[jlisenbe]

You can also look at the tax rates and lack of choices in the UK and Canada.

It is free enterprise that has accounted for most of the amazing advances in med technology in the past hundred years.

But you're right in that it is going to be a tough deal to solve.

[Curlyben]

Actually, there is choice for treatment in both countries, it comes under the second opinion option that's available to all.
However, for simple, everyday alignments, rapid treatment is far more important than shopping around.

I'd rather pay for universal healthcare as part of the tax regime then as an additional cost after the fact.
The PAYE system the UK operates alleviates that out of pocket pain.

[jlisenbe]

The problem.

TORONTO — When Sharon Shamblaw was diagnosed last summer with a form of blood cancer that could only be treated with a particular stem cell transplant, the search for a donor began. A Toronto hospital, 100 miles east of her home in St. Mary's, Ontario, and one of three facilities in the province that could provide the life-saving treatment, had an eight-month waiting list for transplants.

Four months after her diagnosis, Shamblaw headed to Buffalo, New York, for treatment. But it was too late. She died at the age of 46, leaving behind a husband and three children, as detailed by the Toronto Star.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...revious%20year.

I'd prefer to see a system where we all pay for our ordinary medical treatments such as eye exams, sore throats, minor surgery, and so forth. For the dramatic events, the gov could possibly step in. If I had to pay for some of these treatments I've had done, I would shop around for a good deal. It would be like buying a car.

[Curlyben]

That's a bad example as the lack of donor could easily be the actual root cause, rather than the reported waiting list.
Cancer is a hard one to treat even with all the funds and facilities to hand.

So in the UK system, access to a General Practitioner (Family Doctor) is free, you then pay an amount for any medications.
Hospitalisations, for whatever reason including referrals and treatment, again is free.
This is paid for by all adults via the National Insurance scheme.

You can, if you like, also purchase additional health insurance, which allows access to private facilities.
This is not, however, a panacea.
Many Major treatments such as long term cancer care would still be dealt with by the Universal Health system.

For things like dental and eye care, you have the shop around option, as this tends to be private.
Minors get these costs covered by the Universal scheme again, more complex treatments are also deal with in this system.

Your choice, be forced to on cost your health care out of your pocket, as you believe in free choice, of get seen in a more straightforward manner...
While you are supporting the Free Market economy, watch while the mandatory insurance sector becomes bloated with excess profits.

So, who actually has a choice in all of this, you or I ?

[tomder55]

Canada their solution is to off the geezers and the destitute .
They call it MAID but I call it MAD

Medical assistance in dying - Canada.ca

This is the emperor saying take the pain killer instead of getting the expensive treatment .

Obama's Health Care Solution for Elderly - Just take a Pill - YouTube

[jlisenbe]

None of it is “free”.

There would be no insurance for routine matters, and so no “bloated” profits.

I would speculate it is not paid for by “all adults”. I doubt the poor and homeless pay in a dime.

[tomder55]

Debt Deal . I won't know until the final bill is on the table and negotiations in the House and with the Senate are finished .

Initial observation is that Speaker McCarthy did the best he could with the hand he was given...... a razor thin majority in the House (that should've been bigger ) ;a Dem Senate (that should've been a Repub majority ;and a President who doesn't care if the country goes belly up .Oh and one other thing ;a neo-con faction in both parties who refuse to budge on Defense spending reductions even though there is plenty of fat to trim in the Defense budget .How can you negotiate down discretionary spending when the biggest chunk of it is off the table ? And of course no real debt deal can be made without entitlement reforms .

Have I said lately that the senior Senator from my state is a moron ?

COMBATE |���� on Twitter: "Lindsey Graham: "The Russians are dying... it's the best money we've ever spent." https://t.co/Vn1THUjHmO" / Twitter

There were some needed concessions by Clueless Joe and if passed the deal paves the way forward to 2024 .Repubs need the wave they thought they would have(and could have had ) in 2022.

[jlisenbe]

Been waiting to see your analysis of this situation. Basically, nothing of real substance took place which is about what should have been expected. What about some deal about a natural gas pipeline? Have you read anything on that?

There should be at least a three or four percent cut across the board on all spending. Defense could lose that much and, if managed properly, not really miss it. No more welfare for the sound of mind and body as long as unemployment is under some level, say four percent.

[tomder55]

What about some deal about a natural gas pipeline? Have you read anything on that?

The Dems want to keep Manchin in their camp. The Repubs have nothing to lose by having a pipeline approved .


Let's see what happens in the Senate . Tim Kaine has already signaled he opposes it . I'm betting the Senate amends the bill to remove it .

And I'm sure when all is said and done , some enviro-wackos will tie it up in court .

[tomder55]

This could be me soon .

Inflation, government spending are pulling boomers out of retirement (usatoday.com)

Housing isn't my concern I am completely debt free. It is just cost of living on a fixed (no ) income.

[tomder55]

The bill passed the House Rules Committee 7-6 . On to the full House where I can't decide who is chirping louder , the progressive left or the Freedom caucus .

