Slowtwitch.com Main Index MAIN
INDEX 		Forum Rules & Legend RULES &
LEGEND 		Log in LOG
IN 		 
 
 
Search for (options)
Newsletter Signup

Slowtwitch Forums: Lavender Room:
Healthcare - Democrats are wimps!

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Tri ForumClassifiedsLavender RoomJobsThe Womens


big kahuna

Nov 3, 09 17:46

Post #26 of 39 (193 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [Bone Idol] [In reply to] Can't Post
Your obsession with the evil religious fanatics here in the U.S. is becoming worrisome. There's a real constitutional question whether Congress can even mandate that people participate in a government-run program, by the way. Not to mention that most people (upwards of 80%) are happy with the insurance they have. Trying to tie the so-called lack of some sort of national health to the dumbass ways in which political leaders in both parties here in the United States have run its economy down into the ground is a bit of a stretch.

T.


saltman

Nov 4, 09 9:48

Post #27 of 39 (177 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [Tri N OC] [In reply to] Can't Post
In Reply To:
The longer the debate the more the deserters. Swift decisive action was necessary and the Dems lost their leverage.

Not to be too confrontational, but doesn't this suggest a certain amount of underhandedness? Sneaking it by before people had a chance to weigh in?
Sneaking it by??? Jesus man, welcome to the debate! Healthcare reform and all the variations it might take has been a foremost topic in nearly every major election in the last 30 years. Many of us voted for Obama, he was voted in with a mandate essentially and has squandered it and that is where he is losing voters. He has to have confidence that his POLICIES will win over more voters, or an even better idea would be to ignore the prospects of a 2nd term.


saltman

Nov 4, 09 9:52

Post #28 of 39 (176 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [big kahuna] [In reply to] Can't Post
Not to mention that most people (upwards of 80%) are happy with the insurance they have.

You understand this "fact" doesn't really help the argument against a public option.


Tri N OC

Nov 4, 09 14:27

Post #29 of 39 (161 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [saltman] [In reply to] Can't Post
Many of us voted for Obama, he was voted in with a mandate essentially and has squandered it and that is where he is losing voters.

This is where the crazy starts. Mandate?!? Really? He won with 52%! What kind of mandate is that? As for his policies, he is not putting them in place. He has abandoned the healthcare plan to Congress. Where is the leadership in that?

What I took your first post to suggest was for the Admin to put forth something like the first glimpse of Obamacare and use the strength of the Dem majorities to ram it through. Was that your idea? In his defense, it is similar to what he actually attempted to do, but the blue dogs couldn't quite choke it down.

As an alternative, what is so wrong with actually trying to work out a solution on a bipartisan basis? Isn't that part of what he promised you to get your vote?


saltman

Nov 4, 09 15:23

Post #30 of 39 (149 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [Tri N OC] [In reply to] Can't Post
He won with 52%!

Actually he won 338 - 200, because last I checked the electoral college still elected Presidents and that is a modern day ass kicking.

What I took your first post to suggest was for the Admin to put forth something like the first glimpse of Obamacare and use the strength of the Dem majorities to ram it through. Was that your idea? In his defense, it is similar to what he actually attempted to do, but the blue dogs couldn't quite choke it down.

Yes, and that isn't what he did. Blue dogs still need Obama's support for their own bills. This is why he should have burned that political capital. Behold the power of veto.

As an alternative, what is so wrong with actually trying to work out a solution on a bipartisan basis?

Simple, the problem is that only works for shit that nobody cares about.


Tri N OC

Nov 4, 09 16:40

Post #31 of 39 (144 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [saltman] [In reply to] Can't Post
Yes, and that isn't what he did. Blue dogs still need Obama's support for their own bills. This is why he should have burned that political capital. Behold the power of veto.

Doesn't it suggest something to you when a President whose party also controls both houses of the Congress with unstoppable majorities can't get something through? As for party discipline, it is not the power of veto that is in play in this instance. Pelosi and Reid control the committee assignments and what comes up for a vote. Nothing gets past them to allow for a veto and both of them are demonstrably to the left of the Pres.

As an alternative, what is so wrong with actually trying to work out a solution on a bipartisan basis?

Simple, the problem is that only works for shit that nobody cares about.

What? Nobody cares about cost containment? Nobody cares about coverage? Alternatively, if/when the circumstance occurs where the Reps have the same control are you good with them doing whatever strikes them as appropriate?




