.

Unless you just want next President to say hey Turkey do what you want. Saudi Arabia if you have to fund a sunni insurgency then go ahead. If oil is disrupted whatever we will deal with it.

[loborugger]

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/488840.html

El Jefe Maximo has decided to nationalize the steel industry.

[elsid13]

Russia to Sell 3 Submarines to Venezuela
6 days ago
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iK7niuF9l52vrJFFu1ZWpAj1IP-AD8VQVDR00

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia will sell three submarines to Venezuela in a deal to be inked when President Hugo Chavez visits next month, a Russian news agency reported Friday.

Interfax cited an unnamed military-industrial official as saying that the subs would be diesel-electric models, of the "Varshavyanka" class, known under NATO terms as a Kilo-class sub.

A spokesman for state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport had no comment; no one answered the phones at the Venezuelan Embassy in Moscow.
During a visit to Russia last year, Chavez said that his country needs submarines to protect itself against its enemies — foremost among them the United States.

At that time, a top Rosoboronexport official said discussions centered on as many as five "Project 636" Kilo-class Varshavyanka submarines.
Caracas already has purchased some $3 billion in arms from Russia, including military helicopters, Kalashnikov rifles, Sukhoi fighter jets and other weaponry.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm basing it on the facts. Saudi Arabia already told our govt they would have to fund the Sunni's if we left Iraq to the Iranians. It's just how it would be. Because we don't want to piss Saudi Arabia off any new President will have more pressure then they understand right now as a candidate to please the Royal Family. Second the UN will demand something be in place to help maintain security. A quick pullout will simply not be possible.

Of course I didn't mean they can force us. I mean Saudi Arabia saying stay or we will fund a Sunni Insurgency and oil flow may be disrupted will force the President to re-think a hasty exit that leaves Sunnis to the Iranians and the Mehdi Army.Good, let them fund that sh*thole war for a few years and we can leave. Why do I care which radical religious nut ends up in power over there?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Good, let them fund that sh*thole war for a few years and we can leave. Why do I care which radical religious nut ends up in power over there?

Good point.

http://www.bartcop.com/ugly_amer.jpg

[cutthemdown]

Russia to Sell 3 Submarines to Venezuela
6 days ago
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iK7niuF9l52vrJFFu1ZWpAj1IP-AD8VQVDR00

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia will sell three submarines to Venezuela in a deal to be inked when President Hugo Chavez visits next month, a Russian news agency reported Friday.

Interfax cited an unnamed military-industrial official as saying that the subs would be diesel-electric models, of the "Varshavyanka" class, known under NATO terms as a Kilo-class sub.

A spokesman for state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport had no comment; no one answered the phones at the Venezuelan Embassy in Moscow.
During a visit to Russia last year, Chavez said that his country needs submarines to protect itself against its enemies — foremost among them the United States.

At that time, a top Rosoboronexport official said discussions centered on as many as five "Project 636" Kilo-class Varshavyanka submarines.
Caracas already has purchased some $3 billion in arms from Russia, including military helicopters, Kalashnikov rifles, Sukhoi fighter jets and other weaponry.

Really they can only be used to intimidate his neighbors. Our subs are so advanced they will just off the coast and wait for them to come out to see. Then they follow them around all the time. Then if anything did break out we would sink them before they knew what hit them.

No way IMO a few subs make Venezuela any safer it's just a waste of money and something for Chavez to use to keep the peace when he refuses to leave office when his term is up.

[cutthemdown]

Good, let them fund that sh*thole war for a few years and we can leave. Why do I care which radical religious nut ends up in power over there?

If you can't see how a full blown war between Iran and the Saudis, fought proxy in Iraq, with Turkey probably going into the Kurdish areas will disrupt the flow of oil then I can't explain it to you.

It's in Americas interests to keep a firm hold on the whole region by staying in Iraq, staying in Kuwait, keeping the Royal family happy, keeping Turkey happy, not letting Iran expand it's influence and keeping the Gulf open for business.

It's easy to say pull out and let whole region go under, but Presidents have to think bigger then that. Obama and Clinton will find it impossible to deliver on there promises of a quick withdraw.

