The fatality rate so far is higher than the Spanish Flu epidemic of
1918.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...ecause_of.html
__________________________________________________ __
http://www.jbs.org

On Apr 28, 7:34*am, wrote:
The fatality rate so far is higher than the Spanish Flu epidemic of
1918.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...s_sicker_becau...
__________________________________________________ __http://www.jbs.org

no... Mexico is a poor nation, malnutrition (and too much starch
and low protien) is their problem, along
with bad sanitation.... not socialized medicine ... drummer boy.

Nations with solicalized medicine have *better longevity than in the
US... here we give a thrid of our health care
dollars to greedy assholes in suits, with zero medical training
running HMO's ... duhhh. htat impresses you?



Phil scott

On Apr 28, 10:08*am, phil scott wrote:
On Apr 28, 7:34*am, wrote:

The fatality rate so far is higher than the Spanish Flu epidemic of
1918.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...s_sicker_becau...

no... * Mexico is a poor nation, malnutrition *(and too much starch
and low protien) is their problem, along
with bad sanitation.... not socialized medicine ... drummer boy.

Nations with solicalized medicine have *better longevity than in the
US... here we give a thrid of our health care
dollars to greedy assholes in suits, with zero medical training
running HMO's ... duhhh. * * *htat impresses you?

Phil scott

BULL SHEIT - more endless ignorant Liberal fascist propaganda LIES!!!!

Words Versus Realities [ OR Liberal Fascist Propaganda Lies Versus
Truth ]

"Much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I must report the
shocking facts: Medical care is medical care. Nothing more and nothing
less.

This may not seem like a breakthrough on the frontiers of knowledge.
But it completely contradicts what is being said by many of those who
are urging "universal health care" because so many Americans lack
health insurance.

Insurance is not medical care. Indeed, health care is not the same as
medical care. Countries with universal health care do not have more or
better medical care.

The bottom line is medical care. But the rhetoric and the talking
points are about insurance. Many people who could afford health
insurance do not choose to have it because they know that medical care
will be available at the nearest emergency room, whether they have
insurance or not.

This is especially true for young people, who do not anticipate long-
term medical problems and who can always get a broken leg or an
allergy attack taken care of at an emergency room -- and spend their
money on a more upscale lifestyle.

This may not be a wise decision but it is their decision, and there is
no reason why other people should lose the right to make decisions for
themselves because some people make questionable decisions.

If you don't think government bureaucrats can make questionable
decisions, then you haven't dealt with many government bureaucrats.

It is one thing to deal with bureaucrats when you are at the
Department of Motor Vehicles and in good health. It is something else
when you have to deal with bureaucrats when you are lying on a gurney
and bleeding or are doubled over in pain on a hospital bed.

People who believe in "universal health care" show remarkably little
interest -- usually none -- in finding out what that phrase turns out
to mean in practice, in those countries where it already exists, such
as Britain, Sweden or Canada.

For one thing, "universal health care" in these countries means months
of waiting for surgery that American get in a matter of weeks or even
days.

In these and other countries, it means having only a fraction as many
MRIs and other high-tech medical devices available per person as in
the United States.

In Sweden, it means not only having bureaucrats deciding what
medicines the government will and will not pay for, but even
preventing you from buying the more expensive medicine for yourself
with your own money. That would violate the "equality" that is the
magic mantra.

Those who think in terms of talking points, instead of trying to
understand realities, make much of the fact that some countries with
government-controlled medical care have longer life expectancies than
that in the United States.

[ *** PAY ATTENTION Useful Idiots! *** ]

That is where the difference between health care and medical care
comes in. Medical care is what doctors can do for you. Health care
includes what you do for yourself -- such as diet, exercise and
lifestyle.

If a doctor arrives on the scene to find you wiped out by a drug
overdose or shot through the heart by some of your rougher companions,
there may not be much that he can do except sign the death
certificate.

Even for things that take longer to do you in -- obesity, alcohol,
cholesterol, tobacco -- doctors can tell you what to do or not do, but
whether you follow their advice or not is what determines the
outcome.

Americans tend to be more obese, consume more drugs and have more
homicides. None of that is going to change with "universal health
care" because it isn't health care. It is medical care.

[ *** PAY ATTENTION Useful Idiots! *** ]

When it comes to things where medical care itself makes the biggest
difference -- cancer survival rates, for example -- Americans do much
better than people in most other countries.

