USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[Prydain 1]

The problem is that so many of the staff are not properly trained and most importantly, simply do not care about anything except when their next pay cheque comes so they can buy their next packet of cigarettes.

Wow, what a caricature, did the Sun give you that one?

Before you go on about personal problems in hospitals, it is true that some have problems in different areas of the country but my point is that we are a grown up and naturally calmer and mature culture to save ourselves from reactionary politics. Look at all of the facts that have ever been released by a reputable source, read the nuances and studies relating to cost and care efficiency. It all points to the fact that, over a large population, we have a very good healthcare in terms of outcomes and a very cheap service that saves people from not just medical and physical pain but financial pain too (which can be the more important thing to many people).

As for anecdotes, I can give you a few but my most recent was after being stabbed in the eye I was treated in A&E at Coventry and Warwickshire University Hospital and had specialist care at Midland eye centre in a very clean, efficient and caring environment. The day after I was last treated at the Midland eye centre I was told that, due to the Tory's new plans for the NHS that the facility that treated my conditions (corneal abrasion and recurrent corneal erosion in particular) would have been cut to the point where only one patient could be treated at a time. I have since found out (my aunty is the facility's chemist) that the waiting time would have been a month or two rather than within the week meaning I would have been unable to work and partially blind for all that time.

So I do have a bias. A bias in favour of working people who, instead of being forced into debt, can return to their livelihood swiftly but (and here is a caricature) people, maybe like you, wouldn't know anything about that.

[hellfire257 3]

instead of being forced into debt

LOLOLOLOL. Guess who just took out a HUGE loan to cover Uni fees to study a STEM subject that wont net me a job in the UK that pays more than a lorry driver. How wonderful. From that you can probably guess that I am no Tory supporter.

One simply cannot say that all is rosy within the NHS. That caricature, while a huge generalisation, is reflected in the lobby of my local hospital simply because of the retched smell left behind by certain "healthcare professionals" that smoke. Like I said earlier, I will not go into detail as to what actually happened to my grandfather, but suffice it to say, they were kind enough to pay for all of his care home fees after the incident(s). Gee, I wonder why? I will leave you to your deductions. I do not agree with scrapping the NHS, but it seriously needs some better management and better employees.

[Prydain 1]

The worst issues relating to poor care could be fixed if we could just ban hospitals using private companys to find staff because it invariably leads to the private company airbrushing an individual's qualitys to make sure they have the required numbers to fulfil their contract. The fact that the Torys are handing over essential services to greedy private companys is a scandal and isn't even a cost cutting measure which is the Tory justification. Where as before we were just paying for a service, now we are paying for a service and for the profit too.

This means that, unless Labour get into government and return our property back to us, the NHS will cost more, provide less care and increase waiting times. So yes, the NHS can always improve, I agree, but compare that to what we are being threatened with and it isn't as bad. It certainly isn't as bad as private insurance based care or solely private care that provide less and harshly burdens a patient in their hour of need. Compared to the rest of Europe healthcare is something that we are actually good at for a change.

As for your family's problems as described, I'd look into that if you haven't already. What care did you expect? What was your grandfather denied? What hospital was he being treated at? How did his GP centre organise action against the hospital? Who where his ward staff and their leader? You say you don't want to go into it, which is fine, but I'd have these sorts of questions answered and send your findings your primary care trust with a letter of complaint or a meeting in person to complain. This page can guide you better. You never know, you could be doing other patients a favour.

Edited August 5, 2012 by Prydain

[PELHAM 10]

The difference is in other health care systems if you are not satisfied with your treatment you go elsewhere. With the NHS they can treat you like dirt and get away with it because you have no alternative. I would prefer the ability to take my National Insurance and obtain care where I choose. I have lived in several different countries Prydain and seen health care from both sides, the NHS is not the utopia you think it is. The lack of choice and the attitude of the staff is driving serious and widespread problems.

I actually envy my dog, when I take him to the vet he gets a better standard of care and is treated with more dignity than I ever have in an NHS hospital. Why? the vets know I can take my money elsewhere if I am not satisfied.

