World Politics

[BroDeal]

At least GWB did something. For the good or bad.

I'm sure General Custer's men thought the same.

Bush is Al Qaida and you americans voted him. that's the biggest joke. That wouldn't happen in australia.

At least Bush has dogged stupidity as an excuse for his actions. What was Howard's excuse for following him?

 

[Anonymous]

Profiting from human pain and suffering is IMHO immoral and I find it abhorrent. Health care is a basic human need and shouldn't be profited on like it is an iPhone.

You have missed the point. Without the profit motive we'd be in the stone ages as far as medicine goes.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I'm sure General Custer's men thought the same.



At least Bush has dogged stupidity as an excuse for his actions. What was Howard's excuse for following him?

Howard doesn't need to make excusees. He got this country out of debt and put us in a economic place were the share market crash didn't hit us as bad. then kevin rudd goes and spends it all so the next generation will have to be paying it off. bush did jack all for the economy. he was all about the war.

 

[auscyclefan94]

that is not ...how do i say good policy. he was a COMPLETE IDIOT
you're cool though...

thanks. you are too. i'm just trying to stir some trouble up as george w bush always causes controversey and it really gets the yanks going.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, thats why he is trying to decide what to do about Afghanistan, you remember that place that Bin Laden is supposedly hiding in, which Bush forgot all about in his efforts to wipe out daddy's tormentor in Iraq and get us mired in another police action war.

I thought Afghanistan was the war "we should be fighting" according to Obama (during the campaign, anyway). So his hand picked General askes for re-inforcements and now we are 11 weeks later with no action?

You see, he could vote "present" when he was a Senator (for all of 150 days), but that doesn't work when you are the President.

What beer you drinkin' tonight?

 

[Anonymous]

thanks. you are too. i'm just trying to stir some trouble up as george w bush always causes controversey and it really gets the yanks going.

Nutin' like Sarah Palin. Oh yes, I said it.

 

[usedtobefast]

Nutin' like Sarah Palin. Oh yes, I said it.

i hear she is going Para Salin' .

 

[Hugh Januss]

What beer you drinkin' tonight?

Too tired to respond to the other stuff anymore today so I'll stick to the serious question. Since the holidays are approaching I plan on switching from Sierra Nevada Aniversary Ale a very crisp almost citrusy hopped IPA to their winter seasonal Celebration Ale a somewhat heavier more bitter hopped Extra IPA that kinda keeps your bones warmer when the weather gets colder.
A customer brought me a 6 pack of Hoegaarden Whitbier yesterday, I don't usually like wheat beers that much and this one probably wouldn't be something I'd go out of my way for, but it did have some little different flavors going on in it compared to other wheat beers that I have been forced to drink. Like the only keg besides Bud at a cross race or something like that. It was a wheat beer taste on top but with a hint of belgian ale taste at the end, kind of like someone poured a little Chimay into a Blue Moon.

 

[usedtobefast]

for your consideration

 

[BroDeal]

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not disputing for a moment that GWB is a moron, but he's our moron,gosh darn it. If anybody is gonna pick on him it's gonna be us.
Actually I was just trying to make a humorous point that the world doesn't criticize your leaders because nobody outside of Aus. knows what they do.
Dammit, I am rapidly catching up to TFF in terms of number of jokes that require explanation.

It sucks, doesn't it?

 

[Laszlo]

Obama alienates our allies (Poland, Czech Republic) by conceding to the Russians. Good idea or bad? Obama chooses not to meet with the Dali Lama (which one would think would have the left in a melt-down) to make the Chinese happy (good move sisnce we borrowed a coupla trillion dollars from the in the last few months). And you are correct. Obama has forgotten about Al Qaida.

He is certainly different than GWB, no doubt.

I beg to difer; there is a lot of movement against the taliban in NW ****stan- where before there was nothing at all; a lot of drone strikes and they have hit a few leaders too. I think Mrs Clinton made a point expressly clear when she went for a visit- I don't think the developments therre are coincidental. Obama was weak in his knowledge of american foriegn relations in the debates leading up to the election- international politics is not something someone picks up all of a sudden; so he has to rely on advisors to present him with policy proposals to consider- so his leadership in the international scene may seem weak; but because we don't see it on front pages, does not mean nothing is happening, there could be surprises in store.

That said, the reaction to the fraud in the afghan election was disgraceful and counterproductive; karazai really took advantage of lives of foriegn troops lost trying to bring peace to that land. what goes around, comes around.

