Dr. Jill Stein is the Green Party front runner for President.
She is a graduate of Harvard Medical School.
She has over 25 years' experience as a doctor.
Dr. Stein campaigned for single payer health care when she ran against Mitt Romney for governor of Massachusetts in 2002.
When asked about the mandate and Obamacare she explained that whatever the outcome determined by SCOTUS:
…, Americans will still be stuck with an expensive, ineffective health care system that fails to provide quality health care to all Americans.
snip
The mandate that every American buy expensive, inadequate health insurance is a scheme developed by Republicans and foisted on the nation by Democrats. The winners are the health insurance companies. A Stein administration will make health care a right while eliminating the enormous waste, bureaucracy and negative health impacts of the current health insurance mess.
snip
As a medical doctor trying to care for people in an increasingly broken system over 25 years, I know that a single payer Medicare for All program is the real solution to the American health care crisis. President Obama repeatedly admitted this during the health care debate while insisting that single payer was off the table.
snip
Americans spend far more money on health care than other industrial democracies but have a poorly performing health care system, ranked only 37th in the world, due to the cancerous burden of private health insurance. Obama and the Democrats turned their backs on Medicare - a proven solution. Instead they enacted a health insurance mandate whose prime goal will be to increase insurance company profits.
Dr. Stein contends that our complicated health system increases health expenditures each year by $400 billion.
She points out that the federal health insurance law now being deliberated will still leave more than 26 million Americans uninsured.
The present law will force other millions of Americans to buy expensive yet still inadequate health insurance.
It will cause millions of Americans to go bankrupt due to high medical bills. Stein emphasizes that ¾ of Americans who go bankrupt today do so in spite of having health insurance.
Our country spends more than twice as much as other industrialized nations per capita ($8,160) on health care, yet we still perform poorly in terms of life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates.
Other nations provide comprehensive coverage for each of their citizens, the United States leaves 51 million at present uninsured and millions more under-insured.
Dr. Stein concedes there are some positives within the Obama reforms, but she points out that most will not go into effect until 2014 and such a delay will cost lives. Approximately 45,000 Americans die annually due to lack of health care coverage.
Dr. Stein concedes there are some positives within the Obama reforms, but she points out that most will not go into effect until 2014 and such a delay will cost lives. Approximately 45,000 Americans die annually due to lack of health care coverage.
Dr. Stein discloses that Romney Care’s Massachusetts' experiment with insurance mandates, though it did reduce but not eliminate the uninsured population, “significantly increased under-insurance, increased health care premiums, and created a financial crisis among the state’s safety-net hospitals and community health centers….”
Many low-income residents had less access to health care. And the financial burden of the reform has fallen disproportionately on lower-middle-class. This is not the reform we need. A system based on mandates is basically a regressive tax imposed on the middle class in order to support profiteering in the health industry. No other country in the world would tolerate such an abuse of consumers and neither should we.
According to Dr. Stein’s math, with the Obama mandate, a family of four with an $80,000 a year income will be forced to pay 9.8% of their income to purchase health care, a health care that would only cover 70% of their medical expenses. This is financially challenging enough, but Stein warns that in the event of a serious illness of a family member, the family would face financial ruin.
Dr. Stein on a single payer system:
… that means that all medical bills get paid under a single streamlined system, similar to Medicare. Everyone would be covered, regardless of employment or medical care status, for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care. All those complicated forms that have to be filled out for the current multitude of private health insurers would no longer be necessary, and that would save billions in paperwork costs.”
Dr. Stein’s and her Green Party’s platform has long supported single payer health care. It contends that eliminating private insurers and recapturing the money draining away in administrative waste would easily fund health care for the uninsured.
With a single payer system modest new taxes would replace premiums and out of pocket costs currently paid by both businesses and individuals.
Negotiating fees, bulk budgeting and purchasing would be provided by the single payer system on behalf of the patients, leaving patients with NO out of pocket costs.
A single payer system would mean an end to obscene corporate profit-making by vendors who hold the economic and physical fates of too many Americans in their amoral hands.
Dr. Stein.
Green Party.
Single Payer.
Sanity.
Solvency.
Sustainability.
Citizen salvation!
Sounds good?
Winston Churchill once said, "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities."
