Obama seeks $634B over 10 years for health care

[Hayabusa Rider]

Yeah, it's ideological, sort of like wiretaps without warrants. Hey if you have nothing to worry about don't worry about it. You were in the military and it always amuses me when people who have no idea what it's like tell you as if they had a shred of credibility. You are doing just the same. So you are telling us health care providers we make too much and Obama needs to cut out wages. For the Public Good of course.

It looks like the cries of "socialists" are justified if your thinking is the same as Obamas.

Do you know that people other countries probably get paid less than you? Let's improve our system, cut your wages and let you figure out how to pay your bills.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Obama hasn't told them how they must prescribe or how much they are entitled to be paid yet.

He hasn't told you that either, but you're freaking out? His proposal puts money towards research into finding out what treatments are most effective. Sounds like a pretty good idea to me.

No, he hasn't but we who are in health care have been dealing with the government for a long time. How long have you been practicing again?

No, we won't be told how much we can earn. We can take what the government offers or refuse it. You can have thousands more doctors. Just lower the standards. Most of the best won't have to take your scraps of what you deign to offer. My wife is in education, and is a health care professions advisor. You can have some of the people who want desperately to become MDs provide your care. That they aren't qualified shouldn't matter. We have high standards for ourselves. Perhaps it's time to lower those for the public good.

What you seemingly embrace is a "take it or leave it" system for millions of people who YOU depend on. If we were to go on strike for a week (and I'm not proposing it because it is against most of our ethics, screw everything else) we could bring this nation to it's knees. Good luck on replacing us.

No we aren't government employees and you have no right to inflict yourselves in this way. We work our damned asses off so that ungrateful asses can get on the internet and complain how overpaid we are.

Yeah, it's ideological just like everything else. It matters.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Yeah, it's ideological, sort of like wiretaps without warrants. Hey if you have nothing to worry about don't worry about it. You were in the military and it always amuses me when people who have no idea what it's like tell you as if they had a shred of credibility. You are doing just the same. So you are telling us health care providers we make too much and Obama needs to cut out wages. For the Public Good of course.

It looks like the cries of "socialists" are justified if your thinking is the same as Obamas.

Do you know that people other countries probably get paid less than you? Let's improve our system, cut your wages and let you figure out how to pay your bills.

When people talk about the military, they frequently use information that is simply wrong, and I tell them that. My ideas on socialized medicine come from the studies and observations done on other countries with similar economic and social backgrounds as ours, where it is achieving similar results for WAY less money. If I'm wrong go ahead and show me how, but it's not like I just pulled my opinion out of my ass.

I'm not saying he needs to cut your wages because you make too much money, what I am saying is that we seem to have a bit of an artificial shortage of doctors, which drives up wages beyond the fair market value of their work. I am against artificial shortages. Other countries who train more than we do (meaning they are letting in some of the not-so-best-and-brightest) are still achieving similar outcomes. If their system is so much cheaper, and equally (if not more) effective, shouldn't we look to them for how it's done?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Yeah, it's ideological, sort of like wiretaps without warrants. Hey if you have nothing to worry about don't worry about it. You were in the military and it always amuses me when people who have no idea what it's like tell you as if they had a shred of credibility. You are doing just the same. So you are telling us health care providers we make too much and Obama needs to cut out wages. For the Public Good of course.

It looks like the cries of "socialists" are justified if your thinking is the same as Obamas.

Do you know that people other countries probably get paid less than you? Let's improve our system, cut your wages and let you figure out how to pay your bills.

When people talk about the military, they frequently use information that is simply wrong, and I tell them that. My ideas on socialized medicine come from the studies and observations done on other countries with similar economic and social backgrounds as ours, where it is achieving similar results for WAY less money. If I'm wrong go ahead and show me how, but it's not like I just pulled my opinion out of my ass.

I'm not saying he needs to cut your wages because you make too much money, what I am saying is that we seem to have a bit of an artificial shortage of doctors, which drives up wages beyond the fair market value of their work. I am against artificial shortages. Other countries who train more than we do (meaning they are letting in some of the not-so-best-and-brightest) are still achieving similar outcomes. If their system is so much cheaper, and equally (if not more) effective, shouldn't we look to them for how it's done?