Ralph Norman of South Carolina and Chip Roy of Texas, and all four of the committee's Democrats, voted against the measure.Once Repub . Thomas Massie announced that he would vote in favor of the rule, the conservative effort to tank the bill in committee was defeated .The Dems were always going to vote no because they are partisan hacks ;even as the bill was endorsed by their own puppet in the White House.

Only one Dem that I know of made a legit point. Jim McGovern argued against the bill's paperwork requirments to get federal assistance benefits . His patronizing attitude appears to be that the poor are too stupid to fill out the paperwork so the bill would make the poor poorer. But he has a point when he said "We don't hold the Defense Department accountable for cost overruns" "Yet we are doubling down on poor people."

In the Senate ,Lindsey Graham continues to slam the bill because he wants even more defense spending.

Graham blasts defense spending in debt ceiling deal as ‘a joke’ | The Hill


If you go through the budget and allocations it is easy to find areas where spending could be reversed . Hey the Pentagon recently found $3 billion more for Ukraine just by sharpening their # 2 Ticonderoga pencils and doing accounting tricks.
Pentagon Says Accounting Mistake Frees Up $3 Billion More for Ukraine - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[jlisenbe]

Amazing how we are willing to borrow money to be used for the military of a country not named "United States".

[tomder55]

The House bill passed last night after a procedural vote was approved . 29 Repubs defected and voted against it The procedure passed because 50 Dems stepped up to vote with McCarthy. Supposedly McCarthy cut a deal with Dem Minority leader Hakeem Jefferies . The Dems who voted for the procedural vote stayed in the chamber while the Repub votes were registered . Then Jefferies held up a green card .Only then did the 50 Dems vote yes.

The final bill passed 314-117 vote, with 71 Republicans and 46 Democrats voting against it.

Many of the Dems that voted yay are members of the bi-partisan 'Problem Solvers Caucus' that was formed in 2017 to find common ground in the House and break gridlock .


I expect that the bill will pass in the Senate after the Dems dilute many of the deal provisions that were agreed on by Clueless Joe and McCarthy .

Will Yertle wake up for the debates or will he let Schmucky run roughshod over the process ? Will Lindsey Graham kill the bill because we haven't given Ukraine nukes to use on Russia ? Bottom line . If the Senate makes ANY revisions to the bill then it would have to be put through a Conference Committee review and then sent back to the House for a new vote. There is still a chance that there will be a default .

[tomder55]

The Senate passed the debt ceiling bill and also passed a bill that would stop the nonsense student loan forgiveness. [Clueless Joe will of course veto that bill But the Senate Dems can say on the campaign trail ..... 'hey at least we tried ' ]

Speaker McCarthy was the face of the debt ceiling debate. Clueless pretty much sat this one out , The House passed the initial bill that forced the President to the negotiation table. McCarthy then met with the White House a number of times hashing out a compromise .

Then he took it to the House floor and did what House Speakers are supposed to do .....got it done despite opposition from inside his own caucus and the Dems .

Schmucky to his credit knew that it was critically important to get the bill through the Senate .

Basically this was punting the debt crisis until after the 2024 elections.McCarthy showed that he could if necessary forge a bi-partisan coalition . This will not please the burn it down crowd from both parties . But sometimes it is better to choose which mountain to defend . It would've done no one any good to allow a default.

For the Repubs the message is clear . Win elections and secure majorities in Congress and elect a Repub President . Then use the Dem model of getting your agenda passed into law.

[tomder55]

'The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023' . Sometimes the names they give these bills are ironic parodies . There is nothing fiscally responsible about the passage of this bill . It was a necessary kicking the can down to road for 2 more years . They increased the debt ceiling and called it responsible debt reduction . They must stay up late at night reading Orwell. Now they don't have to think about being fiscally responsible for another 2 years . They will campaign saying how fiscally responsible they were .

They brag about not touching entitlements when it is clear that is the fiscally responsible thing to do to get the long term debt under control. By law if they don't put a fix on SS there will be a 20% cut in benefits in less than a decade .

Not touching Social Security could lead to a 20% benefit cut within a decade | CNN Politics

Medicare they are already cutting physician fees that are being passed on to the patient .

The money for entitlements are not in the trust fund. So the money will come from general funds. But the cupboard is bare . The CBO estimates that it will take a staggering $114 trillion in borrowing in the next 30 years . Hello !!!! That's 200 % of GDP .
Fiscally responsible my A$$ ,$$$, $$$, $$$ ,$$$, !!! That's 4x what we have borrowed in the history of the US .

[tomder55]

. What about some deal about a natural gas pipeline? Have you read anything on that?

Best guess . This is a tradeoff. There will be quicker EPA reviews (2 years max) and in return more law suits. The full impact of this National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) revision with all the legal actions that are sure to follow will take years to sort out. Developers can go to court if they feel the study is taking too long but that would mean them suing the agency that can give a green light on their project . Would they risk it ?
Envirowackos will not be happy that any part of the process is streamlined. They too will use the courts for relief.