Dr. Stein wants to do the right thing.
Let's let her!
[cross-posted on correntewire and sacramento for democracy]
------------
I've long thought that the only way to stop the madness is to stop playing the game. Which I have years ago. I started my own Health Account in which I deposit $'s for future need. Why do we need a middle man to handle us???
very informative
Sounds good to me. If you don't mind I'll add the following comments on the subject from Jill Stein as posted at Vote Smart:
"I will cut health care costs - a major, growing driver of the budget deficit - by cutting the wasteful, expensive administrative overhead of private insurance through a cost-saving Medicare for all system. I will also save money through bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals, preventive care, community-based health infrastructure (including sound nutrition, safe bikepaths and sidewalks, and prevention of harmful pollution) and by drastically reducing medical inflation. My jobs program - which achieves full employment in five years - will restore tax revenues to the budget, and eliminate recession-era revenue deficits that have been another major source of the budget deficit." Jill Stein position on health care at Vote Smart (for positions on other issues see the link)
If any other candidate can compete with Jill Stein it clearly isn't either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama as far as I can tell based on their positions on the issues.
"I will cut health care costs - a major, growing driver of the budget deficit - by cutting the wasteful, expensive administrative overhead of private insurance through a cost-saving Medicare for all system. I will also save money through bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals, preventive care, community-based health infrastructure (including sound nutrition, safe bikepaths and sidewalks, and prevention of harmful pollution) and by drastically reducing medical inflation. My jobs program - which achieves full employment in five years - will restore tax revenues to the budget, and eliminate recession-era revenue deficits that have been another major source of the budget deficit." Jill Stein position on health care at Vote Smart (for positions on other issues see the link)
If any other candidate can compete with Jill Stein it clearly isn't either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama as far as I can tell based on their positions on the issues.
Tgwithin,
The way insurance works is that people share the risk, and thus reduce the individual risk. You don't know what your eventual health care costs will be. If everyone pays into a big pool based on social averages, each person pays much less than if every individual saves all they may need for there own costs (taking the worst case scenario into account). Smart people using math and actuarial accounting have worked out what is best for the majority in other countries. In the US smart and greedy people have figured out how arrange to get a lot of the health care money to go into their own pockets. They've also manipulated lots of low-information voters into seeing things their way. Hope that answers your question.
The way insurance works is that people share the risk, and thus reduce the individual risk. You don't know what your eventual health care costs will be. If everyone pays into a big pool based on social averages, each person pays much less than if every individual saves all they may need for there own costs (taking the worst case scenario into account). Smart people using math and actuarial accounting have worked out what is best for the majority in other countries. In the US smart and greedy people have figured out how arrange to get a lot of the health care money to go into their own pockets. They've also manipulated lots of low-information voters into seeing things their way. Hope that answers your question.
Sounds wonderful. One reason I won't vote for a green party president is that if she won she wouldn't get a bill destroying the private health care industry through the congress unless the green party won a majority there. The other reason I won't vote this way is because she won't win and she might help the Republicans win. Votes for third parties will become viable only if we work first to reform our election system to use a non-first past the post system such as STV or Instant Runoff. Then I'd vote green first, and Dem second, and fuck the Republicans.
Yeah, Jeff, that's the problem - with the kind of governmental system you guys got, the prez can't do much...it's gotta come from Congress. The parliamentary system, IMO, works much better.
I'm going to add part of a very compelling article by Lubov Lulko which encourages me further to support the Green Party. (for anyone who has enuf time and will to read it! :) ) best, libby
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30962.htm
From 10 Myths About Capitalism by By Lubov Lulko:
"Myth 1. Under capitalism, anyone who works hard can become rich
"The capitalist system will automatically provide wealth to hard-working individuals. Workers unconsciously formed an illusory hope, but if it does not come to fruition, they will be blaming themselves only. In fact, under capitalism, the probability of success, regardless how much you may have worked, is the same as in a lottery. Wealth, with rare exceptions, is not created by hard work, but is a result of fraud and lack of remorse for those who have greater influence and power. It is a myth that success is the result of hard work and, combined with luck and a good dose of faith, depends on the ability to engage in entrepreneurial activity and level of competitiveness. This myth creates the followers of the system who support it. Religion, especially Protestant, works to support this myth as well.