Well hell yes we should be looking at how things can be done better. That's why I say that this whole affair should be run by something like the surgeon generals office. They can create a commission and Congress votes up or down on it.

So what really happened? A career politician will decide on what's to happen. There's an old saying that those who like law and sausage should see neither being made. Add medicine to that list soon.

Let me give you a concrete example of a government health care cluster. Take HIPPA. Among other things it was to lower the cost of healthcare by putting standards in place. What it really did was increase them drastically because the cost of regulatory compliance (dotting all the i's) is staggering. You may have read how pharmacies were audited and punished in order to make money for the state in a prior post. No one wants the regulators who are EXPECTED to make money for the government off of fines to come in and hit them for some form error at a few thousand dollars a pop.

So what happened as a result? A pediatric practice let a nurse go. Nurses aren't limited by the AMA BTW. Nurses don't just do bed pan duty these days. They are true health care professionals and command a salary proportional to their responsibilities, education and damned hard work. Why did they let one of these valuable people go? Because the government decided to enact cost control and enforcing regulatory compliance. They used that money to hire two people who only job is to go over claim submissions for both private and government regulations. FYi, private insurance follows government leads. If the state or Uncle Sam hits us, they follow because govt has set the precedent. "Efficiency" is Newspeak for cutting reimbursments. For many many years health care has been getting LESS every year in fees. Why it costs so much more isn't because we're costing more, we're getting less back. On average filling a medcare part D prescription COSTS the pharmacy $2.

That doesn't affect the standard of care. That doesn't mean the cost of equipment goes down that we have to use, or make MRI machines cheaper. It just means we're supposed to suck it up. That's what "making health care more efficient" comes down to. Making bricks without straws. The cost of bureaucratic control always offsets the theoretical cost savings. That's how it is. Now I'm supposed to believe that suddenly DC has gotten new religion? What they will do is pander to the voting base de jur and then boast about how great they are rather than let health care providers who despite some seem to think want the best possible patient outcome.

Seriously, do you think the same bureaucratic machine that runs the military and Iraq is suddenly knows more than the entire collective knowledge and experience of hundreds of thousands of people dedicated you best interests? That they don't want to suddenly worry how to pay the bills while being told it's their patriotic duty to FOAD because not cutting us doesn't sit well with UHC supporters?

OK, prove me wrong. When Obama doesn't select a politician to tell health care how to run I'll retract my rant. I wonder if people promoting this agenda will make excuses if the picks someone without a years worth of practical experience in any medical field to run the thing.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So UHC will cut health care workers wages eh? So the republicans were right to cry "socialist" after all. I have a daughter who has the potential to be a very good physician. If your desire bears fruit I'll urge her to choose another career like many others. We don't want to be your lackies. What will you do when the best decide not to play the serf? You'll lower the standards and ten mediocre will be the norm.

I'm sorry you don't want to be 'our lackies'. Unfortunately physician salaries in the US are inflated compared to the rest of the world, and it would appear to me that a significant contributor to this is the artificial scarcity created by a lack of medical schools. The best aren't playing the serf by any leap of the imagination and you know it. While you're free to advise your daughter in any way you want, if she doesn't want to be a doctor there are thousands and thousands of people right now who do, but cannot get into medical school.

Regardless, countries with significantly lower physician salaries (and thus lower quality doctors?) achieve similar health outcomes to the US for a fraction of the cost. This is something we should look to as a guide, as it has been a far superior method of caring for a population.

Everyone here knows just as well as I do that if we were shown a privatized system that showed similar outcomes to ours while spending HALF what we currently are per capita, people would be slobbering all over it. This opposition to UHC is largely ideological in nature, and it flies in the face of a half century of evidence to the contrary.

Thats a great idea, pay US citizens what other people in the world make. Factory workers can make 10 cents an hour, IT guys can make 20K, everyone in the US is overpaid compared to the rest of the world.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So UHC will cut health care workers wages eh? So the republicans were right to cry "socialist" after all. I have a daughter who has the potential to be a very good physician. If your desire bears fruit I'll urge her to choose another career like many others. We don't want to be your lackies. What will you do when the best decide not to play the serf? You'll lower the standards and ten mediocre will be the norm.

