A Nation in Decline?

[tocco05]

A Nation in Decline?
By Bill O'Reilly


Just in time for Independence Day, the bible of the American left, The New York Times, continues to opine that the United States is a "nation in decline." Hoping to see a Democrat in the White House, the newspaper has been hammering home that theme on its editorial pages.
The Times bases its claims on two primary situations: The negative view of America abroad and income inequality at home. So, let's take a look at the supposed "decline."
Overseas, the world is largely a mess. Africa remains a chaotic cauldron of corruption, China continues its authoritarian rule, and there's no letup in the India-Pakistan hatred. Would you like to live in those countries?
Russia continues to lead in the league of corruption, Mexico is fighting a brutal war against its own drug traffickers, and South America remains mired in poverty. Call me crazy, but I don't see many immigrants pounding on those doors.
Of course, many liberal Americans blame the USA for the world's misfortunes and side with those who, for whatever reason, verbally downgrade the United States. However, considering the sad state of a world that will not even unite against a nuclear weapons-seeking Iran, our so-called "decline" is a terrible misreading of the global picture.
Against all odds, U.S. forces have almost single-handedly defeated Islamic fascism in Iraq, one of the most complicated battlefields in history. In Afghanistan, U.S. and NATO troops continue to hammer the vicious Taliban on every front. The only reason those fascists are operating is that Pakistan protects them. If the Pakistanis would ally themselves with NATO, the Taliban would be wiped out.
Back home, the Bush administration has succeeded in making it ultra-difficult for terrorists to kill us. The FBI and other federal agencies have been effectively reorganized, and the nation is much safer for it. That doesn't sound like a decline to me.
But what really has The New York Times furious is the gap between rich and poor Americans; a gulf that is now being exacerbated by escalating gas prices that rob workers of take-home pay. Never mind that it is largely liberal policies that have shut down much U.S. oil exploration and made America even more dependent on foreign oil; the left believes capitalism must now be "tempered" by the federal government. That means income redistribution through higher taxation on wealthy Americans.
In this month's Harvard Magazine, the liberal position is clearly stated: "Americans, on average, have a higher tolerance for income inequality than their European counterparts. American attitudes focus on equality of opportunity, while Europeans tend to see fairness in equal outcomes."
"Equal outcomes," of course, means socialistic entitlements, something many European countries have embraced and a philosophy The New York Times deeply endorses.
So, it comes down to this: The committed left believes America has been too aggressive in fighting the war on terror and not aggressive enough when it comes to government-mandated economic and social engineering. Thus, in their view, the country is in decline.
But that's opinion, not fact. There's no doubt that times are tough right now, but from this vantage point, the American people are still as creative and hardworking as they've always been. Our pinheaded politicians have mucked it up recently, but we are certainly not a nation in decline. With another Independence Day upon us, we remain strong and the world's greatest hope.

 

[Dave007inVegas]

:thumbsup:

 

[ScottL]

"A Nation in Decline?
By Bill O'Reilly"

Am I recalling this corectly? Isn't O'Reilly the guy on FOX that Doc Mercer always raves about being SPOT ON? And that if it weren't for HANNITY and CAVUTO O'Reilly would be his favorite journalist?

 

[jeffry22]

At work there's a tv that switched every 7 min between cnn and fox, when cnn is on anybody watching would conclude that the world is falling apart , when fox comes on all of a sudden things dont seem so bad. I think the "truth" is somewhere in the middle.

 

[JoeContrarian]

"The world" does not hate America. The world's LEFT hates America. But since 95% of the world's media is left, there is this skewed perception that the "world hates us" -- which conveniently plays right into the talking points from our own loonie left back home.

In fact, it's the opposite -- the world does not hate us, the majority love us and welcome us. They love us for our values, they love us for our freedom, they love us because we're the only nation that consistently opposes evil. Unlike idiots like Al Franken, the world understands how fucked they would be without the United States of America. They see what's going in Darfur -- and every other shit hole we don't have an influence in. Facts are facts and results are results.

As for the entitlement mentality on the left, well, this is true, just like Bill O'Reilly says.

Liberal politics are based on "compassion" and "feelings" -- nothing more. Conservative politics are based on standards -- high moral, economic and social standards.