"Myth 2. Capitalism creates wealth and prosperity for all
Wealth, accumulated in the hands of a minority, sooner or later will be redistributed among all. The goal is to enable the employer to accumulate wealth without asking questions. At the same time the hope is maintained that sooner or later workers will be rewarded for their work and dedication. In fact, even Marx concluded that the ultimate goal of capitalism is not the distribution of wealth but its accumulation and concentration. The widening gap between the rich and the poor in recent decades, especially after the establishment of the rule of neo-liberalism, has proven the opposite. This myth has been one of the most common during the phase of "social welfare" of the postwar period, and its main task was the destruction of the socialist countries.
"Myth 3. We are all in the same boat
"Capitalist society has no classes, therefore the responsibility for the failures and crises also lies on all and everyone has to pay. The goal is to create a guilt complex for workers, allowing capitalists to increase revenues and pass expenditures onto the people. In fact, the responsibility lies entirely on the elite consisting of billionaires who support the government and are supported by it, and have always enjoyed great privileges in taxation, tenders, financial speculation, offshore, nepotism, etc. This myth is implanted by the elites to avoid responsibility for the plight of the people and oblige them to pay for the elite's mistakes.
"Myth 4. Capitalism means freedom
"True freedom is only achieved under capitalism with the help of the so-called "market self-regulation." The goal is to create something similar to a religion of capitalism, where everything is taken as is, and deny people the right to participate in making macroeconomic decisions. Indeed, the freedom in decision-making is the ultimate freedom, but it is only enjoyed by a narrow circle of powerful individuals, not the people, and not even the government agencies. During summits and forums, in the narrow circles behind closed doors, the heads of large companies, banks and multinational corporations make major financial and economic decisions of strategic nature. The markets, therefore, are not self-regulating, they are being manipulated. This myth has been used to justify interference in the internal affairs of non-capitalist countries, based on the assumption that they have no freedom, but have rules.
"Myth 5. Capitalism means democracy
"Democracy can only exist under capitalism. This myth, which smoothly follows from the previous one, was created in order to prevent the discussion of other models of social order. It is argued that they are all dictatorships. Capitalism is assigned such concepts as freedom and democracy, while their meaning is distorted. In fact, society is divided into classes and the rich, being ultra-minority, dominate over all others. This capitalist "democracy" is nothing but a disguised dictatorship, and "democratic reforms" are processes opposite to progress. As the previous myth, this one also serves as an excuse to criticize and attack non-capitalist countries.
"Myth 6. Election is a synonym of democracy
"Election is synonymous with democracy. The goal is to denigrate or demonize other systems and prevent a discussion of political and electoral systems where leaders are determined through non-bourgeois elections, for example, on the virtue of age, experience, or popularity of candidates. In fact, it is the capitalist system that manipulates and bribes, where a vote is a conditional term, and election is only a formal act. The mere fact that the elections are always won by representatives of the bourgeois minority makes them unrepresentative. The myth that bourgeois elections guarantee presence of democracy is one of the most entrenched, and even some left-wing parties and forces believe it.
"Myth 7. Alternating parties in office is the same as having an alternative
"Bourgeois parties that periodically alternate in power have alternative platforms. The goal is to perpetuate the capitalist system within the dominant class, feeding the myth that democracy is reduced to the election. In fact, it is obvious that two-party or multiparty parliamentary system is a one-party system. These are two or more factions of one political force, they alternate, mimicking the party with an alternative policy. People always choose an agent of the system, being sure that this is not what they are doing. The myth that bourgeois parties have different platforms and are even oppositional, is one of the most important, it is constantly discussed to make the capitalist system work.
"Myth 8. The elected politician represents the people and can therefore decide for them
"The politician was granted authority by the people, and can rule at will. The purpose of this myth is to feed the people with empty promises and hide the real measures that will be implemented in practice. In fact, the elected leader does not fulfill that promise, or, worse, starts to implement undeclared measures, often conflicting and even contradicting the original Constitution. Often such politicians elected by an active minority in the middle of the mandate reach their minimum popularity. In these cases, the loss of representation does not lead to a change of the politician through constitutional means, but by contrast, leads to the degeneration of capitalist democracy in the real or disguised dictatorship. The systematic practice of falsification of democracy under capitalism is one of the reasons for the increasing number of people who do not go to the elections.