IMO the only way it works is if NATO or UN wants to send a peacekeeping force of at least 100 thousand. NATO won't because they are up to eyes in Afghanistan. I doubt UN could put a decent force together but maybe.

For sure though you can't just leave and give up all we fought for.

[Spider]

Really they can only be used to intimidate his neighbors. Our subs are so advanced they will just off the coast and wait for them to come out to see. Then they follow them around all the time. Then if anything did break out we would sink them before they knew what hit them.

No way IMO a few subs make Venezuela any safer it's just a waste of money and something for Chavez to use to keep the peace when he refuses to leave office when his term is up. who are you trying to Kid ? hell look how scared we was of Saddam ........Saddam the next Hitler , Mushroom cloud .Big Bomb go boom ..... you guys on the right were scared ****less of Saddam and he couldnt even get his own ass out of his Country .Chavez gets Subs , and you people on the right will hike up your skirts and scream bloody murder

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If you can't see how a full blown war between Iran and the Saudis, fought proxy in Iraq, with Turkey probably going into the Kurdish areas will disrupt the flow of oil then I can't explain it to you.

It's in Americas interests to keep a firm hold on the whole region by staying in Iraq, staying in Kuwait, keeping the Royal family happy, keeping Turkey happy, not letting Iran expand it's influence and keeping the Gulf open for business.

It's easy to say pull out and let whole region go under, but Presidents have to think bigger then that. Obama and Clinton will find it impossible to deliver on there promises of a quick withdraw.

IMO the only way it works is if NATO or UN wants to send a peacekeeping force of at least 100 thousand. NATO won't because they are up to eyes in Afghanistan. I doubt UN could put a decent force together but maybe.

For sure though you can't just leave and give up all we fought for.Exactly what is that again?

[baja]

LOL I can't wait to see his answer.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOL I can't wait to see his answer.

Give him a few minutes to look through his saved e-mails/RNC talking points. ;)

[W*GS]

No comment from the resident Chavez fluffer on ol' Hugo following in Fidel's footsteps. Not surprising at all...

[Bronco_Beerslug]

No comment from the resident Chavez fluffer on ol' Hugo following in Fidel's footsteps. Not surprising at all...Should we invade and occupy and then turn them into a "Democracy"?

[W*GS]

Of course not. Why are you even asking me?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Of course not. Why are you even asking me?Because it's pretty obvious what's going on there, in Africa, the Middle East, etc... with religious rule/war, dictatorships, etc...

I'm just wondering what people expect the U.S to do about any of those countries.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Should we invade and occupy and then turn them into a "Democracy"?

You know the answer from an anti-democracy/pro-corporatocracy cheerleader like W*GS to that question is going to be affirmative - even though he won't say it out loud.

[W*GS]

Bull****, LABF.

Show me one single instance of my supporting such a policy. Just one.

Or shut the **** up with the baldfaced lies, ya prick.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You know the answer from an anti-democracy/pro-corporatocracy cheerleader like W*GS to that question is going to be affirmative - even though he won't say it out loud.I doubt from reading his prior posts he's onboard with American led regime change. I just don't see how one is worse than the other in a lot of these countries.

[W*GS]

Beerslug doesn't believe your horse****, LABF...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Bandwagon appeals and name-calling are the last refuge for W*GS, apparently.

[W*GS]

Making up **** is your only trick, LABF.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I doubt from reading his prior posts he's onboard with American led regime change. I just don't see how one is worse than the other in a lot of these countries.

Funny how W*GS just marches in lockstep with the pro-corporatocracy right when it comes time to pick the boogyman du jour, eh?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Obama mocks Clinton's vocal support for gun rights (http://www.yahoo.com/s/856787)<dl class="inline"><dt>Maybe W*GS wants to take another look at Hill? ;)
</dt></dl>

[W*GS]

You're in no position to write about Chavez truthfully and accurately, LABF, seeing as how you've swallowed so much pro-Chavez propaganda without a single gag.

Just about everything everyone who isn't as enamored of Chavez as you are has predicted has come to pass; why you stand up for someone like him (we all know why, which is just an indication of the shallowness and utter stupidity of your ideology) beggars belief. You're just like the lefty dupes who fell for Stalin in the 20s and 30s, and who fell for Castro in the 60s. The rest of us have seen their kind of song-n-dance before; you're the one twirling like a well-mannered marionette.

