See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient with it until it receives the early and the late rains. - James 5:7

Monday, August 17, 2009

Two steps forward

...one step back.
.
That is Obama-speak, an inversion of the old Leninist saying, 'one step forward, two steps back'. Anyway, it looks as if Obama is backing down on pushing health care so hard - the protests at local town hall meetings must be working - the President also pulled the flag website for informants spying on opponents to Obama-care. It pays to protest - loudly. Or is he just regrouping?
.
Interestingly enough I just watched a piece on network TV about the French state-run health care system - considered the best in the world - but getting overloaded. In today's news, Canadian Medical Association is saying the system is imploding: "(Canadians) have to understand that the system that we have right now - if it keeps on going without change - is not sustainable." - Source The French were saying the same thing.
.
What up? Does this mean Nationalized health-care will never be implemented in this country?
.
Who knows? At this point it may look as if it isn't going to happen any time soon - but the Trojan horse is already in the square...
.
Whatever develops, I'm willing to bet some final solution will come down the pike one way or another, sooner or later. You know, addressing the cost of treating the disabled, the mentally ill, the elderly, the poor, the underclass.

5 comments:

  1. This whole health-care mess makes me want to scream and pull my hair out. I've disapproved of our government before, but I've never full-on hated it like I do now. Ugh!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why, heck. The State of Oregon ever so politely asked a woman to please consider contacting her personal physican to request assistance with suicide, because it won't be "cost effective" to pay for her medical care. After all, roughly $100 versus a boatload of money is a no-brainer, right? Hmmph. The final solution is most definately coming down the pike.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maybe the French health care system can be labeled :run by the state", but it would not do it justice. In England we have socialized medecine, maybe in Canada too. In France, it's not socialized medecine. We have private doctors, some of the best. Doctors don't set their prices for most of them. The government, with the "input" of a commission of doctors, set the prices. However if doctors are particularly good or have special degrees, they are allowed to go as high as they want. Patients can choose if they like to pay more or not. Life in France is expensive but one thing that is cheap (that's the right word) is doctors. A general practionner (they are very good) charge about $18 a visit. The doctor I chose charged $28. I was always amazed how inexpensive it was. Her answer was "tell that to the French people".
    The French are complainers. They don't think twice about buying a $70 bottle of wine or spending money (a lot of money) at the vet's (no health insurance for the French poodles).
    Do the French abuse the system? What a silly question! Of course they do. It's too cheap. They go to the doctor if their little finger hurts. And probably get one week off to recover.
    Is the French health care system strained? Of course. It's not sustainable.
    No, I don't like the American system but I am not certain there is a good health care system. What we are not being told is that our generation stopped having children.That's one of the problems. Nobody can't afford health care because a whole generation was not allowed to be born. The trend is not improving since Obama is President.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Austringer12:45 PM

    Terry, it's my belief that the "final solution" will be packaged as "compassion". "Quality of life" standards will be drawn up by the very wise (and healthy) among us. And -- surprise!! -- it will be discovered that the elderly, the mentally ill, and the disabled suffer greatly from a reduced quality of life. Isn't it cruel to leave them suffering like that, when compassionate and dignified means of ending their suffering (quiet ways of killing them, that is) exist?? How can we be so cruel as to require them to live (due to some out-moded ideas fueled by those superstitious religious fanatics)when we know they have such poor quality of life?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Austringer - sounds about right.

    ReplyDelete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.