"Myth 9. There is no alternative to capitalism
"Capitalism is not perfect, but it is the only possible economic and political system, and therefore the most appropriate one. The goal is to eliminate the study and promotion of other systems and eliminate competition using all possible means, including force. In reality, there are other political and economic systems, and the most known is scientific socialism. Even within the framework of capitalism, there are versions of the South American "democratic socialism" or European "socialist capitalism". This myth is intended to intimidate people, to prevent the discussion of alternatives to capitalism and ensure unanimity.
"Myth 10. Savings generate wealth
"The economic crisis is caused by the excess of employee benefits. If they are removed, the government will save and the country will become rich. The goal is to shift the liability for capitalist debt payment onto the public sector, including the retirees. Another goal is to make people accept poverty, arguing that it is temporary. It is also intended to facilitate the privatization of the public sector. People are being convinced that savings are the "salvation" without mentioning that it achieved through the privatization of the most profitable sectors whose future earnings will be lost. This policy leads to a decrease in state revenue and reduction of benefits, pensions and benefits."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30962.htm
From 10 Myths About Capitalism by By Lubov Lulko:
"Myth 1. Under capitalism, anyone who works hard can become rich
"The capitalist system will automatically provide wealth to hard-working individuals. Workers unconsciously formed an illusory hope, but if it does not come to fruition, they will be blaming themselves only. In fact, under capitalism, the probability of success, regardless how much you may have worked, is the same as in a lottery. Wealth, with rare exceptions, is not created by hard work, but is a result of fraud and lack of remorse for those who have greater influence and power. It is a myth that success is the result of hard work and, combined with luck and a good dose of faith, depends on the ability to engage in entrepreneurial activity and level of competitiveness. This myth creates the followers of the system who support it. Religion, especially Protestant, works to support this myth as well.
"Myth 2. Capitalism creates wealth and prosperity for all
Wealth, accumulated in the hands of a minority, sooner or later will be redistributed among all. The goal is to enable the employer to accumulate wealth without asking questions. At the same time the hope is maintained that sooner or later workers will be rewarded for their work and dedication. In fact, even Marx concluded that the ultimate goal of capitalism is not the distribution of wealth but its accumulation and concentration. The widening gap between the rich and the poor in recent decades, especially after the establishment of the rule of neo-liberalism, has proven the opposite. This myth has been one of the most common during the phase of "social welfare" of the postwar period, and its main task was the destruction of the socialist countries.
"Myth 3. We are all in the same boat
"Capitalist society has no classes, therefore the responsibility for the failures and crises also lies on all and everyone has to pay. The goal is to create a guilt complex for workers, allowing capitalists to increase revenues and pass expenditures onto the people. In fact, the responsibility lies entirely on the elite consisting of billionaires who support the government and are supported by it, and have always enjoyed great privileges in taxation, tenders, financial speculation, offshore, nepotism, etc. This myth is implanted by the elites to avoid responsibility for the plight of the people and oblige them to pay for the elite's mistakes.
"Myth 4. Capitalism means freedom
"True freedom is only achieved under capitalism with the help of the so-called "market self-regulation." The goal is to create something similar to a religion of capitalism, where everything is taken as is, and deny people the right to participate in making macroeconomic decisions. Indeed, the freedom in decision-making is the ultimate freedom, but it is only enjoyed by a narrow circle of powerful individuals, not the people, and not even the government agencies. During summits and forums, in the narrow circles behind closed doors, the heads of large companies, banks and multinational corporations make major financial and economic decisions of strategic nature. The markets, therefore, are not self-regulating, they are being manipulated. This myth has been used to justify interference in the internal affairs of non-capitalist countries, based on the assumption that they have no freedom, but have rules.
"Myth 5. Capitalism means democracy
"Democracy can only exist under capitalism. This myth, which smoothly follows from the previous one, was created in order to prevent the discussion of other models of social order. It is argued that they are all dictatorships. Capitalism is assigned such concepts as freedom and democracy, while their meaning is distorted. In fact, society is divided into classes and the rich, being ultra-minority, dominate over all others. This capitalist "democracy" is nothing but a disguised dictatorship, and "democratic reforms" are processes opposite to progress. As the previous myth, this one also serves as an excuse to criticize and attack non-capitalist countries.