 

[Hugh Januss]

It sucks, doesn't it?

I don't know if it's me or them.

 

[usedtobefast]

I don't know if it's me or them.

based on what i have seen. it's them, and the trouble is, there's a whole lot
of them. not that there's anything wrong with that...

 

[Cobblestones]

You have missed the point. Without the profit motive we'd be in the stone ages as far as medicine goes.

Not quite true. Look up the term orphan drug. In short, orphan drug is medication to treat rare diseases. The market is so small, that no profit can be achieved by researching, testing, and producing such drugs. The US (and Europe) have orphan drug laws. The gist of it is:

Since the market for any drug with such a limited application scope would, by definition, be small and thus largely unprofitable, government intervention is often required to motivate a manufacturer to address the need for an orphan drug. Critics of free market enterprise often cite this as a failure of free market economic systems.

The profit motive is useful, but it skews the system toward fewer, but highly profitable, areas. Another example would be 3rd-world diseases. There's comparably far less interest by drug manufacturers to address those, because little profit can be made (in short, the sick cannot afford the drugs). I don't think relying on the profit motive ensures optimal outcome for society as a whole.

 

[titan_90]

You have missed the point. Without the profit motive we'd be in the stone ages as far as medicine goes.

I didn't miss the point I just don't agree with it. I can see through the rhetoric and see the real issue here. I admit I might be an idealist on this issue but for me it's a moral issue. How many more people need to be sacrificed on the alter of capitalism before people can admit that profiting from human pain and suffering is just plain wrong?

As other have stated in this thread the current system has failed. 45,000 people died last year because they didn't have health insurance, how is that not a failure? The system needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the bottom up. But our political leaders lack the balls and or corrupt and they are giving us a bill that panders to the Insurance Companies. We should all be ashamed as a nation to allow so many human lives to be lost for profit.

 

[Anonymous]

I didn't miss the point I just don't agree with it. I can see through the rhetoric and see the real issue here. I admit I might be an idealist on this issue but for me it's a moral issue. How many more people need to be sacrificed on the alter of capitalism before people can admit that profiting from human pain and suffering is just plain wrong?

As other have stated in this thread the current system has failed. 45,000 people died last year because they didn't have health insurance, how is that not a failure? The system needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the bottom up. But our political leaders lack the balls and or corrupt and they are giving us a bill that panders to the Insurance Companies. We should all be ashamed as a nation to allow so many human lives to be lost for profit.

You are simply wrong. I'll give you one example (of probably tens of millions).

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)

http://www.physorg.com/news6695.html

"GE management then made the bold decision to produce an MRI product using 1.5 T magnets with their very strong magnetic fields. This required the solution of a host of technical problems. Scientists and engineers in the GE Corporate R&D group and others at GE Medical Systems in Milwaukee, WI made rapid progress and the first 1.5-T product was available less than two years later."

"All of these technical improvements helped make MRI systems commercially viable and clinically useful.

GE profited greatly from the industrial physics work of Edelstein and colleagues at the research laboratory and GE Medical systems. In a little over a decade after the first MRI image was produced at their lab, GE went on to gross a billion dollars a year from the sales of MRI systems, and GE retains the largest market share for MRI. Siemens, Philips, and Toshiba, which are some of the other major manufacturers of the machines, also profited greatly from physics-based MRI research at GE, those companies, and elsewhere."

So, a really smart guy takes a really great idea to a large corporation. The corporation uses their own capital to research and develop this machine. They bring it to market because of the profit motive. Guess what? There are over 22,000 MRI machines world wide and there are in excess of 60,000,000 scans per year saving and prolonging literally countless lives.

The part I am afraid of is that you only look at the fact that GE made a few billions of dollars in the process. I find that sad.

This goes on everywhere there is a capitalist system every hour of every day.

No one is arguing capitalism to be perfect, but it is certainly the least-worst system. I acknowledge there are pitfalls. I acknowledge things can be improved but be very careful demonizing profit.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

You have missed the point. Without the profit motive we'd be in the stone ages as far as medicine goes.

I don't get it either, or it just seems way out of context? If this is true, and us taking a step towards passing a health care bill - which will still make our system very heavily based in the private sector, how does this cut all profit motive?

