<blockquote>I wouldn’t exactly call quasi-governmental agencies capitalism (although a lot of people did get rich). Fannie and Freddie were established and milked by Congress, mostly the Democrats.</blockquote>
Sorry, I should have said "crony capitalist." If they're "quasi-" anything, the things I mentioned make them quasi-<i>corporate</i>.
<blockquote>"...divided by the 36 Million members gets you about one and one half penny per person if I’m doing my math right."</blockquote>
Not by all 36 million, maybe just a couple of thousand who died because they got dumped.
<blockquote>"You currently have a prescription benefit for which you likely never contributed a dime (passed into law when the country was already in debt)."</blockquote>
FYI, I contribute every month; I'm nowhere near the donut hole and nowhere near collecting what I've paid in. I've also payed into Medicare since the program's inception, and I still do.
What you forget, too, is the social cost of <i>not</i> providing. Take cataract surgery on Medicare. Not only can the recipient keep enjoying watching TV, he can still drive a car, which means someone else doesn't have to drive her around and s/he can give rides to still others. That's just one small example and it's not intangible; in aggregate it adds up to a lot of bucks, or would if someone "did the math."
<blockquote>"Talk to your doctor next time about how they like the Medicare reimbursement rate.</blockquote>
Already have, to my primary. That's why he has a boutique practice, which means I pay a fixed yearly amount for a list of covered services. In effect, that makes him my insurer at least as far as those services are concerned (and to that extent, you're not subsidizing me.) Still pretty capitalistic, but since his practice consists of just himself and one assistant, it beats the hell out of Wellpoint as far as it goes.
<blockquote>As for the bureaucrat, you’ll love this – some of the same for-profit insurance companies that you hate contract with the government to perform many of the same administration functions that they provide for the private market (and I’m not just talking about Medicare Advantage program).</blockquote>
Think I don't know that? This way they're at least theoretically accountable to the government.
<blockquote>"Yes there are some people in the market who are paying year after year exorbitant amounts, like me. (My current annual premiums are $13K)."</blockquote>
Yet you still defend the status quo with maybe a few token changes. (Dropping disqualification for pre-existing condition is like civil unions: used to be anathema, but now it's the fallback position.) Sounds like Stockholm syndrome.
<blockquote>"...But the fact is none of them are currently sustainable (with or without the wars). </blockquote>
Then let's stop the wars and put half the defense budget into healthcare. Maybe that would keep Medicare going until, say, 2027 instead of 2017. Fewer innocent Afghan villagers killed, more Americans served instead of robbed, and more time to come up with permanent solutions. A lot better than nothing.
Sugar is clearly a big problem in the modern diet, as the dentist, Dr. Weston Price (www.ppnf.org) showed as early as 1936. Fructose doesn't stimulate insulin production, but instead goes directly to the liver to be turned into FAT in the form of triglycerides. It is interesting to note that the obesity epidemic parallels the increasing use of high fructose corn syrup.
Eating lots of fat and even cholesterol is no problem if you don't also eat more than a tiny amount of sugar and other carbohydrates. If that surprises you, you haven't read Gary Taubes' "Good Calories, Bad Calories", For a free introduction to his carefully researched book, look up his hour long video talking to folks at UC Berkeley more than a year ago. He shows that the low fat diet advice offered by doctors and others for decades is exactly wrong, and exacerbates the obesity problem world wide.
Dick needs to come out and admit his mistake. I can't shoot someone and cite a made up source in the Bill of Rights and get away with it. This isn't on that magnitude but still, can somebody confront him about this.
I noticed, too, that there was very little coverage of this information in the popular news media, which was one reason I felt we needed to highlight it on PRWatch. The emergence of this information, though, occurred immediately before Cheney went into the hospital for his (fifth?) heart attack, and coverage of that, amazingly, seemed to take precedence over this story.
I suggest you call your local news stations and ask why they haven't covered it, and report back to PRWatch about what they say.
Anne Landman
So now the problem is that HSUS IS NOT part of the local shelter system?
Since you are obviously not a member, why are you complaining about being "deceived". You sound like you've been reading to many CCF sites or maybe that idiotic "AR-HR" (Animal Rights or Human Responsibility) site. Probably more appropriately called "Animal Rights or Corporate Profits". The actually have an ad campaign about HSUS "deception", even though it is obviously run by a disgruntled dog breeder going by the name of "Erica Saunders". He or she does nothing but complain about HSUS puppy mill raids and other animal abuse exposures. The breeders and animal profiteers have all got their fangs out because somebody is threatening their cash cow and they may actually have to get a job!
Well, good for HSUS!
To be honest, a lot of local shelters are pretty awful. As the previous poster pointed out, many sell animals into vivisection. Animals in 20 counties in North Carolina are gassed because a vet on the state rabies board makes and sells gas chambers. In Oregon, they had to pass a state law forbidding shelters from using animals for fur. They still trap and sell cats to sell for class room disection in Portland.
So, it really just depends. Animals need voices in government just like everybody else. At least the HSUS doesn't grease palms. It is also not the "mindset" of people who support and /or donate to HSUS that they are a shelter. It sounds like you are the one who is being deceived, or more likely is trying to deceive.
Sugar is clearly a big problem in the modern diet, as the dentist, Dr. Weston Price (www.ppnf.org) showed as early as 1936. Fructose doesn't stimulate insulin production, but instead goes directly to the liver to be turned into FAT in the form of triglycerides. It is interesting to note that the obesity epidemic parallels the increasing use of high fructose corn syrup.
Eating lots of fat and even cholesterol is no problem if you don't also eat more than a tiny amount of sugar and other carbohydrates. If that surprises you, you haven't read Gary Taubes' "Good Calories, Bad Calories", For a free introduction to his carefully researched book, look up his hour long video talking to folks at UC Berkeley more than a year ago. He shows that the low fat diet advice offered by doctors and others for decades is exactly wrong, and exacerbates the obesity problem world wide.
Pages