Yeah, if that's the main reason they joined the Army. What would you call it?

I have seen this in conjunction with older cries from some that we have motor vehicle fuel prices that are “too low” [sic] or “artificially low” [sic] in contrast to the (presumably “normal” [sic] or desireable, to them) tax rates in Europe. I always think not only of the other economic things I listed myself in this light earlier, but about what I read once from a wonderfully correct and caustic writer, that is so appropriate in examples such as this (nowadays, with HIV as well as tuberculosis infection rates):

“Maybe we can find lots of countries with a higher TB rate. Are we supposed to rush to emulate them[,] too?”

So?”

Self-explanatory, again. It was something (better) worth doing if she wanted to do it.
(Not “had” to do it…)

[sigh]

* * *

“Does that mean they were 'Dying for an education'.”

Wait until more state governments cut their financial aid and higher education budgets, raise tuition…

So? Again: the world (and, presumably, this blog) does not revolve around you and your wants. If you want to start a blog on which you post only the things you want to see, nobody is stopping you.

Not as badly as the Europeans (object of idiotic worship by many here in the USA) eventually will.

What I post is self-explanatory.

So far, I haven't seen an additional (often-neurotic conservative-bashing) thread by Kathy, though the traveling free-clinic phenomenon is as I described, evidence of problems we have currently with health care.

* * *

“As one who inherently mistrusts government inefficiency, as most recently evidenced by the 'cash for clunkers' debacle”

Now we have learned — no surprise — that GM and Chrysler aren't likely to repay the money they got.

The problem we see with health care is not a failure of silly emotionalism in place of logic, that “all the modern industrialized nations but ours have government health care” and other such whinings (we also don't have more crushing regulations on the economy and much higher motor vehicle or energy prices, not yet, at least, either). What we see with health care is the biggest and most disturbing kinds of failures of overreach and wrongful-reach by the Dems, increasingly bad since the start of this year. The intelligent, logical public naturally is becoming increasingly skeptical and opposed to it.

redbus wrote: “Is that all? That's not nearly as many nations as I thought.”

There are… I was being lazy because I don't think many (any?) minds here are going to be changed.

EVERY developed country but one has one form or other of Universal Health Care System.

From the same link posted earlier: “The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system.”

There is no logic in the argument against universal health care… just politics.

Is that all? That's not nearly as many nations as I thought. As one who inherently mistrusts government inefficiency, as most recently evidenced by the “cash for clunkers” debacle, I would be more inclined to see greater government regulation of the existing industry. Switzerland is not on your list for a reason. They have privately run insurance, and from what I can tell, have found the right balance between private enterprise and government regulation that makes most people satisfied. So, if we're going to look elsewhere for models, let's remember that there are several that could be followed.

What will universal healthcare look like in the future when the U.S. is 50% Hispanics, 20% black, 10% Asian, and 20% white. Can the U.S. hope to maintain a system with those demographics.

Many nations have lots of things that we don't have here. Many of those nations have no way of dealing with H1N1 because their already overburdened systems can't handle it. Just look at the nations in SteveK's list of nations who are “happy” with healthcare. Look at how they handle pandemic and look at their own polls within their own borders as to whether they “love it”.

I haven't done that (yet).

But you are correct. If they are going to do it, then make it all or nothing. I'd rather see massive regulation of insurance, healthcare, and pharmaceutical industries FIRST. Then, try nationized if that didn't work.

But as far as the topic goes, Kathy really shouldn't make the assertion that Greg Missman was “Dying” for healthcare. That is in extremely poor taste. Many people join the Army for college money, and end up dying in Afghanistan. Does that mean they were “Dying for an education”.
Bad article, Kathy.

said better than anyone.

How awful. I'm really sorry, joe. My heart goes out to his family, and to you, too, as a friend of the family.

I am going to break my personal vow never to respond to anything you write, just this one time, because I think you truly need to know this: It's very difficult for me to find words precise enough to convey to you how profoundly indifferent I am to your opinion of me, or what I write.

I just wanted you to know that, because I think it's only fair to you.

Father_Time wrote: “I want healthcare NOT insurance!

WE need and I want full Government Run Healthcare. Full Nationalized Medicine.

It is cheaper, better and the rest of the world has it!

Absolutely FT. The “public option” would just be a money pit with the $1.4M/day Health Industry still controlling the “game” and making the rules. Anything less than Nationalized Medicine would be doomed to failure.