Conservatives do not believe any society should lower itself to the lowest common denominator, just so the most miserable among us can feel good about their sad, pathetic lives. If 90% of Americans are thriving -- relative to totalitarian hotbeds like Iran, Sudan, Syria, Darfur, "Palestine" etc. -- there's no need for an overhaul our economy and values.

I don't want "change"...I love America how she is. But liberals don't love America. They love a caricature of America. Or, as Ann Coulter loves to say, "liberals love America, the way OJ loved Nicole."

 

[gtc08]

europe, canada are above the us. china will be in 5 years if things continue the way they are. republicans say everything is fuzzy and peachy because we have a republican president that they try to cover for. in essence, putting the blinders on the likes of Joe C to make him only see one way. he buys it, because he doesn't know of any other way.

 

[paftraft]

If Obama gets in the fate of the USA will tend downward.

 

[gtc08]

If Obama gets in the fate of the USA will tend downward.

your a clinton backer so i dont know what your doing here still.

 

[JoeContrarian]

Canada are ahead of us, gtc?

:laughingb

***********************************************************

Doctor shortage cripples Canada's "free" health care

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/healthcare/docshortage2.html

WHITBY, ONTARIO -- Esther Pacione needs a family doctor. At age 56 she is afflicted with severe ataxia, a neurological condition that causes her acute pain, choking and loss of consciousness.

The walls of her home are scuffed from the times she has fallen and hit her head.

Her regular doctor suffered a stroke a year ago, and all the local doctors she has contacted say they cannot take new patients, so now Pacione, a retired bookkeeper, goes to a walk-in clinic whenever she has an emergency. At the clinic, she waits hours and sees a different doctor each time, and no one there is familiar with her medical history and what drugs she has been taking.

"If you are not bleeding all over the place, you are put on the back burner," Pacione said. "Unless, of course, you have money or know somebody."

The publicly financed health-insurance system remains a prideful jewel for most Canadians, who see it as an expression of communal caring for the less fortunate and a striking contrast to a U.S. health-care system that leaves 45 million people uninsured. But polls indicate that public confidence in Canada's system is eroding, although politicians remain reticent to urge increasing privatization of services.

During the recent closely fought election campaign, Prime Minister Paul Martin promised to fix Canada's health-care system "for a generation," focusing on trimming waiting times for diagnostic tests, cancer treatment and elective surgery such as hip replacements. But medical professionals and local officials say a major reason it may not be easy to address the problem of slow access to treatment is because doctors who do preliminary diagnostic work, refer patients to specialists and monitor the care of chronically ill people are less and less available -- especially in small towns and rural areas.

A 2002 report from the Canadian Senate said that the actual number of family doctors had decreased only slightly in recent years but that the demands of an aging population were growing. Meanwhile, several recent studies have shown that family doctors are working shorter hours.

Young doctors are more likely to seek the most lucrative work in cities or go to the United States rather than start more modest practices in small towns because of growing debts when they leave medical school. That has set off an increasing competition among small towns to attract doctors.

Pacione's predicament is surprisingly common, even in her upper-middle-class community on the north shore of Lake Ontario.

Whitby has only 63 family doctors to care for its 110,000 people (medical officials and local officials say at least 16 more are needed), and many residents drive 45 minutes or more to Toronto for basic medical care. Whitby is one of 136 communities, encompassing a total of a million people in Ontario, Canada's most populous province, that are not adequately served by family doctors, according to the Ontario Medical Association. That is up from 100 communities in 2000.

Whitby officials estimate that 22,000 people there have no doctor at all, forcing them to go to emergency rooms at overcrowded local hospitals to wait in line for as long as four hours simply to refill a prescription, get a doctor's note for an employer or care for their flu symptoms.

"It's like winning the lottery to get in and see the doctor," Mayor Marcel Brunelle said. "This is a very wealthy country. What happened to bring the situation to this point?"

Shortage worsening

The government statistical agency estimates that more than 3.6 million Canadians, representing nearly 15 percent of the population, do not have a family doctor. That remains better than in the United States, where an estimated 20 percent do not have a regular doctor.

But there are signs that the doctor shortage in Canada is worsening. The Canadian Medical Association estimates that the country requires 2,500 medical graduates annually but is producing 2,200 a year.