I'm sorry you don't want to be 'our lackies'. Unfortunately physician salaries in the US are inflated compared to the rest of the world, and it would appear to me that a significant contributor to this is the artificial scarcity created by a lack of medical schools. The best aren't playing the serf by any leap of the imagination and you know it. While you're free to advise your daughter in any way you want, if she doesn't want to be a doctor there are thousands and thousands of people right now who do, but cannot get into medical school.

Regardless, countries with significantly lower physician salaries (and thus lower quality doctors?) achieve similar health outcomes to the US for a fraction of the cost. This is something we should look to as a guide, as it has been a far superior method of caring for a population.

Everyone here knows just as well as I do that if we were shown a privatized system that showed similar outcomes to ours while spending HALF what we currently are per capita, people would be slobbering all over it. This opposition to UHC is largely ideological in nature, and it flies in the face of a half century of evidence to the contrary.

Thats a great idea, pay US citizens what other people in the world make. Factory workers can make 10 cents an hour, IT guys can make 20K, everyone in the US is overpaid compared to the rest of the world.

Or you could be a sane person and look at doctor salaries as compared to the median salary of that country when looking at differences between states.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
So UHC will cut health care workers wages eh? So the republicans were right to cry "socialist" after all. I have a daughter who has the potential to be a very good physician. If your desire bears fruit I'll urge her to choose another career like many others. We don't want to be your lackies. What will you do when the best decide not to play the serf? You'll lower the standards and ten mediocre will be the norm.

I'm sorry you don't want to be 'our lackies'. Unfortunately physician salaries in the US are inflated compared to the rest of the world, and it would appear to me that a significant contributor to this is the artificial scarcity created by a lack of medical schools. The best aren't playing the serf by any leap of the imagination and you know it. While you're free to advise your daughter in any way you want, if she doesn't want to be a doctor there are thousands and thousands of people right now who do, but cannot get into medical school.

Regardless, countries with significantly lower physician salaries (and thus lower quality doctors?) achieve similar health outcomes to the US for a fraction of the cost. This is something we should look to as a guide, as it has been a far superior method of caring for a population.

Everyone here knows just as well as I do that if we were shown a privatized system that showed similar outcomes to ours while spending HALF what we currently are per capita, people would be slobbering all over it. This opposition to UHC is largely ideological in nature, and it flies in the face of a half century of evidence to the contrary.

Thats a great idea, pay US citizens what other people in the world make. Factory workers can make 10 cents an hour, IT guys can make 20K, everyone in the US is overpaid compared to the rest of the world.

Or you could be a sane person and look at doctor salaries as compared to the median salary of that country when looking at differences between states.

And government decides what we get paid as a result. Tell me, since the other fellow wouldn't answer. What do you do?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

-cut-

I get where you're coming from, I really do, and I understand your anecdotes. I think they miss the point though. The question really isn't if our system and the regulatory environment it lives in sucks or not, as it definitely does. The question is would a different system work better? Just pointing out some bad regulations now and then extrapolating that to indict future, unnamed regulation doesn't seem very fair to me. (in that case, why have any regulation at all?)

Can you explain to me how other countries with socialized systems can have ones that so massively outperform ours for a fraction of the cost? Why are we subject to this bureaucratic difficulty, but they are not? Also, it seems that other countries do in fact have lower standards for doctors as compared to ours, but I have not seen any evidence that this has led to a measurable decrease in the quality of care. What do you think about this?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Or you could be a sane person and look at doctor salaries as compared to the median salary of that country when looking at differences between states.

And government decides what we get paid as a result. Tell me, since the other fellow wouldn't answer. What do you do?

Yet again my point was that due to an artificial shortage of doctors, ours are paid proportionately more than in other countries. My argument is against this artificial shortage, and the solution to that does not in any way have to come from government controls.

EDIT: Oh, sorry I didn't answer what you do. In my humble opinion you massively increase visa support for foreign born doctors in the short term while subsidizing the creation of a whole big pile of additional medical schools here in the US.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Or you could be a sane person and look at doctor salaries as compared to the median salary of that country when looking at differences between states.

And government decides what we get paid as a result. Tell me, since the other fellow wouldn't answer. What do you do?

Yet again my point was that due to an artificial shortage of doctors, ours are paid proportionately more than in other countries. My argument is against this artificial shortage, and the solution to that does not in any way have to come from government controls.