Bone Idol

Nov 4, 09 18:09

Post #32 of 39 (136 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [big kahuna] [In reply to] Can't Post
You seem to be misreading me. It's probably deliberate. And you are definitely projecting with the "obsession" reference.

My comment was not about religious fanatics (by whom I'm sometimes bemused, hardly obsessed. Try to stop worrying). It was about political fanatics, who hold to their political dogma with an unbending fervour usually only seen in religious extremists. You present as one of those. That's probably deliberate, too.

What you have in common with religious fanatics is that you believe you hold the one and only truth, and you are impervious to any evidence or argument that is inconsistent with your faith. It is an article of faith for you that greater government involvement in healthcare provision equates to communism equates to social and economic ruin, although the evidence simply does not show that. Many wealthy advanced economies are reaping great social and economic benefits from progressive health and other social programs, and are lately well out-performing the USA on fiscal management and economic performance measures.

Your nation is in the process of achieving a couple of historic firsts in the entire history of developed economies (and probably much longer). A generation of 'working class' and middle class Americans will be, on average: fatter, sicker, with shorter life expectancy and financially less secure than the generation before them. This against a backdrop of the USA being more unpopular internationally than it has been, probably ever, and internally more divided than it has been since the Civil War.

Your belief demonstrated by multiple posts per day here suggesting that all of your problems stem from the country being too 'left-wing' are beyond being laughably wrong. They are delusional.


saltman

Nov 4, 09 19:49

Post #33 of 39 (130 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [Tri N OC] [In reply to] Can't Post
Doesn't it suggest something to you when a President whose party also controls both houses of the Congress with unstoppable majorities can't get something through?

Unfortunately, this is where I have to step back and say yes. In this instance he has shown a lack of fundamental leadership and its disappointing.


What? Nobody cares about cost containment? Nobody cares about coverage?

I am a little confused here. Yes, a lot of people care about cost containment and a lot of people care about coverage which is why a bi-partisan approach will fail.

Alternatively, if/when the circumstance occurs where the Reps have the same control are you good with them doing whatever strikes them as appropriate?

Yep I expect it to be like this on certain issues.


big kahuna

Nov 4, 09 22:16

Post #34 of 39 (121 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [Bone Idol] [In reply to] Can't Post
You seem to be misreading me.

No I'm not. You come across as supercilious and most likely Euro-trash, to boot. Sorry, but that's what it looks like from over here in the land of the big PX.

My comment was not about religious fanatics (by whom I'm sometimes bemused, hardly obsessed. Try to stop worrying).

I'm not worried. You have pretty much zero input into what we do over here anyway, so why worry?

It was about political fanatics, who hold to their political dogma with an unbending fervour usually only seen in religious extremists. You present as one of those. That's probably deliberate, too.

Oh, I'm a fanatic for sure. Especially when it comes to personal freedoms and liberty, which, you being from somewhere not here, might not appreciate the loss of as acutely as many of us here would. That so-called "universal" health is also a gargantuan theft of generational wealth that tends to eventually beggar every economy, at some point, that engages in it is beside the point. I also despise the inculcation of a culture of dependency, which is something I've seen created in many countries I've either lived in or spent time in over the years that has some sort of statist, collectivist and cradle-to-grade nanny state presence. You appear to come from a country just like that.

It is an article of faith for you that greater government involvement in healthcare provision equates to communism equates to social and economic ruin, although the evidence simply does not show that.

Sure it does. Like I said; you're from a country that hasn't had the kinds of personal freedoms to succeed as brilliantly, or fail as miserably, as you'd like. You can't miss something you've never had, in other words. You prop up numbers and statistics, especially in this case, that don't prove much of anything about anything when it comes to our culture and our way of life. We don't want to be like you folks, though you're all fine in your own way. We want to be like us.

Your nation is in the process of achieving a couple of historic firsts in the entire history of developed economies (and probably much longer). A generation of 'working class' and middle class Americans will be, on average: fatter, sicker, with shorter life expectancy and financially less secure than the generation before them.

You have a surface familiarity with us, I'll give you that. But you miss that the whole "fatter, sicker, life expectancy" thing is due to wealth. We have diseases and conditions due to wealth (obesity, heart disease, cancers) that are also due to the amount of calories all of us -- even the poor among us -- can take in anytime we want. We pay less for just about everything than most people in Europe do and we can buy much more of it. Even the poorest here can walk into a hospital emergency room and he or she will be treated to the best of the ability of the people working in that ER. We have more land, more scenery, more cars, more TVs, more recreational opportunities and yet we're also among the hardest working people (in terms of hours worked per year) than almost any other society on the planet. You're conflating the very idiotic fiscal policies of both parties in the U.S. since the mid-1960s, which have led us to this point, with something not really that germane to the problem; our healthcare (which is still far better in terms of quality and availability than that of Europe's).