Brunelle formed a task force in June to recruit young doctors by introducing them to real-estate agents and giving them advice on how to start new practices, and the town government is considering building a municipal clinic. The town of Peterborough is offering large monetary incentives and a grab bag of perks, including memberships at the YMCA and cable television. Other municipalities offer moving expenses and the inside track on real estate next to golf courses.

But experts say those efforts may not be enough. "If the current trends continue, we can anticipate a crisis," warned Joseph D'Cruz, a University of Toronto business school professor who specializes in health care. "People will actually find it impossible to get general medical services in their towns."

The doctor shortage is hurting the economies of small towns seeking to attract businesses. But it is also taxing the energies of the doctors who do live in those towns, as well as the resources of local hospitals -- and patients often complain that their treatment is rushed.

Administrators at the nearby Lakeridge Health Oshawa, an acute-care hospital, estimated that more than 30 percent of the patients who went to the emergency room would go to a family doctor instead if they could do so quickly. It is a burden on the hospital's staff, space and financial resources.

One patient who went to the emergency room recently, Crystal Bentley, 22, complained of cysts behind her ears. She said she would prefer to see her family doctor but would have to wait in his office for hours. She said she went to the hospital because the emergency room was faster.

"Seeing a doctor and not having to pay is phenomenal," she said, "but here I am taking up emergency time from doctors. I really do wish I could see my family doctor instead of coming here and talking to a total stranger."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only people who advocate socialism are people who haven't lived in socialism.

Good luck when you move to Canada, gtc -- just try and avoid getting sick.

 

[gtc08]

this is from 2004. and its on an angelfire site. i had an angelfire site when i was 16 years old.

you want facts, i'll give you facts. canadiens live on average 80.2 years compared to 77.8 for us citizens, infant mortality is 5.3 compared to 6.8 for us.

 

[DeathEatsaCracker]

this is from 2004. and its on an angelfire site. i had an angelfire site when i was 16 years old.

you want facts, i'll give you facts. canadiens live on average 80.2 years compared to 77.8 for us citizens, infant mortality is 5.3 compared to 6.8 for us.

You may not know this, but facts only confuse Joe.

 

[barman]

this is from 2004. and its on an angelfire site. i had an angelfire site when i was 16 years old.

Excellent observation GTC. MARK L (aka "JoeC") actually promotes the notion that Canadien health care is "free", when in fact it is paid for just as it is in America. Only it's paid for by the populace as a whole via sensible taxation rather than in disproportionate shares as is the case in our country.

 

[JoeContrarian]

this is from 2004. and its on an angelfire site. i had an angelfire site when i was 16 years old.

Huh? It was an article from a Minnesota newspaper.

Oh well, this one is much better anyway....

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=20368

<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="3" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td>Canadians Wait Longer for Medical Care

Written By: Devon Herrick
Published In: Health Care News
Publication Date: January 1, 2007
Publisher: The Heartland Institute
</td> <td>
</td></tr></tbody></table> <hr> In recent years, patients treated by the Canadian health care system have increasingly experienced lengthy waits to see providers.

According a new study on medical care in Canada, released in October 2006 by the Fraser Institute, "waiting times are the legacy of a medical system offering low expectations cloaked in lofty rhetoric."

Since the mid-1980s, the Vancouver-based think tank has produced an annual report on how long patients are required to wait for medical care in Canada. As a result of the group's research, treatment waiting times are now part of the public policy debate on the quality of the Canadian health care system.

Waiting ...
In its 16th annual installment, the report titled "Waiting Your Turn" tracks how waiting times vary across Canadian provinces depending on the type of treatment needed. The report also documents waiting times for referral to specialists and the subsequent amount of time spent waiting for actual treatment from the specialist.

"Despite all of the promises made by Canada's provincial and federal governments, and despite the fact that Canadians are spending more on health care than ever before, the total wait time in Canada continues to hover near the 18-week mark as it has since 2003," coauthor Nadeen Esmail said in an interview for this article. "Equally troubling is the reality that the total wait time in 2006 is 91 percent longer than it was in 1993."

These findings should give pause to proponents of universal coverage, who often cite Canada as an example of a country where health care costs less than care in the United States and everyone has free health care at the point of service.