I'd allow other people to participate in health care without question. My concern is how to do it. Right now the best people get to practice. No doubt more could. The problem becomes one of lowering standards. Only a few who wish to do so are qualified. That's what spooks me.

Now UHC in itself isn't a philosophical problem to me, however I have a justified distrust of the government. Again, why aren't health care professionals (and people who are potential regulators) being tapped for this. Yes, I know that the protocols haven't been established, but it was pretty clear that Daschle was going to be in charge. Why not someone from the OSG? They have real physicians and have experience with bureaucracy. Because the politicians MUST be in control It's not about best outcome, it's about political power. If you don't understand that, then our discussion has come to an end. It's not as if they would unilaterally institute a policy anyway. Congress would hack away at it, looking to attach it's special interests. There is the real problem. Overseas the health care system evolved with private businesses and governments. Here it isn't that way. It would effectively be a new creation with people salivating to get their hands and make some claim for themselves. If they can't get something relatively simple like Iraq, or running the economy, or even simpler HIPPA right, what makes you think they are competent to run health care? Based on experience in the military, private government service and health care, these people scare the crap out of me. Theory is one thing. Practical lessons teach me to be very concerned.

 

[Carmen813]

I still don't understand why so many things dealing with health are controlled strictly by the medical community. For example, mental health issues consume a large amount of a GPs time. Yet GPs have no specialized training in mental health, and are often prescribing medications (antidepressents/antianxiety) without a thorough investigation. Why can't we give psychologists (who earn a PhD) the training and authority to prescribe these types of medications. It would increase patient care and access to drugs treating mental illness, especially in areas where it may be difficult to find a doctor. The military and some states already do this and it works well.

Likewise, many medical visits do not require the attention of a fully trained doctor. Why can't Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners, who have a great deal of medical authority, be trusted to handle these cases on their own?

I'm not saying doctors should get paid less. But when people bring up arguments about how demand would far outstrip supply for healthcare, I don't think they are thinking outside the box of the traditional medical model.

 

[alphatarget1]

Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

UHC can work, and does work every day in dozens of countries around the world.

Are you trying to say that the greatest country in the history of the world can't do what these people do? Absolute silliness.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Or you could be a sane person and look at doctor salaries as compared to the median salary of that country when looking at differences between states.

And government decides what we get paid as a result. Tell me, since the other fellow wouldn't answer. What do you do?

Yet again my point was that due to an artificial shortage of doctors, ours are paid proportionately more than in other countries. My argument is against this artificial shortage, and the solution to that does not in any way have to come from government controls.

EDIT: Oh, sorry I didn't answer what you do. In my humble opinion you massively increase visa support for foreign born doctors in the short term while subsidizing the creation of a whole big pile of additional medical schools here in the US.

Half our department is foreign doctors, they come from England, Germany, and Australia mostly because they see how shitty health care is in their own countries.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

UHC can work, and does work every day in dozens of countries around the world.

Are you trying to say that the greatest country in the history of the world can't do what these people do? Absolute silliness.

The post works every day too, but for some reason millions of people send packages via UPS or FedEx instead of the post office... why is that?

Or, even better, we have a public education system that is available to everyone in this country. But for some reason people like Obama would rather send their kids to private schools than the government run school.

Now imagine UHC run by similar people. We will go from a system that is really good for anyone who has insurance and decent for people who do not to a system that sucks for everyone, except the rich who will figure out a way to keep getting the best care possible.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

UHC can work, and does work every day in dozens of countries around the world.

Are you trying to say that the greatest country in the history of the world can't do what these people do? Absolute silliness.

You're saying that what works for other countries would definitely work here because all countries have identical societal/political situations?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

UHC can work, and does work every day in dozens of countries around the world.

Are you trying to say that the greatest country in the history of the world can't do what these people do? Absolute silliness.

The debate at this point should not be if UHC will work or not, it should be if this is a good time to start implementing it.

Right now with the economic crisis, we are like a family who cannot put food on the table, but thinking about borrowing money to buy a Mercedes Benz. UHC is not a national priority or absolute necessity. We have done well without it for decades, why the need for it right now?

I remember Obama said something like for every dollar he is gonna spend, he will find a dollar to cut. With all the budget deficits, where is he gonna find budget to cut to afford this UHC?