"Myth 6. Election is a synonym of democracy
"Election is synonymous with democracy. The goal is to denigrate or demonize other systems and prevent a discussion of political and electoral systems where leaders are determined through non-bourgeois elections, for example, on the virtue of age, experience, or popularity of candidates. In fact, it is the capitalist system that manipulates and bribes, where a vote is a conditional term, and election is only a formal act. The mere fact that the elections are always won by representatives of the bourgeois minority makes them unrepresentative. The myth that bourgeois elections guarantee presence of democracy is one of the most entrenched, and even some left-wing parties and forces believe it.
"Myth 7. Alternating parties in office is the same as having an alternative
"Bourgeois parties that periodically alternate in power have alternative platforms. The goal is to perpetuate the capitalist system within the dominant class, feeding the myth that democracy is reduced to the election. In fact, it is obvious that two-party or multiparty parliamentary system is a one-party system. These are two or more factions of one political force, they alternate, mimicking the party with an alternative policy. People always choose an agent of the system, being sure that this is not what they are doing. The myth that bourgeois parties have different platforms and are even oppositional, is one of the most important, it is constantly discussed to make the capitalist system work.
"Myth 8. The elected politician represents the people and can therefore decide for them
"The politician was granted authority by the people, and can rule at will. The purpose of this myth is to feed the people with empty promises and hide the real measures that will be implemented in practice. In fact, the elected leader does not fulfill that promise, or, worse, starts to implement undeclared measures, often conflicting and even contradicting the original Constitution. Often such politicians elected by an active minority in the middle of the mandate reach their minimum popularity. In these cases, the loss of representation does not lead to a change of the politician through constitutional means, but by contrast, leads to the degeneration of capitalist democracy in the real or disguised dictatorship. The systematic practice of falsification of democracy under capitalism is one of the reasons for the increasing number of people who do not go to the elections.
"Myth 9. There is no alternative to capitalism
"Capitalism is not perfect, but it is the only possible economic and political system, and therefore the most appropriate one. The goal is to eliminate the study and promotion of other systems and eliminate competition using all possible means, including force. In reality, there are other political and economic systems, and the most known is scientific socialism. Even within the framework of capitalism, there are versions of the South American "democratic socialism" or European "socialist capitalism". This myth is intended to intimidate people, to prevent the discussion of alternatives to capitalism and ensure unanimity.
"Myth 10. Savings generate wealth
"The economic crisis is caused by the excess of employee benefits. If they are removed, the government will save and the country will become rich. The goal is to shift the liability for capitalist debt payment onto the public sector, including the retirees. Another goal is to make people accept poverty, arguing that it is temporary. It is also intended to facilitate the privatization of the public sector. People are being convinced that savings are the "salvation" without mentioning that it achieved through the privatization of the most profitable sectors whose future earnings will be lost. This policy leads to a decrease in state revenue and reduction of benefits, pensions and benefits."
tg within, how smart of you to have done that since the social safety net for citizens is unravelling. with joblessness increasing, and since providing coverage is the responsibility and in the power of the employer, more and more Americans are facing the horror of economic and physical crises, sudden economic and physical crisis to suddenly lose not only the paycheck but the health care.
I remember Ralph Nader talking about the monstrous greed of the corporatists of the medical industry. He said pretty much, for God's sake, these guys should be VENDORS serving the civil contract the government has with its people to support and aid their needs for health care. Now the VENDORS are in charge of the asylum so to speak and calling the shots and pitting their needs for monetary profit against the very survival of human beings. THEY ARE VENDORS!!!! There is an insurance CEO in CT who last year or the year before was pulling in $9,000 an hour, before bonuses. YIPES. I wonder why people can't grasp how surreally obscene or obscenely surreal it all is. Kevin Zeese says Americans are lost in the F-O-G ... "forces of greed"!!!!