This against a backdrop of the USA being more unpopular internationally than it has been, probably ever, and internally more divided than it has been since the Civil War.

And this "unpopularity" is supposed to mean all that much to most independents, moderate/conservatives and, especially, conservatives? What? You think people over here are losing sleep because people like you over there don't like us? That's truly delusional, my friend. What "internal divisions" are you referring to, by the way? You mean the healthy dialogue we're having revolving around a majority of us who really don't want to walk off the statist plank and become like you folks? In that case, I hope we keep on dialoguing.

Your belief demonstrated by multiple posts per day here suggesting that all of your problems stem from the country being too 'left-wing' are beyond being laughably wrong. They are delusional.

I can spend a bit of time here, at all hours of the day, because I was one of those military/capitalist pigs that was smart with his investments, am now semi-retired (at 49) and also grew up in a country that didn't believe in taking all of my hard-earned wealth to "spread it around" to others who might not have needed a hand up but certainly were expecting a hand out. I love helping the first group (and do so far more than you know), but I despise having to help the second. The trouble with you is you tend to look at any dissent in terms of "well, there goes the ignorant American (and right-winger)" instead of the words of dissent being spoken, which takes me back to my original point about you; you don't live here, haven't lived with the kinds of freedoms we have and seem to believe that us pore yokels just don't know what's good for us. Gee...I guess I wasted all those years in university, then, because I'm just not all that eager to buy the aspic that you're selling, which means I most likely just don't know what's good for me.

Best regards,

T.

(This post was edited by big kahuna on Nov 4, 09 22:57)


Bone Idol

Nov 6, 09 5:27

Post #35 of 39 (96 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [big kahuna] [In reply to] Can't Post
Wrong in so many ways, it's hard to know where to start, so perhaps an acknowledgment of what you wrote that is correct.

In Reply To:
Oh, I'm a fanatic for sure.
That covers it. Rare and refreshing to see real insight from you. As to the rest...

In Reply To:

Especially when it comes to personal freedoms and liberty, which, you being from somewhere not here, might not appreciate the loss of as acutely as many of us here would.
.....
I've had the experience of living in the US, and was on the receiving end of a pretty strong pitch to stay there. 7 figure income, nice house, complete with the security and armed guards that such a lifestyle requires in your country. I watched my friends drive their kids to school, past more armed guards, and put them through the metal detectors to reduce the number of guns and knives there. I've travelled fairly widely there, and I've paid careful attention to my friends' earnest requests about which parts of the various cities to avoid at any cost. On a couple of occasions I have deliberately gone to those areas, to see for myself, and I have observed the third world poverty and squalor there. I found Americans, on the whole, to be fearful (and with good reason) and unaware of what real personal freedom might be like.

Ultimately, it is due to the ABSENCE of the personal freedoms and liberties that I hold dear (& thank the US for teaching me to not take for granted) that I could never, not for nuthin', live in the US.
In Reply To:

so-called "universal" health is also a gargantuan theft of generational wealth that tends to eventually beggar every economy, at some point, that engages in it
Well, it's been more than 30 years, here, and so far it seems to be the US and its long-suffering citizenry that is being bankrupted by its health system. Still, as Keynes said, in the long run we are all dead. Perhaps long after you are worm food something will change that renders you less than characteristically wrong. Or perhaps not.

In Reply To:
You're conflating the very idiotic fiscal policies of both parties in the U.S. since the mid-1960s, which have led us to this point, with something not really that germane to the problem; our healthcare (which is still far better in terms of quality and availability than that of Europe's).
No. I'm pointing out that, contrary to your dogma, wealthy countries can and do treat public health as an important part of national social and economic infrastructure, like education, like the justice system, they can and do achieve it with not merely greater equity but also greater efficiency than the US and they can and do combine it with fiscal rectitude and economic success.

The US outspends any comparable country, including mine, on health by almost double. What are you getting for all those extra billions? On just about every measure of public health for which I can find statistics, the US underperforms my country and others. Surely spending double, combined with the manifest perfection of a purely profit-driven industry, would make you more competitive? Why does the US show up towards the bottom of developed country league tables on so many health measures? Oh, right, its because you're so rich and hard working. And why is the US going backwards in relative terms in wealth for its working population? Because its so rich and hard working. Sure, if you say so.