If Obama has the courage, he should step up and said UHC is a good idea, and yes it's his campaign promise, but this is not the time to implement it, America cannot afford it and there are better places to invest the little money we have. There will be a time when economy recovers and the government have a balanced budget and that's when we should implement UHC.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

UHC can work, and does work every day in dozens of countries around the world.

Are you trying to say that the greatest country in the history of the world can't do what these people do? Absolute silliness.

You're saying that what works for other countries would definitely work here because all countries have identical societal/political situations?

Yes, we are so different from the English, French, Japanese, Australians, Canadians, Germans, Italians, Belgians, etc. we couldn't possibly use a system they use that is one quarter the cost of ours. The reason? Because Americans are SO FUCKING STUPID THEY BELIEVE OUR RIGHT WINGERS. That's the difference.

-Robert

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Thanks for your insight Hayabusa Rider. I have some relatives who are in healthcare as well and they have told me that UHC wouldn't work.

More of the same (from politicians).

UHC can work, and does work every day in dozens of countries around the world.

Are you trying to say that the greatest country in the history of the world can't do what these people do? Absolute silliness.

The debate at this point should not be if UHC will work or not, it should be if this is a good time to start implementing it.

Right now with the economic crisis, we are like a family who cannot put food on the table, but thinking about borrowing money to buy a Mercedes Benz. UHC is not a national priority or absolute necessity. We have done well without it for decades, why the need for it right now?

I remember Obama said something like for every dollar he is gonna spend, he will find a dollar to cut. With all the budget deficits, where is he gonna find budget to cut to afford this UHC?

If Obama has the courage, he should step up and said UHC is a good idea, and yes it's his campaign promise, but this is not the time to implement it, America cannot afford it and there are better places to invest the little money we have. There will be a time when economy recovers and the government have a balanced budget and that's when we should implement UHC.

I think some would argue that the fiscally responsible thing to do is to reform healthcare now. I'm not saying a full implementation of UHC tomorrow is the best idea, but starting to take steps that will reduce costs in the long term is a worthwhile objective.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: chess9

Yes, we are so different from the English, French, Japanese, Australians, Canadians, Germans, Italians, Belgians, etc. we couldn't possibly use a system they use that is one quarter the cost of ours. The reason? Because Americans are SO FUCKING STUPID THEY BELIEVE OUR RIGHT WINGERS. That's the difference.

-Robert

Germany IIRC does not have UHC. I believe you are required to buy insurance however.

Aside from Australia/Canada/NZ, most of the countries you have mentioned have very different mindsets. I sincerely doubt that implementing a UHC system in the United States will dramatically lower the costs of healthcare, that people will just abuse the system moreso than they do now, and it won't be pretty.

A culture of entitlement will kill America, as if it isn't bad already.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1

Originally posted by: chess9

Yes, we are so different from the English, French, Japanese, Australians, Canadians, Germans, Italians, Belgians, etc. we couldn't possibly use a system they use that is one quarter the cost of ours. The reason? Because Americans are SO FUCKING STUPID THEY BELIEVE OUR RIGHT WINGERS. That's the difference.

-Robert

Germany IIRC does not have UHC. I believe you are required to buy insurance however.

Aside from Australia/Canada/NZ, most of the countries you have mentioned have very different mindsets. I sincerely doubt that implementing a UHC system in the United States will dramatically lower the costs of healthcare, that people will just abuse the system moreso than they do now, and it won't be pretty.

A culture of entitlement will kill America, as if it isn't bad already.

""We see people having equitable access to affordable and appropriate health care regardless of geography, income, age, gender," said an Ontario Ministry of Health annual report. And, "In Germany, we operate under the social solidarity principle," explained Johann Fann, a top executive with the Bavarian AOK. "The rich pay for the poor, the young for the old, the well for the sick." Although both Canada and Germany are market-based economies, they have taken health care largely out of the marketplace. Unlike England, they do not have socialized medicine. The government controls overall spending, but hospitals and doctors operate independently of the government."

http://findarticles.com/p/arti.../is_n3_v26/ai_14882974

People abuse all healthcare systems, including our current one. Some people are just whiners. Republicans and Democrats. Regardless, in an NHS style system, you have to take off work, then go and sit for an hour to be waited on. Getting care is not instantaneous, but you'd better be sick because you can be made REDUNDANT in England in a heartbeat in today's economy. You don't want to lose your job because you are a whiner. In fact, they've found most people avoid going to the doctor in England because it is a spot of bother. Disincentives to abuse are easy to find.