Thanks for stopping by!!! best, libby
I remember Ralph Nader talking about the monstrous greed of the corporatists of the medical industry. He said pretty much, for God's sake, these guys should be VENDORS serving the civil contract the government has with its people to support and aid their needs for health care. Now the VENDORS are in charge of the asylum so to speak and calling the shots and pitting their needs for monetary profit against the very survival of human beings. THEY ARE VENDORS!!!! There is an insurance CEO in CT who last year or the year before was pulling in $9,000 an hour, before bonuses. YIPES. I wonder why people can't grasp how surreally obscene or obscenely surreal it all is. Kevin Zeese says Americans are lost in the F-O-G ... "forces of greed"!!!!
Thanks for stopping by!!! best, libby
toritto, yes, yes, yes, the facts spell out the truth, don't they. Especially when Jill Stein points out that 45,000 people die each year from inadequate health care and most of Obamacare doesn't even kick in until 2014, so why are those doomed Americans dismissed so easily. Why weren't they brought up in the national conversation more by the Dems or the Repubs? Do the American citizens really not give a serious sh*t about others, even their own family members, health crises come on so fast and mercilessly at times. I don't believe that, even though the media doesn't encourage that except for a titillation moment or two.
Another fact is $400 billion mostly for exec pay and all that duplicated paperwork for all those vendors rather than one centralized system that can keep costs down by bulk ordering of medicines and supplies, looking out for the economic needs of the citizens rather than the needs of those darn VENDORS who should not be making so much money on the plight of citizens. Like the contractors and weapons manufacturers making their killings (pun intended) from the wars.
FACTS matter. So many people trust an Obama who has not been trustworthy, promises and procrastinates and talks one talk and walks the corporate walk. Change to believe in? Not Obama. Jill Stein is someone who talks REAL change not "trust me" but stay myopic and talk incremental pragmatism so that our descendants may one day benefit, not in our lifetime. WOW. That is so depressing. When the public option people got so angry at the single payer people I was dismayed. Why were they mad at us who were dreaming bigger and sooner than they? We weren't their enemy! Or shouldn't be.
Thanks for visiting. :) best, libby
Another fact is $400 billion mostly for exec pay and all that duplicated paperwork for all those vendors rather than one centralized system that can keep costs down by bulk ordering of medicines and supplies, looking out for the economic needs of the citizens rather than the needs of those darn VENDORS who should not be making so much money on the plight of citizens. Like the contractors and weapons manufacturers making their killings (pun intended) from the wars.
FACTS matter. So many people trust an Obama who has not been trustworthy, promises and procrastinates and talks one talk and walks the corporate walk. Change to believe in? Not Obama. Jill Stein is someone who talks REAL change not "trust me" but stay myopic and talk incremental pragmatism so that our descendants may one day benefit, not in our lifetime. WOW. That is so depressing. When the public option people got so angry at the single payer people I was dismayed. Why were they mad at us who were dreaming bigger and sooner than they? We weren't their enemy! Or shouldn't be.
Thanks for visiting. :) best, libby
Kathy, thanks for visiting and commenting! best, libby
Zachd! Military and health care mis-spending are breaking our country. And they are both escalating appallingly, especially the latest extortion mandate plot. And war buzz about two countries!!!
Medical inflation!!! What a perfect way of putting it.
AND SHE HAS GOT A JOBS PROGRAM!!! HURRAY!!!! Thanks for the link! Right now Stein is trying raise matching funding for the election. Especially important to her since no corporate PACS buying and bribing her vote. Chomsky says she is about Peace, People and Planet. Kinda catchy! best, libby
Medical inflation!!! What a perfect way of putting it.
AND SHE HAS GOT A JOBS PROGRAM!!! HURRAY!!!! Thanks for the link! Right now Stein is trying raise matching funding for the election. Especially important to her since no corporate PACS buying and bribing her vote. Chomsky says she is about Peace, People and Planet. Kinda catchy! best, libby
Hey Jeff! Amen to this:
"In the US smart and greedy people have figured out how arrange to get a lot of the health care money to go into their own pockets. They've also manipulated lots of low-information voters into seeing things their way."
Jeff, the movement to a third party will begin with a stream and not a roaring river. But it needs those people willing to join in the stream to make the river happen! Streams and rivers to nourish and refresh, not the swamp of status quo corruption. I don't believe Obama is about "incrementalism". I think he is talking the populism talk and not even very much or convincingly and walking the corporate walk.
thanks for coming by!!! best, libby
myriad, I disagree. If Obama was the Obama of the election when he had 80 million people covering his back and assuming he was covering theirs, things would and could be a lot different imho! best, libby
"In the US smart and greedy people have figured out how arrange to get a lot of the health care money to go into their own pockets. They've also manipulated lots of low-information voters into seeing things their way."