So, while the countries the World Bank noted above have combined budgetary responsibility with socially progressive programs, the US, particularly in under George-the bigger Kahuna-Bush has combined multi-trillion dollar debt with a healthcare SNAFU. Your team is batting nil from 2+.

In Reply To:
We have more land, more scenery, more cars, more TVs, more recreational opportunities and yet we're also among the hardest working people (in terms of hours worked per year)
Compared to my country: no, no, yes, yes, no, no. Knock yourself out with those TVs and traffic, funster.

In Reply To:
And this "unpopularity" is supposed to mean all that much to most independents, moderate/conservatives and, especially, conservatives? What? You think people over here are losing sleep because people like you over there don't like us? That's truly delusional, my friend.
Not "supposed to". It does. Not delusional, just a fairly uncontroversial observation of the world. Nations care about their global standing. The US, particularly since WWII, does considerably more than most, and Conservative administrations have been, generally in that time, more concerned to advance US influence than Democratic ones. I accept that you, personally, don't care but if you were a true conservative you would certainly care more than you do.

The US spends trillions of dollars (your tax dollars) on influencing global affairs, to its perceived own advantage. It does this through "soft" diplomacy (aid, investment, international fora) and through "hard" means (essentially militarily, or via the implicit threat thereof). There is a role or need for each in international affairs, but soft measures tend to be more effective and much, much cheaper. War is expensive and messy and deadly and has numerous unexpected and counter productive consequences.

US popularity and influence were at their greatest after WWII, when the US had a big stick in one hand but on the other hand was seen as a peacemaker and a society to be admired and emulated. Popularity (or empathy) hit another spike after the 11 September attacks, when all but a few of the world's countries expressed their solidarity with the US. It is a tragedy shared 300 million Americans that GWB chose to flush that diplomatic blank cheque down the crapper, by drawing up his lists of "who can we invade next?", by snubbing his nose at some of his closest allies and by declaring "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists" regardless of the senseless folly that being "with us" might entail.

Under Bush's America, the US was consistently assessed by it's allies (let alone by its enemies) as the greatest threat to world peace. As an unswerving supporter of our alliance with the US it concerns me to watch the unfolding of the one reality that sends conservative Americans into a cold sweat (no, I don't mean the revelation of their trysts with gay prostitutes) - the supplanting of the US by China as the pre-eminent global power. It's ironic, but increasingly true - China is out-maneuvering the US diplomatically at every turn. China spends a few well-directed yuan here, sends a softly-softly diplomatic delegation there and suddenly the US is losing UN votes it desperately wanted to win, it is losing trade and investment opportunities it thought were its for the taking and Chinese and other world leaders are sipping oolong tea together and discussing what to do about the American problem.

You don't care about that. Simple folk like you don't feel the need to. But the politicians you pay to run the country while you spend your days airing your reactionary fantasies here do care about it, and they're spending truckloads of US dollars that you don't really have to spare right now on countering it.

I have a 2 and 4 year old sons who don't care about stuff when they really should. It's a combination of small male ego and a lack of the maturity to properly understand consequences, so I'm familiar with your problem. Luckily for my kids, they'll grow out of it, and they're not saddled with the additional impediments of being wedded to irrational religious and political dogma. With you the only consolation is that you don't matter.

In Reply To:
What "internal divisions" are you referring to, by the way?
The increasing "balkanisation" of American society has been noted by commentators across the political spectrum, so I thought it might have reached your attention, unless your information sources are even more narrow and selective than I suspect. No, I am not talking about healthy dialogue, nor about your asinine political propagandism. I'll give you an example that is at least in part indicative of what I have observed of American life.
In my country, there is no electorate that is held with a majority (left v right) of more than about 7%. Even more than about 2.5% is uncommon. A friend holds one of the state's 'safest' seats with a 4% majority. Every neighbourhood, every city, every state is a relatively balanced mix of peoples and views. In the US, the inverse is true. There are few seats that are that close. Through great swathes of the US the dems or the regressives have just given up, knowing that not just some individuals, but entire sections of cities, entire states, will never vote for them. Its been commented upon in this forum that it is natural for people to want to live near people who are largely like them. Apparently being fellow Americans is not nearly alike enough. I can tell you that it is very striking to me as a non-American how America appears as a patchwork of ghettos. Some nicer ghettos, some horrid ones, but each with a very clear and important sense of how very different they are from the racial/ socio-economic/ religious groups that live a few miles away. The idea of America as a harmonious melting-pot society is one of the myths that you guys are force-fed from childhood, and you find it hard to see its falsehood. It's like the notion that you adhere to that the US is unique in the world in its respect for "personal freedoms". So manifestly untrue to anyone other than an insular, ignorant American, but held to be as unchallengeable a truth as the creation of the universe in 7 days by a god who impregnated a virgin to give birth to himself. OK, whatever.

