EvilMonkey Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 09:20 AM) ...while other countries (i.e. the U.K., Japan) get along with significantly fewer doctors per capita than the U.S. does, and they do so without being held up as an example of horrendous wait times as well. You are kidding on this, right? The UK as an example of medical efficiency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 08:45 PM) You are kidding on this, right? The UK as an example of medical efficiency? No, he's not. UTOPIA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 09:45 PM) You are kidding on this, right? The UK as an example of medical efficiency? They cover everyone, give health outcomes that are statistically indistinguishable from ours, and they do so with a cost that is less than 1/2 of what we pay per person. We pay more per person for Medicare in this country, not counting private insurance at all, than the UK does for the NHS. The numbers don't lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 08:43 AM) They cover everyone, give health outcomes that are statistically indistinguishable from ours, and they do so with a cost that is less than 1/2 of what we pay per person. We pay more per person for Medicare in this country, not counting private insurance at all, than the UK does for the NHS. The numbers don't lie. Yeah but I think I read an article about a woman waiting 25 years to get a mole removed or something. *rolls eyes* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 09:47 AM) Yeah but I think I read an article about a woman waiting 25 years to get a mole removed or something. *rolls eyes* You probably have. The UK does generally have somewhat longer wait times. But that's one of those things they're willing to deal with in exchange for paying 40% of what we pay per person. If they changed that to 50-55% of what we pay, those issues would vanish, and if they went to 60% of what we pay per person then they'd have all their scalpels made out of gold because they have no idea what else to do with the money. But then, Obama's a spend-o-maniac. Not the people who defend our system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 OK so, its been getting a little bit tetchy in here lately... cool it, please - everyone. No more ad hominem stuff, no insults to other posters. We thank you for your support. Putting this in both threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 In a surprise to no one, Elizabeth Edwards is leaving John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 11:22 AM) In a surprise to no one, Elizabeth Edwards is leaving John. Can we somehow connect this to Tiger Woods? That'd be gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Something tells me the term "stiff shaft" would be involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 Add another $75 billion to the price of the stimulus plan, as in its most obvious sign of failure to this point, the federal government is paying out way more than it expected in unemployment benefits. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/j..._cube_position1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 10:22 AM) In a surprise to no one, Elizabeth Edwards is leaving John. Good for Elizabeth. I am sure she deserves better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 28, 2010 Share Posted January 28, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 11:29 AM) Something tells me the term "stiff shaft" would be involved. There's report of a pre-iowa-caucuses recording of Mr. Edwards and his partner existing somewhere in an upcoming book/ABC interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 28, 2010 -> 10:46 AM) Add another $75 billion to the price of the stimulus plan, as in its most obvious sign of failure to this point, the federal government is paying out way more than it expected in unemployment benefits. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/j..._cube_position1 Relax, the unemployment rate wont go above 8%, Obama said so. Oh, wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 09:17 AM) Relax, the unemployment rate wont go above 8%, Obama said so. Oh, wait... The solution to this problem is a spending freeze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 08:23 AM) The solution to this problem is a spending freeze. You mean a spending freeze on less than 0.5% of the total budget? Yea, ok. Also, let's not pretend they didn't know that the senate would strike down the so called freeze, so it's the very point/suggestion by Obama was moot from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 09:38 AM) You mean a spending freeze on less than 0.5% of the total budget? Yea, ok. Also, let's not pretend they didn't know that the senate would strike down the so called freeze, so it's the very point/suggestion by Obama was moot from the start. That's been the Republican alternative to the Stimulus since last January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 08:39 AM) That's been the Republican alternative to the Stimulus since last January. And they're just as stupid as the democrats, what's your point? I don't like the GOP as much as I don't like the Liberal Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 09:49 AM) And they're just as stupid as the democrats, what's your point? I don't like the GOP as much as I don't like the Liberal Dems. So you'd be supportive of a much larger stimulus with fewer tax cuts and more job creation work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 08:50 AM) So you'd be supportive of a much larger stimulus with fewer tax cuts and more job creation work? If it created jobs that were sustainable, yes. If it's nothing but a bunch of temporary work, no, and thus far that's all I'm seeing. Not to mention the job losses in the private sector far outweighed any gains in the temporary-until-we-are-out-of-stimulus-money funded public sector. I'm even in support of higher taxes if they start repaying our debt and getting the budget under control. I'm not unreasonable in these ways, it's logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 08:17 AM) Relax, the unemployment rate wont go above 8%, Obama said so. Oh, wait... Oh wait... he never said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 10:53 AM) Oh wait... he never said that. Actually they did. Their economists used something in the 8-9% range as the number to gauge how big the stimulus should be to fill the output gap (and the Congressional republicans cut it downwards from there). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 09:54 AM) Actually they did. Their economists used something in the 8-9% range as the number to gauge how big the stimulus should be to fill the output gap (and the Congressional republicans cut it downwards from there). That is not nearly the same thing. Saying they have a target to gauge need for stimulus, or making a guessed projection, is NOT the same as saying "the UE rate will not go above 8%", which would be a stupid thing to say. And he never said it, that I have seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 10:58 AM) That is not nearly the same thing. Saying they have a target to gauge need for stimulus, or making a guessed projection, is NOT the same as saying "the UE rate will not go above 8%", which would be a stupid thing to say. And he never said it, that I have seen. Making a lowball estimate for the unemployment you're basing your stimulus on when your interest rates are up against the zero bound and there is essentially zero risk in doing too large of a stimulus and large risk in doing too small of a stimulus is just as stupid, if not more so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Let me rephrase that more simply. Whether BO said it or not, they based their entire key economic policy of their first year on the belief that UE would not go higher than that number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 09:53 AM) Oh wait... he never said that. Yes he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts