Matthew,
As I said earlier, good writer – weak thinker. You made stupid statements and think that volume makes up for lack of insight. You confidently make statements, but it’s BS.
But OK, here goes
Where’s all the people flocking to Australia for medical treatment? Where’s that long list of Australian Medical innovations? Where would the world be without Australian mircle drugs – like I said, you just say things. No, I don’t think that US insurance companies conduct cost effectiveness research, they don’t cover experimental treatments, but once the effectiveness of a treatment has been demonstrated – then it’s up to the doctor, they legally can’t refuse to pay for treatment because it’s expensive. Your insurance plan is a legal contract.
We weren’t talking about cost effective insurers, we were talking about cost effective treatments (focus). When my Land Rover has a problem, I go to a mechanic and tell him, I’m looking for a cost effective remedy, this truck ain’t exactly new. When my mother is sick, I’m not looking for a cost effective remedy, I want her to get healthy again. When the government does it, it’s called a death panel.
Rubbish. Just look at the figures for health outcomes vs spend in countries with well-run public health systems. You’re just wrong, it’s that simple.
Gee Matthew, what exactly is the health outcome vs. spend in end of life treatment, which is what Mr. Reich (Clinton’s Sec of Labor) was discussing. Do you have any idea how stupid your point is? Let’s see the outcome is dead, and your point is that a well-run public health system can do it cheaper. Good point, Matthew. Mr. Reich’s point was that if you actually want to save money, since most of it is consumed treating the elderly, just to buy them another year or two, that’s where the hard decisions have to be made. Are you denying that? Now we’re back to the death panels you said wouldn’t exist, but most certainly do, in any government run health care system.
“The spin here is that Palin was refering to the end of life counseling clause”
That’s not spin, that’s just what happened.
Matthew, Palin wasn’t refering to the end of life counseling – she was refering to the “cost effective” decisions that will be made. It was spun that she was talking about the counseling – they yanked it out and pretended, no more death panels! They are still there and always will be anytime individuals don’t control their own health care.
The US simply drilling more gas (which is what palin means by “energy independence”) will not make energy “cheap”. To do that will also require export barriers.
“Natural Gas is not a global commodity – it can only go where there are pipelines”
You’re kidding, right? Have you heard of LNG? Right now, the US imports natural gas from all over the world – including asia, the middle east, south america and australia
Yes, I’ve heard of LNG – Very little of the NG we use is liquified, and right now, the only places that tiny amount comes from is Egypt, Nigeria, Norway and Trindad according to the US government. If you notice the only places that liquify are places that don’t have pipeines. If natural gas is such a “liquid asset” (pardon the pun) why exactly is Europe so concerned about the Russian monoploy, according to you, they can buy it anywhere, anytime. Those Europeans just aren’t as smart as you Matthew. And as far as export barriers, having the pipeline running into the lower 48 will work nicely, it certainly does for all the Canadian oil we use, or are you going to suggest that Canada has a big port where all the tankers load up? Vancouver? Forget about it. Where are all these LNG processing facilities that will ship our NG all over the world.
The US exports gas via pipeline to Canada and Mexico, again because of where the pipelines run. The amount of LNG traded in the world is tiny compared to NG usage.
This all started because you were telling everyone about how you knew more about energy than Sarah Palin – She’s an acknowleged expert – you still aren’t.
They’re AFFECTED by it, sure – but the effect is (relatively) small. Government spending (even america’s) is dwarfed by private spending and capital flows. China’s peg means the US can’t compete as easily with (effectively) subsidised chinese imports – so the US trade deficit balloons. That’s why china owns all those greenbacks,
The effect is small? What the hell do you think the job of the Fed is? They control the money supply! The value of the Dollar is diving because the government is spending a boat load they don’t have, an the Fed is monitizing the debt. The price of all of our imports (oil) is going up because the dollar is going down.
China is a communist country – with a state controlled economy. The currency of communist countries isn’t traded – it doesn’t mean anything except in their own country, it’s an internal exchange rate. China owns all those Greenbacks because Americans are willing to give up their dollars for Chinese goods, and their Government isn’t willing to give the dollars back back to import our goods (except for ag products and SUVs). It’s called a trade imbalance. Matthew, real currencies are traded on exchanges around the world – you can’t “peg” your exchange rate – it’s set by the markets.
Matthew, you only understand about 20% of what you talk about, but boy do you talk.