In Reply To:
I can spend a bit of time here, at all hours of the day, because...
... because you need a life. 12000 posts, with barely a single one adding anything that you haven't previously cut and pasted from some lame right-wingers blog. Res ipsa loquitur.


In Reply To:

...I was one of those military/capitalist pigs that was smart with his investments, am now semi-retired (at 49) and also grew up in a country that didn't believe in taking all of my hard-earned wealth to "spread it around"

My condolences for your small penis problem, it must be a terrible affliction. You're kind of damning yourself with slight self-praise here. For the sake of your pissing contest, I was smart with my investments and fully retired at 40. Of course I did that in a vibrant open economy, and I did have my comrade citizens paying for my education and healthcare, so that helped. If I had been trying to do it in a sclerotic, dysfunctional economy like the US, and if I wasn't very bright, then I might still be struggling to close the deal at 49, too. For the record, my tax obligations are less here than they would be in the US, and our tax take overall is a smaller % of GDP than yours.

You were all over a recent thread on this subject that included this exchange with trail:

Re: On Australian subsidised health care [Bone Idol] [In reply to] Quote | Reply
In Reply To:

So we continue to have: higher growth, lower unemployment, lower inflation, lower government debt (virtually none, actually), better trade balance etc etc etc than the world's last bastion of unfettered capitalism, plus we've had since my first year of high school workable universal health care. LOVE LOVE LOVE Socialism.

Damn, I had to fact check you, and you're pretty much spot on. And all that with lower personal and corporate tax rates than in the U.S. That's jacked up. We're going to send you Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann to fix your country right up. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So trail was willing to look at facts and concede a point. That of course would never happen with you.

In Reply To:
The trouble with you is you tend to look at any dissent in terms of "well, there goes the ignorant American (and right-winger)"
That's the usual off-the-shelf retort, but entirely false. Here's a head's-up. I am a right-winger. In the real world, I debate politics plenty, but mostly matching it with left-wing dissent. In 30 or so elections at local, state and federal level I have voted conservative at all but 3, twice independent and once for the left (the left's candidate was a former university colleague whom I respected, the right's was an egregious buffoon).

However, again, I enjoy certain privileges that you don't. The right in my country has no religious affiliation. All politicians wear their religion lightly or not at all. The right does not believe that beating up on minorities and the disadvantaged is a sound policy platform. Both the right and the left are far more committed to fiscal responsibility than either the right or the left in the US. Both the right and the left are far more committed to social equity and harmony than either the right or the left in the US. Political debate in my country is far more nuanced, and more productive than yours. Communism and God are dead. Some matters are well-enough settled and sufficiently agreed that we can focus on real areas of improvement. Political debate in the US seems little different from what occurs here. Endless cycles of clichéd hysterical blather, name calling, and demonisation of opposing views.

Few people in my country can muster the hate around politics that you guys can. I voted for the right, they lost, and the left are in and doing not just OK, they're actually doing great. I suspect if you could choose to either save your sister from being raped or stop Obama from being president, you'd attack Obama's balls with your bare teeth and send flowers to your sister later. Naturally, to you I seem to be leftist and therefor wrong about everything. From your position on the whacko edge, the whole world is to your left. That's just your stuff. That's why your arguments get no traction here. Every post, in their endless stream, looks like every other: "Right wing nut-job rant starts here....fact free zone...blah blah blah"



Warmest,

x


BarryP

Nov 6, 09 5:54

Post #36 of 39 (91 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [saltman] [In reply to] Can't Post
Quote:
If the Dems are not willing to band together shove this down their throat, they might as sit around fingering themselves.


That's assuming that the Dems even want a bill in the first place. Corporations run everything......for both parties. Political contributions are driving this debate and no one wants the health insurance companies to lose out.