"While many proclaim Canada's Medicare program to be one of the best in the world, or suggest it should be the model for reform in the United States," Esmail said, "the reality is that health spending in Canada outpaces that in most other developed nations that, like Canada, guarantee access to care regardless of ability to pay, and yet access to health care in this country lags that available in most of these other nations."

... and Waiting
In 2006, the average amount of time spent waiting to receive treatment after referral by a general practitioner averaged 17.8 weeks across Canada. At 14.9 weeks, Ontario had the shortest waits. Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick had average waits of 25.8 weeks, 28.5 weeks, and 31.9 weeks, respectively.

Patients referred to a neurosurgeon waited an average of 21 weeks just to see a specialist. Getting treatment required an additional 10.7 weeks.
Patients waited an average of 16.2 weeks to see an orthopedic surgeon, and another 24.2 weeks for treatment to be performed after the initial visit.
The number of people routinely waiting for services is staggering, according to the report. In 2003, the most recent year for which data were available from Statistics Canada, approximately 1.1 million people had trouble accessing care on a timely basis.

About 201,000 had problems obtaining non-emergency services. An additional 607,000 had problems getting in to see a specialist, and about 301,000 patients experienced problems obtaining diagnostic procedures.
"So much for the myth of government-run health care being compassionate and fair," said David Gratzer, a Canadian doctor and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. "Canadians wait and wait and wait."

Rationing
In Canada, waiting lists are considered a way of rationing medical care and holding down health care spending. Because health care in Canada is largely free at the point of service, demand is likely to exceed supply.

In a typical market system, the price would adjust to the point where the quantity of services provided is equal to the amount patients are willing to buy. But in a system devoid of a market mechanism, scarce resources are rationed through means other than price.

"The long waits for needed care in Canada show the danger of abandoning markets in favor of central planning," explained Sean Parnell, vice president of external relations at The Heartland Institute, an Illinois-based think tank. "Just as there were long lines for food and other basic necessities in the old Soviet Union because planners couldn't accurately match supply with demand, the politicians and bureaucrats who run health care in Canada can't provide enough health care to meet the citizens' needs."
Gratzer agreed.

"It's like the old Soviet system," Gratzer said. "Everything is free, but nothing is readily available. Except that we're not talking about lining up for toilet paper in Russia in 1976, but queuing for surgery in Canada in 2006."

Economists generally agree such "non-price" rationing of resources is less efficient than a system that uses prices. One reason is that productivity is lost when people are unable to work due to treatment delays. Also, the risk of death while waiting is higher for serious conditions such as cardiac care.

Waiting lists are consequences of the way the Canadian health care system is structured, not a lack of money, critics say.

"The fact that this is the 16th annual report on wait lists for needed care should be enough to prove that the problem isn't a temporary one that can be fixed with just a little more money, as defenders of Canada's government-run system have claimed for years," Parnell said.
"Long waits and widespread denial of needed care are a permanent and necessary part of government-run systems," Parnell noted.

Spending
According to the study, Canadian provinces with higher spending per capita did not experience shorter wait times than provinces that spent less.
In fact, increased spending was associated with longer waits, unless the increased spending was targeted to physicians and pharmaceuticals.
"The current health care model simply does not deliver to Canadians the access to care they should expect for the amount of money their governments are spending," Esmail said.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

you want facts, i'll give you facts. canadiens live on average 80.2 years compared to 77.8 for us citizens, infant mortality is 5.3 compared to 6.8 for us.

THIS is how you measure socialism being a better system? Based on meaningless and misleading statistics without knowing the factors behind them? Is this how you manage your household budget as well? hno:

In Canada, health care may be "free"...but so is eating out of a trashcan.

 

[gtc08]

Excellent observation GTC. MARK L (aka "JoeC") actually promotes the notion that Canadien health care is "free", when in fact it is paid for just as it is in America. Only it's paid for by the populace as a whole via sensible taxation rather than in disproportionate shares as is the case in our country.

bingo.

In Canada, the various levels of government pay for about 70% of Canadians' health care costs

i'll gladly pay higher taxes if everyone can benefit from it, instead of just myself. these people like joe c only care about themselves, which is why you see the complete lack of parenting in this nation, a sky high high school dropout rate which gives this country a future of lazy, unproductive workers who have no desire to achieve anything. that's why i'm leaving. mindsets like joe c where they only focus on themselves. they think everything is peachy and will refuse to acknowledge problems with there kids and essentially become failed parents.

joe c chooses to wear the blinders, he ain't a horse, he can remove them. he simply chooses not to. nothing the country or anyone can do about it except continue the downward spiral as more and more people keep the blinders on, being completely oblivious to anything going on around them.

