You seem to also ignore the degrees to which regulations, legal suits, and Federal involvement add to the costs of healthcare. It is you that doesn't seem to understand 50 sovereign states and 312 million people vs. Canadian population and govt. You further seem to ignore wait times and the fact that Canadian people are coming to this country for healthcare. You believe in the concept and ignore the reality. What you BELIEVE with regard to other countries healthcare is irrelevant and based upon what you have been led to believe.
I don't ignore wait times but even if I did I would still know that the Canadian system is regarded as more highly rated than your system. The WHO's facts don't lie. Some very wealthy Canadians who have hundreds of thousands or millions to spend do go the the US for immediate treatments that only large amounts of money can buy. But in a close analysis, indications are that for the ordinary millions of people, the wait times aren't significantly different in our two countries.
Because our Founders in their wisdom created a Constitution and believed in a small central govt. If an issue doesn't appear in the Constitution it becomes a state issue, i.e. marriage, healthcare. You don't seem to grasp the concept and know very little about U.S. history.
I know enough to say that if an issue isn't mentioned in your constitution it doesn't automatically become a state issue. And I know enough to say that the ACA has been found to be within your constitution by the SCOTUS. You've deliberately lied to me based on that fact.
Your opinion noted. Your comments mean nothing like everyone else's as results matter not comments. Results show we have a 17 trillion dollar debt and cannot afford what is a state and local issue stemming from personal responsibilities.
Agreed that results matter. I'm really saying that the teabagger mentality and it's actions have proven to be counter-productive to achieveing results. My comments therefore mean as much as anyone else's on this forum. I think that if you are interested at all in reducing the 17 trillion then you would be concentrating on cooperation rather than haranguing on more obstructionism. I think most of the problem is that Bush2 was such a dismal failure that set your country on a course to destruction and the obstructionism by the GOP/baggers has prevented any kind of recovery.
Yes, showing that a federal bureaucracy administered by Federal bureaucrats for 312 million people is ripe with waste, fraud, and abuse. A little research will show exactly the extent of the waste, fraud, and abuse in our social programs.
Agreed. Your government is fraudulent, wasteful, abusive, and also dysfunctional due to politicians being bribed by lobbyists. That was happening long before Obama. And there is no will to stop it either. It's a system in which a teabagger mentality can exist but couldn't exist without it. Take away the lobbying and the baggers couldn't survive. Likewise, take away Obama!
Your opinion noted and may be coming from a belief in the nanny state and the govt. being that parent that many have never had. You call dissent waste and I call it the rights of the people. I don't believe it is the Federal Government's role to take on personal responsibility issues. Also the next time you decide to defame the name of the T.E.A. Party I suggest you do some research and find out what it really means to be a member
I would suggest that not having a parent is just as frequent in the US as it is in Canada. Hardly a reason for what you term as a nanny state and I term as a socially responsible style of capitalism. What works and what doesn't work can be the only real consieeration. Canada's works. It appears that everyone of every different pol persuasion in the US agrees that yours is not working.
I know very well the stated reasons for the bagger party but I also know that the racist element is more prevalent and visible than the stated reason of paying less taxes. I also know that paying less taxes is a recipe for disaster. I'm not sure of exactly who you even think is paying too much tax? It's obvious the very wealthy aren't paying enough. FActs on income inequality in your country don't lie.
The current crisis we face is due to too much govt. and too much dependence on that govt.
While I consider that we don't have too much government and too much dependence on government. Excuses for 'why' it works aside, it appears that you are suggesting that your government is the 'nanny' state government and our isn't! A refreshing twist out of an American's mouth!
Canada has made some great changes and moved towards a conservative government but Canada is being defended by the United States and thus doesn't have the defense budget we have so comparing the U.S. to Canada is like comparing apples to oranges. The current crisis we face is due to too much govt. and too much dependence on that govt. Our Founders are turning over in their graves. Too many Americans and people like you have no concept of American History
I've been preached to by Americans so many times now that I couldn't help but not know what the issues are and what the history appears to dictate for the future. I hear you complaining about your defence budget at the same time as I hear you complaining about too much spending. Don't you think that's rather inconsistent. Regardless, all I'm concerned about as a Canadian is success in government. Our mild swings back and forth between more conservatism and less is working fine. In fact, I consider it essential to good government.
I did change in due course growing up a Democrat and liberal. that changed over time when I realized that the Democratic Party was all talk and little action other than to build a power base. The recipe you are promoting I reject because it is one of big govt., massive dependence, and equal outcome vs. equal opportunity.
By your own admission your government is too big. Maybe you should be looking at other countries with more liberal governments to find something that works. It's your government that has proven to be dysfunctional and that happened before Obama's time.
If the teabagger party would separate itself from the racist hate that is so recognizable then perhaps it could be taken seriously as representing that which it attempts to stand for. Until it does then it stands are representing racist hate more than any other quality or lack of. And of course it can never succeed as long as it is aligned with racism. Rout out the haters and the racists and only then will it be taken seriously by the mainstream perhaps? Only bear in mind that after the racism and hate is banished from your midst then it will again revert to being a 'libertarian' effort and that will again be on the fringe with no more than 15% support.