Now everyone join me in a chorus of America the Beautiful.........
-----------------------------Barry Pollock (aka Baron Von Speedypants)
I'M DYSLEXIC......GET OVER IT!
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485


dave_w

Nov 6, 09 6:17

Post #37 of 39 (88 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [Bone Idol] [In reply to] Can't Post
  
Wow, you're smitten with yourself and your country...nothing wrong with that I guess, but it does leave you unable to observe objectively. As I pointed out in the other thread, your country stacks the deck for you by controlling things tightly; chiefly among them is immigration. You look at this country and say because every person is not officially designated as having insurance, we are heartless bastards. Well, you do the same by freezing out large numbers of people that want to immigrate to your shores. Those people just never show up, and are hence not on the rolls. One could make a good argument that Oz is doing it right, but not so that they are doing things the most compassionate way. Bottom line, you sir are a heartless bastard, and proud of it. :)

ps. People there seem happy with where they are (happier than here!), based on recent polling; but the same polls note the US as the number one desired destination for relocation...ouch, you need to get hold of these people and set them right.

http://www.gallup.com/...ate-permanently.aspx


(This post was edited by dave_w on Nov 6, 09 8:07)


jkca1

Nov 6, 09 6:29

Post #38 of 39 (85 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [saltman] [In reply to] Can't Post
Happy days are here again. Now if only we can get that TARP money back, with interest of course.

"They are all crooks, both sides of the aisle."


Bone Idol

Nov 9, 09 15:34

Post #39 of 39 (50 views)
Re: Healthcare - Democrats are wimps! [dave_w] [In reply to] Can't Post
 
In Reply To:

Wow, you're smitten with yourself and your country...nothing wrong with that I guess, but it does leave you unable to observe objectively.
Didn't intend to appear self-smitten - I was just having a laugh at little Kahuna's attitude that he somehow bolstered his credibility by boasting that his dick is 4 inches long and painted with stars and stripes. I just don't find him very impressive. You've not explained what part of my comments are not "objective". Anything that is not can surely be refuted by facts, which I invite you to try.

In Reply To:
As I pointed out in the other thread, your country stacks the deck for you by controlling things tightly; chiefly among them is immigration. You look at this country and say because every person is not officially designated as having insurance, we are heartless bastards. Well, you do the same by freezing out large numbers of people that want to immigrate to your shores. Those people just never show up, and are hence not on the rolls. One could make a good argument that Oz is doing it right, but not so that they are doing things the most compassionate way. Bottom line, you sir are a heartless bastard, and proud of it. :)
http://www.gallup.com/...ate-permanently.aspx
I'm not sure what point you think you are making, let alone its relevance to a debate about healthcare. Every country in the world, including the USA, including Australia, retains the right to determine who may resettle in their country and take citizenship of it. I have no idea why you attach an emotive criticism of that fact to Australia in particular. Certainly Australia does it more successfully than the USA, just as the USA does it more successfully than, say, Germany or the Netherlands. So what. Each country does it as best they can.

The fact is, as I have previously pointed out to you, that Australia has a higher immigration rate than virtually any other country; certainly higher than the USA. Immigration runs at more than 1% of our population per annum, a massively high proportion. We offer an inordinately high number of people the chance to live here, and access the privileges that entails.

You'll have to explain what, if anything, this has to do with the debate on national healthcare. If any country chooses to not offer healthcare to non-citizens or illegal immigrants that is an issue entirely separate from that of a country looking after its own people. We offer Medicare to residents from New Zealand and some other places. We're neighbourly like that. If you want to say "fine, but we shouldn't help Mexicans", then say that, but don't pretend that the USA has a unique issue with non-citizens schlepping around the country. It doesn't.

I suspect what has happened with you is that you have engaged in the all-too-common "a quick Google search is a perfect substitute for understanding an issue" and you have stumbled upon something about Australian policy in relation to asylum seekers, which has been much in the news lately. Happy to discuss that, but it is irrelevant to this thread.

In Reply To:

ps. People there seem happy with where they are (happier than here!), based on recent polling; but the same polls note the US as the number one desired destination for relocation...ouch, you need to get hold of these people and set them right.

http://www.gallup.com/...ate-permanently.aspx
No, I wish it were more true, not less. Having even more people want to come here is not what we need. A poll like that reflects how the US is viewed as a proxy for the developed west. I worked for an Australian multinational, and had managers reporting to me in 20 countries in central Europe and Asia. They knew more about Australia than just about any of their compatriots, yet many of them consistently referred to us and our company as "Americans". They explained that to them it just meant "you Western, white folk". If the poll was representative of the quality of life of the destination, 200 million people would want to live in New Zealand, but the Kiwis are blessed with the fact that the world hardly knows they exist.

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All