Labour is funded by the unions, the NHS is just 1 huge cash cow for them, hence the continued effort to make it untouchable, any criticism is heresy etc. It's just daft. It shouldn't be a political issue but because of the way Labour is funded it is and we all suffer because of it.

Edit: Another incident to illustrate how bad it is: My colleague who used to be involved in NHS management was once giving a talk to staff representatives about a new policy document outlining the aims of the service. He got to the part where it said the priority of the service would be the patients and he was imediately heckled by the majority in the room. They wanted the wording changed to read that the priority of the service would be the NHS staff. That is the mindset and it's deeply disturbing, patients come second.

Edited August 5, 2012 by PELHAM

[Prydain 1]

I have lived in several different countries Prydain and seen health care from both sides, the NHS is not the utopia you think it is.

Heh. Being a person who has actually used other services I'm experienced enough to say that it is a great system standing alone and compared to others is cheaper, better managed and certainly has very high standards.

As for your complaints, I'm quite happy to see actual evidence that a dog is treated better than a human being in the UK today by a service that the people own and have a large say in. If that was really the case then, after 60 years, the people who own it would have had a big argument about it by now surely? That isn't the case though, the euphemisms and question dodging that this government has had to do while it rapes the NHS isn't because they have a mandate to do what they are doing -- they don't have that mandate because the NHS is a very well loved service.

Regardless of whether your storys are convenient or it is just that you've been let down in your experience I can't comment on them unless I know the details and I definitely don't think you know the mind of all 1.7m NHS employees. As for my own experience with a family of, by the term of my teasers as a child, colonials; I don't think I've seen a better service in terms of its openness and the amount of channels that you can complain through and enforce changes. In New Zealand my auntie has MS and can't make changes to her care plan, unlike my other aunt who could with the NHS. I have family and friends in South Africa who haven't had the A&E and after care that they would get with the NHS and my old man's keyhole surgery that cost him so much money when working for Lockheed in the USA had to be done properly by the NHS for zero cost compared to large co-payments with his insurance company for relatively faulty work. We all have bad experiences around the world but, compared to others the NHS offers among the best service in all categories for very little pain to the national purse.

I think it is the same case as Americans with the first amendment. You don't know how lucky you are and, just like the first amendment, one of your country's best achievements is under attack because of cooked up and spurious reasoning. I never said that the NHS is utopia, just like every system, it has its problems but overall there is nothing wrong with it and we'd do well not to respond to little storys like a Daily Mail editor and deal in facts.

[PELHAM 10]

Lol ,myself, friends and family have used some of the health care services you mention - they are far better. Some have even remarked that despite missing friends and family they would not move back to the UK because they don't like the staff, long waiting lists and constant battling to get basic treatment on the NHS. Those are facts. I am often stunned that once diagnosed they usually get treatment within 14 days, more often than not the same week.

As for A&E in SA, the wife was stung by either a scorpion or spider one night while sitting around the BBQ fire in the Hluhluwe-Imfolozi Game Reserve. Her leg was badly swollen by the next morning so we decided to seek medical help. Compared to the UK it was great, seen and treated in 45 mins, and they booked a follow up to fit in with our itinerary. The cost of the consultations and medicines was so cheap I didn't even bother to file an insurance claim. The biggest thing you notice is that you are treated with some civility and good manners, the NHS only manage that when there is a camera crew around.

Edited August 5, 2012 by PELHAM

[[evo] dan 79]

I have got to disagree with you somewhat PELHAM, I sepnt a week in hospital after Jaw surgery, and I was treated well, and have had no issues really, in the 2+ years I had been going to that surgery. BUT I do agree, it is a bit of a lottery as to how/when you get treated, which you wouldn't get if hospitals had to compete for your money. (Various family members have tried different hospitals and gotten different levels of care from the staff)

[PELHAM 10]

Dan;2202339']I have got to disagree with you somewhat PELHAM' date=' I sepnt a week in hospital after Jaw surgery, and I was treated well, and have had no issues really, in the 2+ years I had been going to that surgery. BUT I do agree, it is a bit of a lottery as to how/when you get treated, which you wouldn't get if hospitals had to compete for your money. (Various family members have tried different hospitals and gotten different levels of care from the staff)[/quote']

That is probably true - all I can say on that is "It's grim up North".

