Yes, I do believe that I will be better off in the long run. I am in very poor health and use more than my share of resources. Even with fairly good coverage, I'm paying around $500 per month in co-payments, which is a bargin just the same. Everytime I'm admitted to the hospital, the bill runs $5,000-$10,000 for just one or two nights. Part of the reason is the large number of uninsured who don't go to a doctor until they are in really bad shape.
Sorry to hear about your health. I think converting over to a socialized system at this point in time would be a very bad thing. I think much needs to be done in order to reduce costs prior to even entertaining the ides. Medical tort reform, over use of unnecessary technologies, implementation of preventive medicine, etc.
I also think that it's sadly ironic that you would be the in line for socialized medicine given your sizable profesed wealth. If anyone should be covering their own costs, or at least a larger portion I think it's you. Being a "Heir" to a sizeable amount it's ironic that you would place your burden on the backs of middle class families working hard in an attempt to garner the wealth that you've fallen into by way of your family tree.
Don't forget, one reason that health care is so $$$$$$$$ are trial lawyers like Edwards!!
*************Kerry/Edwards***************** When you are as full of SHIT as these guys... YOU NEED TWO JOHNS!!
__________________
Racer BVD,
"The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should
be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself"
"lieber Nurburgring als Ehering"
(which translates to "rather Nurburgring than a wedding ring")
"Man, being reasonable, must get drunk."
— Lord Byron
What we need is a condom at the White House, because this Bush/Dick is responsible for more deaths worldwide than AIDS!!
I would like to see those numbers and the sources they came from... In other words, back it up.
On another note: You mentioned that there are more cops in NYC than troops in Afghanistan - which got me thinkin'.
There are more cops here in Oklahoma City than in the whole state of Maine. And Maine is almost as big as Oklahoma. Why is that? Because of population per square mile. Maybe your comment is just a little slanted - what's the population of NYC/square mile compared to the population of Afghanistan/square mile? This will affect the need for coverage. Also, maybe our troops did a good enough of a job that a massive amount of troops aren't necessary.
I say these things from a bird's eye view - admitting I don't have the numbers... I'm just trying to use a little common sense. And maybe add the rest of the story.
Now be sure you're not slanting things here. You make it sound like our troops did all those numbers:
Quote:
13000 Iraqi civilians +
913 US troops +
6370 Iraqi troops +
121 Other coalition dead
________________________
Total over 20,400+ dead
I would venture to say that a lot of the Iraqi civilian deaths were brought on by the terrorist themselves. And I know what you'll say: "If we weren't there, it wouldn't have happened". Bulls*%t!
How many people did Saddam murder before he was dethroned? Hundreds of thousands? Maybe more... If he (and his sons) were still in power how many hundreds of thousands more would end up in un-marked mass graves?
I was wrong...unfortunately more people die from AIDS.... (3 million!!)
Next time please don't say it unless you know it to be true. At least you admitted the error, only after someone called you on it...
I always admit that I could be wrong when using questionable numbers. I try not to slant data for my own purposes - just try to present the facts that I know or have read and let others intrepret them as they will.
Linear Mode