Jeff, the movement to a third party will begin with a stream and not a roaring river. But it needs those people willing to join in the stream to make the river happen! Streams and rivers to nourish and refresh, not the swamp of status quo corruption. I don't believe Obama is about "incrementalism". I think he is talking the populism talk and not even very much or convincingly and walking the corporate walk.
thanks for coming by!!! best, libby
myriad, I disagree. If Obama was the Obama of the election when he had 80 million people covering his back and assuming he was covering theirs, things would and could be a lot different imho! best, libby
Thanks for the work your doing.
You etc., make commonsense.
The world seems extra nutty.
`
I don't comment on some stuff.
It's not that I don't care. I do.
These are important concerns.
`
T think I heard her speak in DC.
Bill McGibben spoke last year.
A group met at Laffayette Park.
Rabbi Michael Lerner was there.
Rabbi etc., does 'Tikkun Magazine.
Rabbi Michael Lerner writes this:
`
. . .
"to heal, repair, and transform the world"
. . .
It's good to know we are not alone at this.
Many folk forget why they were ever born.
We sure flub up our life if we rob others.
If you ever see the lobby gang you upchuck.
WE best remember to eat our leafy green.
We do what we can. Fools plunder. Greed.
Maybe greedy return as a hyena/jackal dog.
You etc., make commonsense.
The world seems extra nutty.
`
I don't comment on some stuff.
It's not that I don't care. I do.
These are important concerns.
`
T think I heard her speak in DC.
Bill McGibben spoke last year.
A group met at Laffayette Park.
Rabbi Michael Lerner was there.
Rabbi etc., does 'Tikkun Magazine.
Rabbi Michael Lerner writes this:
`
. . .
"to heal, repair, and transform the world"
. . .
It's good to know we are not alone at this.
Many folk forget why they were ever born.
We sure flub up our life if we rob others.
If you ever see the lobby gang you upchuck.
WE best remember to eat our leafy green.
We do what we can. Fools plunder. Greed.
Maybe greedy return as a hyena/jackal dog.
ART, YES, YES, YES!!!! Thanks for your comment once again! It resonates. lobby gang makes me upchuck, too. best, libby
jmac, I am so sorry!!! I meant to delete and replace my last comment and I inadvertently deleted yours, too. That is hyper sensitive that delete power. You were sharing that you were the 37th to register as a Green in 1990 out of 100,000 in Calif.!!! BRAVO!!!! Wish I had joined then!!! 37th!!! :) EXCELLENT!
I remember approaching the race with Gore vs. Nader as a safe vote for me to go for Nader since I lived in blue NY, but with Obama vs. Stein I feel differently. I have woken up to the heart of darkness of the Obama and Dem regime. One big corporate party, with rotating villains. Listening to Obama get indignant about Republican anti-humanitarianism, and re-seducing for the election makes me reach for the vomit bucket (speaking of upchucking above with Art) one more time. best, libby
(again, so sorry for accidentally deleting. Geeeezzzz.)
Was trying to post some quotes on Mexico upgrading their health care policy to put us to shame one more time!
This on the state of health care now in Mexico:
Jay Bookman excerpts:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30967.htm
“… we’re getting close to reaching universal coverage of health care — full, free health care coverage for all people up to 18 years of age, including cancer coverage. Of the 112 million Mexicans, 106 million will have efficient, effective universal health care coverage. So I would say that I would hope that one of the greatest economies in the world, such as the United States, could follow our example in achieving this, because it was a great thing.”– Felipe Calderon, president of Mexico, in a press conference with President Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper Monday.
"April 03, 2012 "AJC" -- Canada, to the north, provides its people with universal health care. Mexico, to the south, now provides it as well. But here in “one of the greatest economies in the world,” as Calderon puts it, we can’t seem to manage it, allegedly because we can’t afford it.
"Because as you know, there are so many things more important than helping your citizens live long, healthy and productive lives.