And even if it cuts it, how then do countries like Great Britain, Australia, France, Japan, Norway, Germany, Korea, etc. all have complete socialized medicine, for decades now, and still manage to operate?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Speaking of Afghanistan, I saw a really cool trailer for a documentary film on it. called Battle for Hearts and Minds. Looks like a film that's very raw, and real. And scary.

 

[Laszlo]

In your opinion, why is the war being won in iraq and being lost in afghanistan ? systematic corruption ? appitite for conflict ( eg nothing else to do ) ? sparsity of allied forces ? lack of industrialization ? other ?

 

[python]

who said the war in iraq is being won

millions of iraqis who fled their homes abroad? pentagon generals? iranian ayatollahs who increased their foothold in everything iraq? israeli lobby in washington? a tired anonymous american patriot searching for a face saving sound bite?

 

[Anonymous]

I don't get it either, or it just seems way out of context? If this is true, and us taking a step towards passing a health care bill - which will still make our system very heavily based in the private sector, how does this cut all profit motive?

And even if it cuts it, how then do countries like Great Britain, Australia, France, Japan, Norway, Germany, Korea, etc. all have complete socialized medicine, for decades now, and still manage to operate?

The suggestion that profit is a bad thing has been going on for a while on this thread in the context of the healthcare debate. Insurance Co's making 3.4% equals companies profiting off the pain and suffering of the infirm. Physicians making a great living is somehow a horrible thing and they should work for the greater good. When Titan askes "how many more people have to be sacrificed on the alter of capitalism?", then I will point out how beneficial that motive is. That was my point.

Again, I don't have all of the answers and never claimed to. I'm not familiar with the complete workings of the healthcare systems of the countries you cite. One of the things routinely overlooked in the US is how cutting-edge much of our care is. This adds cost and sometimes outcomes are not as hoped. So when posters cite WHO studies and say we have "the worst" outcomes much of reality is just glossed over. I cite where the US has the world's highest survival rate for cancer and it's posted that the US has bad infant mortality rates. The infant mortality rates can be partly explained by cutting edge care. Things like trying to deliver pre-mature babies at 22 weeks. That counts as a live birth and if/when the child dies those are counted.

But, as a nation we are ready to cast aside a system without attempting to fix the problems. That is a point that I don't get.

 

[Laszlo]

who said the war in iraq is being won

millions of iraqis who fled their homes abroad? pentagon generals? iranian ayatollahs who increased their foothold in everything iraq? israeli lobby in washington? a tired anonymous american patriot searching for a face saving sound bite?

the level of violence has dropped dramatically in iraq, whereas in afghanistan the taliban seem resurgent

 

[fatandfast]

You have missed the point. Without the profit motive we'd be in the stone ages as far as medicine goes.

I hope you are very far from the truth. People will create and strive for great things without a bag of gold being dangled in front of them. We told the Soviets that capitalism will set you free..ask them now they have had a taste and would gladly spit it out for yesteryear. The Philipines has had free market in high gear for awhile and the standard of living is going backward. Mexico tried to be our BFF and still 50% of the population lives below the poverty line. The US one size fits all, our way is better than yours, has screwed up as many things as it has fixed. I will buy the drinks at a pub almost anywhere outside the USA and let your explain aloud why not having health care for everybody is better and more innovative,why it works better. Explain to a German,Austrian or Swiss citizen that they would be in the stone age without the US and all it's inventive spirit. Not as many people mind arrogance when you are right.

 

[CentralCaliBike]

I hope you are very far from the truth. People will create and strive for great things without a bag of gold being dangled in front of them. We told the Soviets that capitalism will set you free..ask them now they have had a taste and would gladly spit it out for yesteryear. The Philipines has had free market in high gear for awhile and the standard of living is going backward. Mexico tried to be our BFF and still 50% of the population lives below the poverty line. The US one size fits all, our way is better than yours, has screwed up as many things as it has fixed. I will buy the drinks at a pub almost anywhere outside the USA and let your explain aloud why not having health care for everybody is better and more innovative,why it works better. Explain to a German,Austrian or Swiss citizen that they would be in the stone age without the US and all it's inventive spirit. Not as many people mind arrogance when you are right.

Having talked with former Soviets about their standard of living 30 years ago - and what is available today - I would say that wanting to go back can be relegated to normal human emotion, when the situation is not optimal, times past seem to be much better than they currently are.

As for Mexico, I have been there a number of times over the last 30 years, appearances today are much different than they were 30 years ago. Of course there are still obvious signs of poverty, but there are clear signs of a middle class that were not readily apparent 30 years ago.