[W*GS]

[Maybe W*GS wants to take another look at Hill?

You're the one who falls for pandering politicians; not me.

Just look at your lust for Chavez...

[Breaker]

:D

You would think right-wing disinfo artists like Breaker would just give up after making fools of themselves enough times.

I quote the Cato Institute and you quote blogs .... yea and I am the dis info artist ROFL!

[Breaker]

I cut the rest of your post out cause it is bull**** , for more serious ailments , my moms family goes to france and Italy , and they are not spring chickens . But besides that , I wanted to take a second here and congratulate you , being as stupid as you are is no easy feat , it is clear you worked long and hard at this .....

Ahh the Spider method, simply cut out things that would actually make you think or prove you wrong and simply say they are bs.


I also find it hilarious that you of all people have the balls to make any sort of evaluation as to ones intelligence Hilarious!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I quote the Cato Institute and you quote blogs .... yea and I am the dis info artist ROFL!

I didn't know Yahoo News was a blog. ROFL!

BTW, isn't the Cato Institute essentially a blog for the Libertarian Party?

No ideological slant there! Ha!

[baja]

I didn't know Yahoo News was a blog. ROFL!

BTW, isn't the Cato Institute essentially a blog for the Libertarian Party?

No ideological slant there! Ha!

I suspect Breaker's first name is Wind.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I suspect Breaker's first name is Wind.

:D

[Spider]

Ahh the Spider method, simply cut out things that would actually make you think or prove you wrong and simply say they are bs.


I also find it hilarious that you of all people have the balls to make any sort of evaluation as to ones intelligence Hilarious!

LOL everyone already knows you are full of **** , they really dont need me to point it out , besides you have never answered the question of why people worked before 1996 ... Until you do boy , you wont get ant serious consideration from me dumb ass ......

[kappys]

I doubt from reading his prior posts he's onboard with American led regime change. I just don't see how one is worse than the other in a lot of these countries.

I doubt there is any country that wouldn't prefer their own bad governance to that of a dictatorship led by the US.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I doubt there is any country that wouldn't prefer their own bad governance to that of a dictatorship led by the US.
That's probably true, really. We don't seem to be very successful at it and it usually comes back to haunt us down the road sometime.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I doubt there is any country that wouldn't prefer their own bad governance to that of a dictatorship led by the US.

That's a good point.

The cheerleaders for Bush's invasion of Iraq were too impaired by EDD (Empathy Deficit Disorder) to grasp this.

[cutthemdown]

I doubt there is any country that wouldn't prefer their own bad governance to that of a dictatorship led by the US.

Tell that to S Korea.

[cutthemdown]

We destroyed Japan then let them build their own country and run it.

[cutthemdown]

We destroyed Germany with help from allies but we let them rebuild and be a country. Usa does not want to be a dicatator. We want stable, friendly govts.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Usa does not want to be a dicatator. We want stable, friendly govts - even if we have to install 'em at gunpoint.

Fixed.

http://www.bartcop.com/less-grim.jpg

[Bronco_Beerslug]

We destroyed Germany with help from allies but we let them rebuild and be a country. Usa does not want to be a dicatator. We want stable, friendly govts.
LOL

Not sure what a dicatator is but yeah, we have no problem installing our brand of dicatatorships around the world.

[Rigs11]

Here's a snipit that will make Wig's blood boil. Chavez just sent 364 tons of food to Haiti.What a bastard!Ha!

[cutthemdown]

My Parents should have been Fixed.

http://www.bartcop.com/less-grim.jpg

I agree

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I agree

I guess when you're trying to defend a thoroughly discredited movement, pathetic ad hominems like these are your last refuge, eh?

[kappys]

Tell that to S Korea.

Your examples are valid ones, with some exceptions to the South Korea model at least initially though things did work out in the end.

Unfortunately I think there has bee a fundamental shift in the foreign policy that characterized the end of WWII as well as the Korean War versus the policy that came to dominate the 1960's, especially with regards to Latin America. The relative sucesses of those policies encouraged a very different approach to foriegn relations, namely, that we should install friendly dictatorships willing to sell out their countries resources provided they and their cronies recieve a portion of the benefits.