[walker 0]

Hi all

This is the USA Politics thread isn't it?

Any way ontopic:

Some one tries to blow up an aeroplane with a shoe, and every American has to take off their shoes and submit to an Xray before flying. Another mass killing and still America sells guns to nutjobs.

Just turn up with the cash and you can buy the Drug Dealers gun of Choice, the Uzi, and go on a killing spree anywhere in America gratis for free.

Many states they do not even check or register your ID.

I am guessing the day that will change, is when Al Qaeda do a Mumbai in ten or twelve US Malls though probably not even then.

Plane fact the US has no protections against such an attack and no plans to do anything to prevent it.

Sadly walker

Edited August 6, 2012 by walker
spelling

[ralphwiggum 6]

You really have no idea how gun buying process goes in US.

2nd. We've been through gun control topic before. Don't start problem threads.

[walker 0]

Hi all

In reply to Ralph Wiggum's points:

I presume, since you sent me no Moderation warning and that I can see nothing listed in this forum's rules that prevents the discussion of this running sore in the US body politic, that you were not wearing your Moderator hat; but merely voicing your own hopes that gun law was not once more discussed in the forum. That would seem to be somewhat forlorn in the light of two mass murderings of innocents in as many weeks.

That it is a problem is a given, problems are things to be discussed, sometimes with passion and yes heat, but more sensibly with well founded argument; that is after all the purpose of a forum.

Politics is after all about dealing with and discussing problems in order to find solutions, and not about sweeping them under the carpet. US Gun law and the dire effects of guns legaly bought by Nutjobs is clearly a problem, US citizens cannot in safety go to their place of worship or recieve an education or watch a film with their family without the threat of mass murder. Ergo it is a subject of political discussion. The regularity with which so many innocent men women and children are murdered with legaly sold and purchased firearms means the subject is bound to be discussed every time it happens.

As to your point about my knowledge of the subject, US Gun Law is a matter of public record and described in the laws of each state and on multiple sites by many parties.

For Example:

The NRA -ILA carries them:

http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws.aspx

If that is too far right for you or too complex for you to understand, then the information is available on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)

With links to the original sources for verification and more detailed inview.

As is obvious several states do not comply with the Brady Act and it is the stated aim of the NRA - ILA to remove and water down the Brady Act.

My point is that US Gun law, or rather the lack of it, is the biggest terrorist threat to America that exists, and it is only a matter of time before Al Qaeda uses that weekness in US defenses to commit an atrocity that would dwarf 9/11.

With Deepest Respect and Kind Regards Walker

Edited August 7, 2012 by walker
clarrity

[ralphwiggum 6]

Hi all

In reply to Ralph Wiggum's points:

I presume, since you sent me no Moderation warning and that I can see nothing listed in this forum's rules that prevents the discussion of this running sore in the US body politic, that you were not wearing your Moderator hat; but merely voicing your own hopes that gun law was not once more discussed in the forum. That would seem to be somewhat forlorn in the light of two mass murderings of innocents in as many weeks.

Actually, I did not sent Moderation warning because I tried to keep it easy, but if you want, I can start sending warnings to you. The topic has been dealt many times with SAME results. I see no reason to start one again.

That it is a problem is a given, problems are things to be discussed, sometimes with passion and yes heat, but more sensibly with well founded argument; that is after all the purpose of a forum.

And you don't have much of sensible argument. I've seen you post here for years and it was only by sheer luck that you were not banned.

As is obvious several states do not comply with the Brady Act and it is the stated aim of the NRA - ILA to remove and water down the Brady Act.

If you haven't noticed, Brady Act expired nearly 8 years ago. Yet, here you are claiming that several states do not comply. States no longer comply to the law becaue it expired. This is an example of you not knowing much about the situation and running things off your mouth after reading some articles.

This will stop right now. If you attempt to post another another statement or argument discussing gun law, you will face the consequence. I am talking as a moderator.

[Prydain 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fdisTOKom5I

Todd Akin, serving since 2001, says that the female body has inbuilt an contraceptive ability and that because of this women who are pregnant because of rape shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves as to what happens to their body and doesn't seem to be aware that he is contradicting his own idea.

