Thread: If Obamacare passes... so does amnesty

States rights! To hell with the unconstitutional dictates!

Originally Posted by roundabout

States rights! To hell with the unconstitutional dictates!

Here Here! 10th Amendment, 10th Amendment, 10th Amendment!

Repeal the dictates of the Reconstruction. Restore the Citizens what is rightfully theirs by birth.

MW wrote

If a liberal politician told you the moon was blue, I honestly think you would believe it to be fact. I'm through arguing with you because I've come to the conclusion that you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you in the behind. You've been proven wrong over and over again in this thread but absolutely refuse to accept the truth and continuously offer up empty arguments that are not based on fact or reality. Furthermore, you're a 'cherry picker' that refuses to see the whole picture for what it is.

I think Kathyet is right, you definitely seem to be one of those folks that think it's Uncle Sam's job to take care of you and your neighbor.

[/quote]

Obviously you have been unable to refute my arguments baseed on facts, so now the pesonal insults, off the mark suppositions, and wild accusations start.

Jennifer wrote;
Chiming in here (I lurk more than post) but I just had to step in... I lived in England for 2 years, gave birth to my first son there. I'm sorry but the NHS, in my opinion, stunk. I have a lot of stories to tell but will save it.

One of the reasons for us moving back was for better health care and a better living. Since Obama took office, we got the worse tax return ever this year and now we fear it's only going to get worse with this bill (we are your normal middle-class family). Eventually the funding for Obamacare will probably run out, then even the lower income families will get hit with more taxes. This bill is bad news...done about all wrong.

Okay back to lurking now...[/quote]

I have had experience with three universal health care systems, Canada which was great, Belgium which was great and the UK, where I only had to use it once and was entirely satisified, but I have to say there were alot of complaints in the press about it.

The fact that no one can deny, is that America ranks around 55th on health care. American women have a 10 times greater chance of dying in child birth than Irish women do. Sure, the health care industy, who profits from our terrible system, does a great PR job to convince Ameicans that they actually have a good deal. Health care for some in this country is top rate...but over all, the numbers don't lie. We pay more to get less.

Glad your care in the UK was good BUT I can tell you first hand my experiences and the things I saw which makes me glad to be here! Even my Mother In Law who is a Councilwoman told me she was glad we were going to the states. I'm not going to argue with you at all...not worth it.

My husband said it the best, Obama only did this so he can make a name for himself forever in history. That's why he was gloating so much while signing it.

This is probably why he will try Immigration Reform next. Thought I saw somewhere in the news next Spring they'll try to pass it.

"Where U.S. Health Care Ranks Number One

Isn't 'responsiveness' what medicine is all about?

By MARK B. CONSTANTIAN

Last August the cover of Time pictured President Obama in white coat and stethoscope. The story opened: "The U.S. spends more to get less [health care] than just about every other industrialized country." This trope has dominated media coverage of health-care reform. Yet a majority of Americans opposes Congress's health-care bills. Why?

The comparative ranking system that most critics cite comes from the U.N.'s World Health Organization (WHO). The ranking most often quoted is Overall Performance, where the U.S. is rated No. 37. The Overall Performance Index, however, is adjusted to reflect how well WHO officials believe that a country could have done in relation to its resources.

The scale is heavily subjective: The WHO believes that we could have done better because we do not have universal coverage. What apparently does not matter is that our population has universal access because most physicians treat indigent patients without charge and accept Medicare and Medicaid payments, which do not even cover overhead expenses. The WHO does rank the U.S. No. 1 of 191 countries for "responsiveness to the needs and choices of the individual patient." Isn't responsiveness what health care is all about?

Data assembled by Dr. Ronald Wenger and published recently in the Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons indicates that cardiac deaths in the U.S. have fallen by two-thirds over the past 50 years. Polio has been virtually eradicated. Childhood leukemia has a high cure rate. Eight of the top 10 medical advances in the past 20 years were developed or had roots in the U.S.

The Nobel Prizes in medicine and physiology have been awarded to more Americans than to researchers in all other countries combined. Eight of the 10 top-selling drugs in the world were developed by U.S. companies. The U.S. has some of the highest breast, colon and prostate cancer survival rates in the world. And our country ranks first or second in the world in kidney transplants, liver transplants, heart transplants, total knee replacements, coronary artery bypass, and percutaneous coronary interventions.

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world; England has one of the longest. In Canada, a country of 35 million citizens, 1 million patients now wait for surgery and another million wait to see specialists.

When my friend, cardiac surgeon Peter Alivizatos, returned to Greece after 10 years heading the heart transplantation program at Baylor University in Dallas, the one-year heart transplant survival rate there was 50%—five-year survival was only 35%. He soon increased those numbers to 94% one-year and 90% five-year survival, which is what we achieve in the U.S. So the next time you hear that the U.S. is No. 37, remember that Greece is No. 14. Cuba, by the way, is No. 39.

But the issue is only partly about quality. As we have all heard, the U.S. spends a higher percentage of its gross domestic product for health care than any other country.

Actually, health-care spending now increases more moderately than it has in previous decades. Food, energy, housing and health care consume the same share of American spending today (55%) that they did in 1960 (53%).

So what does this money buy? Certainly some goes to inefficiencies, corporate profits, and costs that should be lowered by professional liability reform and national, free-market insurance access by allowing for competition across state lines. But the majority goes to a long list of advantages that American citizens now expect: the easiest access, the shortest waiting times the widest choice of physicians and hospitals, and constant availability of health care to elderly Americans. What we need now is insurance and liability reform—not health-care reform.

Who determines how much a nation should pay for its health? Is 17% too much, or too little? What better way could there be to dedicate our national resources than toward the health and productivity of our citizens?

Perhaps it's not that America spends too much on health care, but that other nations don't spend enough.

Dr. Constantian is a plastic and reconstructive surgeon in New Hampshire."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 02274.html