And Furthermore...

Continuing with the previous post, I submit that if they want to talk about people from other countries coming here for health care they can't get at home (at least not as soon as they want), then we can talk about Americans going abroad for health care they can't afford at home.

There are hospitals in Bangkok, Bangalore, etc. set up to cater to Americans who can fly over there and have their bypasses, knee replacements, or whatever, for a small fraction of what it costs over here, even taking air fare into account. Do they get inferior care because it is out of our country? Not at all. It is world-class in terms of both equipment and the training of physicians and staff. So, as one article (Fast Company dot com, April, 2008) says, it's a question of credit card vs. bankruptcy.

Now, if attracting people from abroad to receive health care is a measure, then ours isn't the "best in the world," is it?

So tell me again: What makes our system of health care the "best in the world"?

'Best in the World"?

So they keep harping on how the United States has the "Best health care system in the world." So where is the data to back up that assertion?

The only thing I have heard is some anecdotal evidence of some people from other countries coming here to have medical procedures done that they can't get at home, at least not in a timely manner. So is that it? Those few, usually wealthy, people?

What about the rest of us? What about the almost fifty million United States citizens who don't have insurance, thus dragging down the system for the rest of us. Those who don't have insurance tend to put treatment off until they have to go to the emergency room. Thus you have up to a five-hour wait, while you're bleeding, in pain, etc. You don't have those waits in the civilized countries that have real health care. So the five-hour ER waits make this the "best in the world"?

What about access to doctors? The civilized countries that have complete health care for all have more doctors per thousand people. I guess if they don't have to worry about maximizing their earning power via gouging insurance companies for fees, then they don't have to gravitate to expensive specialties. So, maybe that's why they call ours the "best in the world:" more expensive specialists. So they might have a few more weeks to wait for specialized treatment in England or Canada. Is that worse than the extra five hour ER waits here?

They don't have those long waits for treatment, surgery, etc. in France, Germany, Italy, Japan. They have a different system, but they still spend half the money on health care that we do, and they live longer.

That brings up the next question: Is it death rates? Our death rates are higher at every age group. That means we have shorter life spans than the other civilized countries that have universal health care. Does dying earlier make ours the "best in the world"?

They spend half what we spend on health care, yet they have coverage for everyone, and longer life spans. Ours is the most expensive health care in the world. Does that inefficiency make ours the "best in the world"?

It's the most inefficient in the world, that we can say with confidence. When will we catch up?

I want to be healthier.

Let's see what we can learn from the rest of the world.

Enough Already!

Ten years ago Princess Diana died, and from the hoo-raw surrounding the event, you would think it was Mother Teresa that had died.

Oh, that's right, Mother Teresa DID die at the same time. But you would never know it from the media coverage going on at the time. It was All Diana All the Time.

I hoped never to experience another media circus like that again, but now that Michael Jackson is dead, the media circus is Princess Di times ten!

For three solid weeks I have had Michael Jackson crammed down my throat. It has gotten to the point that if I never hear the name again, it will be just fine. NPR, and event the BBC were in on it, for crying out loud.

Now, I don't hate Mr. Jackson. I rather enjoy some of his music, especially from the Jackson 5ive years. Even when one of his "grown-up" songs comes on the radio, I don't change the channel.

But this hagiography is ridiculous. The man had a troubled life, and lived it on the front pages of the tabloids. I didn't try to seek out any information about him, but you couldn't avoid it.

Now, you can't avoid mention of his death and his funeral. Last I heard they hadn't even buried the poor body yet, because they were so busy milking this thing for all it's worth.

Can I get a break from this without cutting myself off from radio and TV altogether?

Happy Fourth!

Two hundred thirty-three years ago today, a bunch of liberals (the DFHs of their day) took action against the oppresive government that would have preferred they sit down and let the Administration (the Crown) do what was best for keeping the colonies safe.

The Limbaughs, Hannitys, and O'Reillys of the day were arguing for loyalty--the divine right of kings.

Let us remember their spirit and keep the current Administration's feet to the fire. No more letting them get away with Bush policies of torture, spying on Americans, and bailing out fat cats.

Speak up, and keep the Revolution alive.

On Men with Power

Others are pointing out the hypocrisy of those who scream loudest about "family values" being the ones caught with their pants down in the presence of paramours, prostitutes, etc. I won't pile on about that, although it is something to contemplate.

I will note that research shows that those who scream loudest about other people's sexuality are those who are least secure in their own. It seems the same thing happens with sexual fidelity and "sanctity of marriage." The louder they shout about it, the more we need to watch their personal behavior. In fact, it would surprise me not at all to see Fred Phelps caught up in the same kind of scandal that exposed Ted Haggard.

But one thing I notice is that This behavior seems to be a function of too much power. It happened with King David in the Bible (II Samuel 11 & 12). When a man gets into a position of power, no one is there to stop him when he wants something. Personal ambition drives a man to achieve a position of power, then he is surrounded by sycophants bowing to his every whim. He forgets that moral standards apply to him, because no one will deny him anything. So if he sees something he wants, he takes it, and no one tells him no.