Is there anyone with a hint of sanity in the Republican party?

[GRS 10]

Is there anyone with a hint of sanity in the Republican party?

Here we go again... Yes, there are plenty, this guy just isn't one. Believe it or not, it's quite common on both sides of the spectrum. :j:

[maturin 12]

My point is that US Gun law, or rather the lack of it, is the biggest terrorist threat to America that exists, and it is only a matter of time before Al Qaeda uses that weekness in US defenses to commit an atrocity that would dwarf 9/11.

I'm not exactly Charleton Heston here, but how the hell is Al Qaeda supposed to kill more than 3000 people with firearms? They can barely manage that over a multi-year period in other countries.

And how are gun laws supposed to stop a carefully-planned, well-funded conspiracy anyways? Gun laws are aimed at common criminals, not guerrilla fighters and drug cartels. Strict gun control has results. Spotty and inconsistent results, just like all laws.

[PELHAM 10]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fdisTOKom5I

Todd Akin, serving since 2001, says that the female body has inbuilt an contraceptive ability and that because of this women who are pregnant because of rape shouldn't be allowed to decide for themselves as to what happens to their body and doesn't seem to be aware that he is contradicting his own idea.

Heh heh - stunningly stupid, Todd Akin is a moron, I hope this guy loses his seat and never holds public office again.

You can find them on both sides though, look up Hank Johnson Dem. Georgia, he stated that the Island of Guam could possibly capsize if too many people were on the island, he won an election after that so don't have any high expectations in the Akin case!

Edited August 20, 2012 by PELHAM

[ralphwiggum 6]

I'm not exactly Charleton Heston here, but how the hell is Al Qaeda supposed to kill more than 3000 people with firearms? They can barely manage that over a multi-year period in other countries.

And how are gun laws supposed to stop a carefully-planned, well-funded conspiracy anyways? Gun laws are aimed at common criminals, not guerrilla fighters and drug cartels. Strict gun control has results. Spotty and inconsistent results, just like all laws.

As I said earlier,

The topic has been dealt many times with SAME results. I see no reason to start one again.

Please do not discuss this topic. I've been here 10 years and I know how it is going to go and it always ends up the same way.

[Tonci87 163]

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jasonoberholtzer/files/2012/08/Screen-shot-2012-08-27-at-10.27.17-AM.png

Quite many banks on one side....

You just need to take a look at the Top donors to know how the presidency of this candidate will look.

[walker 0]

Hi all

The current regime in Israel is openly trying to orchestrate the US elections for its own ends. It appears they think of Mitt Romney as their next puppet.

As this editorial makes clear, and it is not the only one:

Defeating Obama is top priority

Op-ed: Israeli strike in Iran before elections would divert attention from failed US economy

Shoula Romano Horing Published: 08.29.12, 11:23 / Israel Opinion

Using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is the only option left for Israel but it is not in its best interest to strike before the US elections. Now it is more important for Israel that Barack Obama be defeated...

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4274390,00.html

As always follow the link to the original article in full

Thankfully not all Israeli's think of America and americans as puppets. The current Israeli President does support the Netanyahu regime attempts to start a global and appocaliptic war, that would draw in the rest of the middle east the US Europe, Russia and China.

Actually, Shimon Peres has opposed war with Iran for yearsWhen President Shimon Peres spoke out this week against an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, his long-standing opposition to such a move finally became public.

By Anshel Pfeffer | Aug.18, 2012 | 6:58 PM | 4

...That is why I was so surprised when two and a half years ago, one of his aides said to me in a chance remark that “Shimon is doing everything to block Bibi and Barak’s crazy plan to attack Iran.â€

It seemed to fly in the face of everything he had achieved since assuming the presidency. To clarify the aide’s remark, I asked one of Peres’ oldest confidantes, who told me “It’s true, Ashkenazi and the other security chiefs are all looking to Shimon to lead the opposition to a strike on Iran.â€...