 

[gtc08]

Huh? It was an article from a Minnesota newspaper.

Oh well, this one is much better anyway....

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=20368

<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="3" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td>Canadians Wait Longer for Medical Care

Written By: Devon Herrick
Published In: Health Care News
Publication Date: January 1, 2007
Publisher: The Heartland Institute
</td> <td>
</td></tr></tbody></table> <hr> In recent years, patients treated by the Canadian health care system have increasingly experienced lengthy waits to see providers.

According a new study on medical care in Canada, released in October 2006 by the Fraser Institute, "waiting times are the legacy of a medical system offering low expectations cloaked in lofty rhetoric."

Since the mid-1980s, the Vancouver-based think tank has produced an annual report on how long patients are required to wait for medical care in Canada. As a result of the group's research, treatment waiting times are now part of the public policy debate on the quality of the Canadian health care system.

Waiting ...
In its 16th annual installment, the report titled "Waiting Your Turn" tracks how waiting times vary across Canadian provinces depending on the type of treatment needed. The report also documents waiting times for referral to specialists and the subsequent amount of time spent waiting for actual treatment from the specialist.

"Despite all of the promises made by Canada's provincial and federal governments, and despite the fact that Canadians are spending more on health care than ever before, the total wait time in Canada continues to hover near the 18-week mark as it has since 2003," coauthor Nadeen Esmail said in an interview for this article. "Equally troubling is the reality that the total wait time in 2006 is 91 percent longer than it was in 1993."

These findings should give pause to proponents of universal coverage, who often cite Canada as an example of a country where health care costs less than care in the United States and everyone has free health care at the point of service.

"While many proclaim Canada's Medicare program to be one of the best in the world, or suggest it should be the model for reform in the United States," Esmail said, "the reality is that health spending in Canada outpaces that in most other developed nations that, like Canada, guarantee access to care regardless of ability to pay, and yet access to health care in this country lags that available in most of these other nations."

... and Waiting
In 2006, the average amount of time spent waiting to receive treatment after referral by a general practitioner averaged 17.8 weeks across Canada. At 14.9 weeks, Ontario had the shortest waits. Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick had average waits of 25.8 weeks, 28.5 weeks, and 31.9 weeks, respectively.

Patients referred to a neurosurgeon waited an average of 21 weeks just to see a specialist. Getting treatment required an additional 10.7 weeks.
Patients waited an average of 16.2 weeks to see an orthopedic surgeon, and another 24.2 weeks for treatment to be performed after the initial visit.
The number of people routinely waiting for services is staggering, according to the report. In 2003, the most recent year for which data were available from Statistics Canada, approximately 1.1 million people had trouble accessing care on a timely basis.

About 201,000 had problems obtaining non-emergency services. An additional 607,000 had problems getting in to see a specialist, and about 301,000 patients experienced problems obtaining diagnostic procedures.
"So much for the myth of government-run health care being compassionate and fair," said David Gratzer, a Canadian doctor and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. "Canadians wait and wait and wait."

Rationing
In Canada, waiting lists are considered a way of rationing medical care and holding down health care spending. Because health care in Canada is largely free at the point of service, demand is likely to exceed supply.

In a typical market system, the price would adjust to the point where the quantity of services provided is equal to the amount patients are willing to buy. But in a system devoid of a market mechanism, scarce resources are rationed through means other than price.

"The long waits for needed care in Canada show the danger of abandoning markets in favor of central planning," explained Sean Parnell, vice president of external relations at The Heartland Institute, an Illinois-based think tank. "Just as there were long lines for food and other basic necessities in the old Soviet Union because planners couldn't accurately match supply with demand, the politicians and bureaucrats who run health care in Canada can't provide enough health care to meet the citizens' needs."
Gratzer agreed.

"It's like the old Soviet system," Gratzer said. "Everything is free, but nothing is readily available. Except that we're not talking about lining up for toilet paper in Russia in 1976, but queuing for surgery in Canada in 2006."