Health care should be guaranteed to all human beings. It's a basic right.

-Robert

 

[Pneumothorax]

Originally posted by: chess9


Health care should be guaranteed to all human beings. It's a basic right.

-Robert

As Hayabusa has pointed out, Food, Shelter, transportation can all be regarded as a basic right and should be free too. I mean why should I pay for it, or better yet why should I even work for it when the Government is going to provide for me free of charge.

BTW Most groups/HMO's will pay $140K starting here in California for primary care, and this is with malpractice insurance already included.
Here's some interesting tidbits about UK I found...

Looks like you guys are having problems recruiting Junior Docs(AKA Residents here in the US)

Junior Doc shortage


ER shortage = Why should I work longer hours at the hospital and get paid less?

If your health care system makes med school free (Our med schools now are costing >$200K BEFORE school loan interest, which BTW is NON-Deductible for almost all Docs) in the UK why is there shortages?
Maybe because, you have to work your butt off and get paid less?
You're just going to get a lot more foreign docs such as Indians who get paid less in their own country coming in to fill in the shortages.

In a sense, what no one seems to respond to Hayabusa's argument on other professions.

Why are we still listening to UAW? We should just lower their wages to China's level as they're more efficient.

Answer: Most Dems are in the Union's pockets and would never force them to make concessions, just like the Unionized gov workers here in CA. BTW it's indirectly illegal for Docs to unionize here in the US

Same thing can be said for carpenters here in the us and farmers, they both provide "A Basic Right" Food and Shelter, so their wages should be lowered to more "Efficient" levels.

As above, if Chinese/Mexican workers are willing to do above jobs for less, why don't we bring them in on H1B visas?

 

[winnar111]

What else is in these bills?

1. $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa
2. $2 million ?for the promotion of astronomy? in Hawaii - because nothing says new jobs for average Americans like investing in astronomy
3. $332,000 for the design and construction of a school sidewalk in Franklin, Texas - not enough $ for schools in the stimulus?
4. $2.1 million for the Center for Grape Genetics in New York - quick peel me a grape.
5. $650,000 for beaver management in North Carolina and Mississippi
6. $1 million for mormon cricket control in Utah - is that the species of cricket or a game played by the brits?
7. $300,000 for the Montana World Trade Center - enough said
8. $200,000 ?tattoo removal violence outreach program to could help gang members or others shed visible signs of their past? REALLY?
9. $475,000 to build a parking garage in Provo City, Utah
10. $1.7M ?for a honey bee factory? in Weslaco, TX

 

[chess9]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03...Kristof.html?th&emc=th

Note how lack of health care affects our competitiveness. The cost to corporations is very high.

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: winnar111
What else is in these bills?

1. $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa
2. $2 million ?for the promotion of astronomy? in Hawaii - because nothing says new jobs for average Americans like investing in astronomy
3. $332,000 for the design and construction of a school sidewalk in Franklin, Texas - not enough $ for schools in the stimulus?
4. $2.1 million for the Center for Grape Genetics in New York - quick peel me a grape.
5. $650,000 for beaver management in North Carolina and Mississippi
6. $1 million for mormon cricket control in Utah - is that the species of cricket or a game played by the brits?
7. $300,000 for the Montana World Trade Center - enough said
8. $200,000 ?tattoo removal violence outreach program to could help gang members or others shed visible signs of their past? REALLY?
9. $475,000 to build a parking garage in Provo City, Utah
10. $1.7M ?for a honey bee factory? in Weslaco, TX

Those Mormon Crickets are watching porn, which accounts for the heavy porn usage in Utah. And how many of those Mormons are Democrats? And all that money for Texas projects? Probably a bunch of Texas Dems again.

But, regardless of these small pork projects, those are all fairly small sums. If that's the damage, I'm not too worried.

Generally, we need a mechanism to keep this crap out of spending bills, but this is the stuff that gets these guys re-elected, so fat chance cutting it.

-Robert