No one who compares medical care in this country with medical care in
other countries is likely to want to switch. But those who cannot be
bothered with the facts may help destroy the best medical care in the
world by falling for political rhetoric.

http://townhall.com/Columnists/ThomasSowell/
http://www.tsowell.com/
________________________________________
http://www.jbs.org

wrote in message
...
On Apr 28, 10:08 am, phil scott wrote:
On Apr 28, 7:34 am, wrote:

The fatality rate so far is higher than the Spanish Flu epidemic of
1918.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...s_sicker_becau...

no... Mexico is a poor nation, malnutrition (and too much starch
and low protien) is their problem, along
with bad sanitation.... not socialized medicine ... drummer boy.

Nations with solicalized medicine have *better longevity than in the
US... here we give a thrid of our health care
dollars to greedy assholes in suits, with zero medical training
running HMO's ... duhhh. htat impresses you?

Phil scott

BULL SHEIT - more endless ignorant Liberal fascist propaganda LIES!!!!
==================================================

koo koo, koo koo.

On Apr 28, 11:03*am, wrote:

Words Versus Realities [ OR Liberal Fascist Propaganda Lies Versus
Truth ]

No one who compares medical care in this country with medical care in
other countries is likely to want to switch. But those who cannot be
bothered with the facts may help destroy the best medical care in the
world by falling for political rhetoric.

http://townhall.com/Columnists/Thoma...w.tsowell.com/


"Healthca We don’t yet know what combination of mandates,
subsidies, government-supplied insurance, and controls will arise. But
we do know that the cornerstone of the cost containment Obama seeks
will be decisions about what gets covered by the insurance that the
government will be guaranteeing, regulating, and demanding. This means
rationing and a potentially fatal blow to one of the last markets
where expensive and experimental new treatments can be developed and,
if found worthwhile, thrive.

"Given how Obama has shown such a scrupulous sense of pipers and their
right to call the tune in the financial and automotive markets, he is
apt to be more explicit than past politicians in insisting that any
behavior by companies or individuals that costs the public money must
be stringently controlled. That means your health will no longer be
your own business but Barack Obama’s.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/133045.html

That's enough to make me gravely ill.

On Apr 28, 10:06*am, wrote:


That's enough to make me gravely ill.

We can only hope so ;-)

"Fish" wrote in message
news:120460d5-21a4-4d94-9487-
all countries regardless of the color of their government are
socialized society, the subtle different is the tax system. the
stronger the infrastructure, the deeper socialized gov. Only a handful
of country that has no tax or little tax are truly free society,
people have to defend for themselves. If you go to a library, call
911, driving on a highway ... you use socialized services

You don't know what socialism is. Having a government for the benefit of the
population is not socialism...which has more to do with who controls the
means of production, ranging from agriculture to manufacturing and services.

David Eduardo wrote:

"Fish" wrote in message
news:120460d5-21a4-4d94-9487-
all countries regardless of the color of their government are
socialized society, the subtle different is the tax system. the
stronger the infrastructure, the deeper socialized gov. Only a handful
of country that has no tax or little tax are truly free society,
people have to defend for themselves. If you go to a library, call
911, driving on a highway ... you use socialized services


When they start demanding 50% and more of your income it's not just
community services, it becomes Government control, whether they control
all your money or the businesses directly it's Socialism.


Wake up and smell the socialism.

You don't know what socialism is. Having a government for the benefit of
the population is not socialism...which has more to do with who controls
the means of production, ranging from agriculture to manufacturing and
services.

Poetic Justice wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"Fish" wrote in message
news:120460d5-21a4-4d94-9487-
all countries regardless of the color of their government are
socialized society, the subtle different is the tax system. the
stronger the infrastructure, the deeper socialized gov. Only a handful
of country that has no tax or little tax are truly free society,
people have to defend for themselves. If you go to a library, call
911, driving on a highway ... you use socialized services


When they start demanding 50% and more of your income it's not just
community services, it becomes Government control, whether they control
all your money or the businesses directly it's Socialism.

Wake up and smell the socialism.

'Eduardo' is incapable of doing that. He's still trying to figure out what
happened to the radio stations he once claimed to "own" and the amateur radio
license he once claimed to "have".

Never let a faux Hispanic try to fool you.

dxAce wrote:

Poetic Justice wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:
"Fish" wrote in message
news:120460d5-21a4-4d94-9487-
all countries regardless of the color of their government are
socialized society, the subtle different is the tax system. the
stronger the infrastructure, the deeper socialized gov. Only a handful
of country that has no tax or little tax are truly free society,
people have to defend for themselves. If you go to a library, call
911, driving on a highway ... you use socialized services
When they start demanding 50% and more of your income it's not just
community services, it becomes Government control, whether they control
all your money or the businesses directly it's Socialism.

Wake up and smell the socialism.

As a sometimes socialist, I see nothing in Obama that even vaguely
resembles socialism. He seems like a corporate tool, same as Bush.