Economists generally agree such "non-price" rationing of resources is less efficient than a system that uses prices. One reason is that productivity is lost when people are unable to work due to treatment delays. Also, the risk of death while waiting is higher for serious conditions such as cardiac care.

Waiting lists are consequences of the way the Canadian health care system is structured, not a lack of money, critics say.

"The fact that this is the 16th annual report on wait lists for needed care should be enough to prove that the problem isn't a temporary one that can be fixed with just a little more money, as defenders of Canada's government-run system have claimed for years," Parnell said.
"Long waits and widespread denial of needed care are a permanent and necessary part of government-run systems," Parnell noted.

Spending
According to the study, Canadian provinces with higher spending per capita did not experience shorter wait times than provinces that spent less.
In fact, increased spending was associated with longer waits, unless the increased spending was targeted to physicians and pharmaceuticals.
"The current health care model simply does not deliver to Canadians the access to care they should expect for the amount of money their governments are spending," Esmail said.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



THIS is how you measure socialism being a better system? Based on meaningless and misleading statistics without knowing the factors behind them? Is this how you manage your household budget as well? hno:

In Canada, health care may be "free"...but so is eating out of a trashcan.

you can spin it anytime you want. you say wait times are high, but they recently passed a wait laws legislation to fix that problem, should be set by 2010. the system isnt perfect, no system is. system is far superior to the US though. i can give you many reasons why socially democratic countries like canada are better than the US.

 

[JoeContrarian]

I'm not lining up in any fucking 'queu' for my health care. If I can afford to have immediate treatment, I have the full rights to do so.

In Canada, the government has stripped away those rights in the name of "social justice."

Like Bill O'Reilly talks about in his article....liberals believe in equality; conservatives believe in liberty.

You can't have both.

 

[JoeContrarian]

you can spin it anytime you want. you say wait times are high, but they recently passed a wait laws legislation to fix that problem, should be set by 2010.

2010! :lolBIG: (You really think they'll "fix" it, do ya?)

All I can think about is the guy who's just been diagnosed with a brain tumor and can't wait that long. I guess he's screwed under your "compassionate" system, huh gtc?

Or he could always opt out of socialism and come to the US for his treatment instead. :toast:

What would you do?

system is far superior to the US though. i can give you many reasons why socially democratic countries like canada are better than the US.

blah, blah, blah...all these vagaries, flowery platitudes and meaningless stats with no specific facts to back them up. Meanwhile, the people continue to get screwed and denied care.

I guess liberals just enjoy making themselves feel good by repeating the same talking points over and over and over and over...

 

[Willie99]

this is from 2004. and its on an angelfire site. i had an angelfire site when i was 16 years old.

you want facts, i'll give you facts. canadiens live on average 80.2 years compared to 77.8 for us citizens, infant mortality is 5.3 compared to 6.8 for us.

does Canada's health care system have the same burden as the USA's.

that's like saying some team in the Cape Cod League with a 18-2 record is better than the 55-45 Boston Red Sox.

Minor leagues my friend, and there is a wait time, unlike our virtual health care on demand. Furthermore, they have a much larger % of "non-treatable" patients, just let them die already.

Where do the world's richest people go to for medical treatment again?
Hint, it ain't Canada, they come to the USA

--------------------------------------------------------------------
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]This is an idea that might help solve one of the problems with government funded medical care, which in Canada is known as Medicare.[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]Usually, people don't have any complaints with medical treatment itself (once they get it). The big problem that causes so much complaining is the waiting lists for treatment. You hear stories of people waiting weeks or months for important procedures like heart or cancer surgery.[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]It seems that the wealthiest people in particular are irked by the concept of waiting lists. They're appalled that they can't just wave some bills under a doctor's nose and automatically get bumped to the front of the queue. In many cases, these rich patients go to the US for medical care, which I'm sure costs them in the tens of thousands of dollars. [/FONT]

 

[Willie99]

and here's the best part, you can leave this country any time you want. If I hated my life, I'd be gone too. I would just hate to hate my life, that must really suck.

:lol:

 

[eek.]

You may not know this, but facts only confuse Joe.

hehe

Actually facts don't really confuse our Joe, its just that they generate unnecessary complications.
:grandmais