"Julio Frenk, dean of the Harvard School of Public Health and Mexico’s minister of health from 2000 to 2006, explains what motivated Mexico to commit toward an eventual goal of universal coverage beginning in 2003:
“Studies carried out by several academic institutions and think tanks revealed that every year more than four million Mexican households were falling victims of catastrophic expenditures due to health care payments. The reason: half of the population lacked health insurance. These households were being forced to use their lifetime savings, sell their most treasured belongings, or borrow heavily to meet their health needs.
"This analysis brought to light an unacceptable paradox: We know that health care is one of the most effective ways of fighting poverty, yet medical care can itself become an impoverishing factor for families when a country does not have the social mechanisms to protect the population against financial shocks derived from the universally human reality of falling sick.”
"Medical care in Mexico is on average some 70 percent cheaper than here in the United States, so medical tourism is a growing industry. And while the standard of care in many Mexican hospitals and clinics is undoubtedly below that of the United States, that is changing.
"In fact, Calderon has been lobbying Obama to change U.S. law to allow certified high-quality Mexican hospitals to be reimbursed for providing care to American patients on Medicare. You know, just to be neighborly and help out a neighbor in need."
jmac, I am so sorry!!! I meant to delete and replace my last comment and I inadvertently deleted yours, too. That is hyper sensitive that delete power. You were sharing that you were the 37th to register as a Green in 1990 out of 100,000 in Calif.!!! BRAVO!!!! Wish I had joined then!!! 37th!!! :) EXCELLENT!
I remember approaching the race with Gore vs. Nader as a safe vote for me to go for Nader since I lived in blue NY, but with Obama vs. Stein I feel differently. I have woken up to the heart of darkness of the Obama and Dem regime. One big corporate party, with rotating villains. Listening to Obama get indignant about Republican anti-humanitarianism, and re-seducing for the election makes me reach for the vomit bucket (speaking of upchucking above with Art) one more time. best, libby
(again, so sorry for accidentally deleting. Geeeezzzz.)
Was trying to post some quotes on Mexico upgrading their health care policy to put us to shame one more time!
This on the state of health care now in Mexico:
Jay Bookman excerpts:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30967.htm
“… we’re getting close to reaching universal coverage of health care — full, free health care coverage for all people up to 18 years of age, including cancer coverage. Of the 112 million Mexicans, 106 million will have efficient, effective universal health care coverage. So I would say that I would hope that one of the greatest economies in the world, such as the United States, could follow our example in achieving this, because it was a great thing.”– Felipe Calderon, president of Mexico, in a press conference with President Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper Monday.
"April 03, 2012 "AJC" -- Canada, to the north, provides its people with universal health care. Mexico, to the south, now provides it as well. But here in “one of the greatest economies in the world,” as Calderon puts it, we can’t seem to manage it, allegedly because we can’t afford it.
"Because as you know, there are so many things more important than helping your citizens live long, healthy and productive lives.
"Julio Frenk, dean of the Harvard School of Public Health and Mexico’s minister of health from 2000 to 2006, explains what motivated Mexico to commit toward an eventual goal of universal coverage beginning in 2003:
“Studies carried out by several academic institutions and think tanks revealed that every year more than four million Mexican households were falling victims of catastrophic expenditures due to health care payments. The reason: half of the population lacked health insurance. These households were being forced to use their lifetime savings, sell their most treasured belongings, or borrow heavily to meet their health needs.
"This analysis brought to light an unacceptable paradox: We know that health care is one of the most effective ways of fighting poverty, yet medical care can itself become an impoverishing factor for families when a country does not have the social mechanisms to protect the population against financial shocks derived from the universally human reality of falling sick.”
"Medical care in Mexico is on average some 70 percent cheaper than here in the United States, so medical tourism is a growing industry. And while the standard of care in many Mexican hospitals and clinics is undoubtedly below that of the United States, that is changing.
"In fact, Calderon has been lobbying Obama to change U.S. law to allow certified high-quality Mexican hospitals to be reimbursed for providing care to American patients on Medicare. You know, just to be neighborly and help out a neighbor in need."
Well I doubt she has a snowballs chance and siphoning votes from Obama will only assure a win for the right. But, considering the powers that be, what makes you think this virtually unknown woman can control Congress or SCOTUS or manage the rest of this world mess?
No comments:
Post a Comment