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/the-axis/actually-shimon-peres-has-opposed-war-with-iran-for-years.premium-1.459079

As always follow the link to the original article in full

In reality Israel's own Nukes are more than adequate to defend Israel against even the potential of a Nuclear armed Iran.

The plane fact is that the first article and a host of other similar articles that have appeared, in the Pro Netanyahu Israeli press, make it clear that all the Iran talk is really about manupulating the USA and controling its choice of political leaders, and ensuring Bibi gets re-elected.

Kind Regards walker

[Tonci87 163]

Hi all

The current regime in Israel is openly trying to orchestrate the US elections for its own ends. It appears they think of Mitt Romney as their next puppet.

As this editorial makes clear, and it is not the only one:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4274390,00.html

As always follow the link to the original article in full

Thankfully not all Israeli's think of America and americans as puppets. The current Israeli President does support the Netanyahu regime attempts to start a global and appocaliptic war, that would draw in the rest of the middle east the US Europe, Russia and China.

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/the-axis/actually-shimon-peres-has-opposed-war-with-iran-for-years.premium-1.459079

As always follow the link to the original article in full

In reality Israel's own Nukes are more than adequate to defend Israel against even the potential of a Nuclear armed Iran.

The plane fact is that the first article and a host of other similar articles that have appeared, in the Pro Netanyahu Israeli press, make it clear that all the Iran talk is really about manupulating the USA and controling its choice of political leaders, and ensuring Bibi gets re-elected.

Kind Regards walker

Thankfully? I´m actually quite surprised considereing how the USA always "protects" them even if they do silly things...

[nettrucker 142]

There's a huge shit storm in arrival and we're in the middle of it.

SpGW4YrdHBE

It is an interesting watch.

cheers

[nodunit 397]

Welp I guess I have to tell me father to burn his vegetable garden less the Gestap- I mean homeland security arrests him.

Also I need to report myself to nearest psychiatric because I love cheff and garden salads, and have really like to eat spinach and other greens.

In all seriousness surely they wouldn't be making laws to prosecute just anyone for doing these things, this has got to be a case of context, or taking out of context, you'd practically be killing your own nation by saying farming=illegal.

As for the healthy food issue I'm sure it's...some strange obsession but I can't help but wonder what harm could possibly come out of eating too much healthy foods vs junk/fast foods.

Edited August 31, 2012 by NodUnit

[PELHAM 10]

There's a huge shit storm in arrival and we're in the middle of it.

It is an interesting watch.

cheers

Really? It's a video produced by the National Inflation Association - it's a pump and dump scam - you will notice that the 1st entry on the wikipedia definition of pump and dump is J. Lebed the co-founder. He has a long history of trying to artificially inflate stocks and was prosecuted for it. This latest one is designed to artificially inflate gold and silver stocks - check their web site, it's all about getting you to buy shares they promote which usually become worthless. The other co-founder has an interview here where he exposes the fraud:

XYOclEsKHtc

There are specific warnings all over the web about the NIA. Nice try NetTroller.

You can watch Lebed squirm here lol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFcgwZ3xjJg

Edited August 31, 2012 by PELHAM

[Tonci87 163]

Is that how you vote in the US?

[PELHAM 10]

Is that how you vote in the US?

If you actually watch the video it has "scenario 1" and "scenario 2" for a yes or no vote. It's difficult to assess if the aye's or no's got it without seeing video of the crowd, small mics on mobile phones or cameras are more sensitive to local sound. That is how they vote at party convensions, not elections. Controversial though - maybe it would have been best to have a roll call vote over such a major issue? If Ron Paul's supporters lost the vote, which was likely, they wouldn't have so much to whinge about. At the Paul Festival in Florida very few turned up to support him, they were expecting 40,000 but got less than 5000.

I am wondering if the rule change was brought about by delegates not casting the votes they were supposed to, e.g.

In Nevada the results of the state caucus votes for the presidential candidates meant that under national and state party rules, delegates were required to cast 22 votes for Mr. Romney and six votes for Rep. Ron Paul. Instead they cast 17 votes for Rep. Paul, five votes for Mitt Romney and five delegates abstained. Clearly against the wishes of state caucus members. It's a bizarre way of doing things lol.

Edited September 2, 2012 by PELHAM