David saw a beautiful naked woman, so he wanted a roll in the hay with her. All he had to do was send for her and he got what he wanted. But he also got something he didn't want when she turned up pregnant. Instead of taking responsibility, he did what powerful men do, and deflected the blame. He had her husband killed in battle so he could marry her himself. Again, no one was there to second guess him.

I don't know the full story of Franklin Roosevelt's straying, nor that of Dwight Eisenhour. I understand that things happen in marriages, and to soldiers in the theater of war, so I won't sit in judgment. But John Kennedy seems to fit the pattern. The press conspired with him to cover up his multiple affairs, but no one was there to remind him of the vows of fidelity he took in his marriage. From what I read of Lyndon Johnson, the same thing seems to apply to him, too.

Bill Clinton fit the same pattern, as did Gov. Spitzer, Rep. Vitter, Sen. Edwards, and now Gov. Sanford. Being surrounded by people who want to please him gives a man a distorted view of how important he really is, and distorts his perspective on the world. He comes to believe he is the only one who matters, and his desires take precedence over everything.

Now King David had the prophet Nathan to call him to account on his actions. He told of a rich man who stole his poor neighbor's pet lamb, then pointed his finger at David and said, "Thou art the man!" David then realized his guilt and repented.

Powerful men nowadays don't have any Nathans. They don't have anyone to call them on their sins, except for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. But that was more political than moral, which is why it failed.

Instead of "Thou art the man," all they hear is, "You da man!"

So Gov. Sanford went off to take care of his personal desires at the expense of the state--not just financially, either. He left no one in charge, so if there had been an emergency there was no one in charge who could call out the National Guard or declare a state of emergency. He left no one any information as to where he could be reached, so the state was essentially leaderless for those four days.

So now that this has all hit the fan AGAIN, how are we to get someone put into place to say, "Mr. President, Governor, Senator, Congressman, Mr. Mayor, or whoever you are, thou art the man. Remember that BEFORE you indulge yourself"?

Grover Norquist's Paradise

Grover Norquist is famous for saying we need to shrink government to the point it can be drowned in a bathtub--and then drown it in a bathtub.

Guess what? There is a country on Earth where the government has figuratively drowned in a bathtub. There has not been an effective government there since 1991. This country should be a Mecca for all those of Norquist's ilk, and all the Ayn Rand devotees, and the John Locke Foundation, and everyone else who agrees with St. Ronald Reagan that "Government isn't the solution. Government is the problem."

This anti-government paradise levies no taxes, offers no welfare to its citizens, does nothing these people want government not to do.

This paradise is called Somalia.

I propose raising the money to send all those opposed to any government action a one-way ticket to Somalia. They can then see for themselves the logical extreme of their anti-government philosophy. They can see the Italian Mafia dumping France's nuclear waste off the Somali coast. They can see the pirates running free and terrorizing the passing commercial shipping traffic. They can see people dying for lack of opportunity to live a decent life.

Let's send them all to Somalia and be done with them.

Highs and Lows

Every life has highs and lows. I realize that. But I think that my life has had higher highs and lower lows than most lives.

Consider: On the high side, I have lived in a 2800-sq. ft. house and had a higher-than-average income. Yet I have not been up to the McMansion level. I haven't earned $100,000 a year. Ever.

On the low side, I have been unemployed and not eligible for unemployment insurance, but I haven't been on the street. I was lucky enough to cash in a couple of pensions to tide me over and enough credit cards to live on.

While on the low side, I have had to file Chapter 13 Bankruptcy, but not Chapter 7.

On the high side: I have enjoyed better health than most people my age. Yet I haven't been able to be really good at anything athletic, and I don't know if I'll make my goal of living to be well beyond 100.

On the low side, I have had cancer, but it was thyroid cancer, easily removed with surgery, and I have never had to experience chemotherapy or radiation, yet.

On the high side, I have the happiest marriage of anyone I know about.

On the low side, this is my third marriage. Yet others have been married more times than I have.

On the high side, I have children who know how to make money. Yet they aren't as affluent as some others I know of.

On the low side, my daughter is the highest earner at her sheltered workshop. Yet she isn't as severely handicapped by her mental retardation and autism as the children of some of my friends. On the other hands I have friends who have children that are not as severely involved as my daughter is.

I have had three careers, the second of which was the one where I earned the most money. I have been on television and radio, but only locally. I am a published writer, but not yet a published author. I have had pictures published, but I haven't been able to make a living as a photographer.

In other words, I have experienced better times than average, and had more misfortune than average, yet I haven't had the extreme highs of a lot of people, nor the extreme tragedies that others have.

Average people experience highs and lows in their lives, and I have been higher and lower than average, as far as I can tell.

But a lot of people have had higher highs and lower lows than I have, and I'm a lot closer to average than they are.

I wonder about the pattern here. Is it what they call karma? Or is it something else?

I'll put that on the list to inquire about when I get to Heaven.