Originally Posted by Balthazar

When Britain negotiated the loan - chief negotiator: John Maynard Keynes no less - from US bankers in 1945 to fund the launch of the NHS it was a broadly commercial loan. The last repayment was paid around 2001. So sure, it was 'other people's money' but why can't friends lend cash to each other?

If you've got the cash to repay, that's fine. The U.S. is already swimming in red ink, so we literally can't afford it.

Supported by Churchill he felt Britain was owed the money by America for standing firm, and alone, against Hitler for two long years while America sat on its hands and appeased its domestic fascists.

If not for us, you'd be speaking German. But, in typical leftist fashion, you'll complain that your aid didn't come fast enough or in the quantity that you would have preferred.

Incidentally, should you care to explain why you wish to see your poor or unfortunate neighbours, and their children, and their ageing parents, continue to suffer from untreated illness, or receive sub-standard care, I'm all ears.

I don't like watching anyone suffer; however, under a government-run program, my son would be dead. The bureaucrats would've determined, likely in utero, that he wasn't worth saving. Aside from a feeding pump, he's a very intelligent and perfectly normal kid. Sure, I've paid through the nose for his care, but he's MY son, so it's MY responsibility. Why should my neighbors have the fruits of their labor forcibly taken from them to fund his care?

Are you conniving in a 'gene-pool clearance operation' to keep capitalism healthy?

No, but I also don't want to see a system which delays or denies care hoping that the patient will die before the procedure can be performed. For regular doctor visits, the NHS may be fine, but when Canadians are very ill and time is of the essence, they come to the States.

Originally Posted by Balthazar

* Blows Tantal a big, sloppy, socialist, Yerp kiss *

*Tantal throws-up in his mouth a little, then feels an overwhelming urge to bathe.*

Originally Posted by Tantal

If you've got the cash to repay, that's fine. The U.S. is already swimming in red ink, so we literally can't afford it.

Oh don't talk rot. The US is the richest nation on earth. You've not defaulted on a single loan. You've got a tip-top international credit rating. The Chinese would LOVE to lend you the cash. It's coming out of their little post-communist ears. The economic argument's a smokescreen. This is about politics not how much money America's got hidden under the bed.

Originally Posted by Tantal

If not for us, you'd be speaking German. But, in typical leftist fashion, you'll complain that your aid didn't come fast enough or in the quantity that you would have preferred.

Ha! Britain was THAT close to doing a deal with Hitler in 1939. The British upper class (the most unpatriotic ruling class in the world) was deeply penetrated by fascism. There was a Quisling King ready and waiting in the South of France. So Hitler would have controlled the whole of Europe, and America face a war on two fronts with no European base. That's the scenario the Yankee delay almost caused, i.e. without Britain standing firm you'd now be speaking German and Japanese and possibly have a British king (again).

Originally Posted by Tantal

I don't like watching anyone suffer; however, under a government-run program, my son would be dead.

Not in Britain he wouldn't. And you wouldn't have paid a single medical bill or stuffed money into the pockets of a single insurance company bureaucrat.

Originally Posted by Tantal

The bureaucrats would've determined, likely in utero, that he wasn't worth saving. Aside from a feeding pump, he's a very intelligent and perfectly normal kid.

Good luck to you and your son. It's terrible you were placed in the position of having to pay for his treatment. It's a scandal it happened. The money should be returned to you to spend with your son now. The vile insurance companies who took it, and their filthy political enablers, should say sorry and hang their heads in shame. If I had my way they'd be jailed for demanding money with menaces - they threatened the survival and health of your son if you didn't pay up. That's the extent of the threat you were placed under. If a private citizen threatened your son's life and health you'd shoot him (and good luck to you).

Originally Posted by Tantal

Sure, I've paid through the nose for his care, but he's MY son, so it's MY responsibility. Why should my neighbors have the fruits of their labor forcibly taken from them to fund his care?

Because you're part of a community. They owe you and you owe them. It's unnatural for you to be a tiny, atomised, individualised unit. You're part of a whole. I admire American individualism, the get-up-and-go, the 'I take responsibility for my life' attitude, but those qualities should be put to work for the common good. You're leading an unnatural, de-humanised life.

Originally Posted by Tantal

No, but I also don't want to see a system which delays or denies care hoping that the patient will die before the procedure can be performed. For regular doctor visits, the NHS may be fine, but when Canadians are very ill and time is of the essence, they come to the States.

Well, the Canucks should get their act together and build a fully functional NHS, like Britain's, where there's a cradle-to-grave, free at the point of use service superior to any private hospital. The French, German and Swedish socialist health systems are even better.

Originally Posted by Tantal

*Tantal throws-up in his mouth a little, then feels an overwhelming urge to bathe.*

* Forgives Tantal. Posts him Das Kapital to read in the tub *

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

They got rid of the foreign workers and had a surge in British applicants.
The care home my mum works at is made up entirely of English workers.

Is it a private or NHS (or mixed) care home?

I can't imagine many of the indigenous population applying to be a nurse at circa £5.80/hr.

Originally Posted by Tantal

If you've got the cash to repay, that's fine. The U.S. is already swimming in red ink, so we literally can't afford it. If not for us, you'd be speaking German. But, in typical leftist fashion, you'll complain that your aid didn't come fast enough or in the quantity that you would have preferred.

I don't like watching anyone suffer; however, under a government-run program, my son would be dead. The bureaucrats would've determined, likely in utero, that he wasn't worth saving. Aside from a feeding pump, he's a very intelligent and perfectly normal kid. Sure, I've paid through the nose for his care, but he's MY son, so it's MY responsibility. Why should my neighbors have the fruits of their labor forcibly taken from them to fund his care? No, but I also don't want to see a system which delays or denies care hoping that the patient will die before the procedure can be performed. For regular doctor visits, the NHS may be fine, but when Canadians are very ill and time is of the essence, they come to the States.

Tantal, I do really have sympathy for your son's condition and applaud your efforts to do the best for him, but I do feel you have a wrong impression about the NHS. The anti NHS stories are mostly cherry picked exaggerated examples in order to discredit a good system which is an anathema to political opponents who want to introdce the private system.
.

My grandson and his wife are in a similar situation, a daughter born clinically dead and resuscitated her brain starved of oxygen after a complicated birth. She cannot see or talk and cannot communicate and only responds to touch and sound.

She was initially cared for by the NHS but is at home with by Grandson and daughter who are main 24hr carers. They now have another two normal children. They have both received total help through social services have a four bed roomed house supplied by the local authority at a nominal rent, and are receiving full financial support now and in the future.

I often wonder what would have happened had they had not lived in Britain and received all of the assistance that has given them some relief from the nightmare they found themselves in.

I wish yourself and your family all the best for the future...Exp

Originally Posted by JAMC

Is it a private or NHS (or mixed) care home?

I can't imagine many of the indigenous population applying to be a nurse at circa £5.80/hr.

It is NHS. They all get minimum wage.
However, the wage is going up soon to about 6.10


In regards to Expounder he is quite correct. The NHS is one of the greatest health services in the world.

Originally Posted by JAMC

Is it a private or NHS (or mixed) care home?

I can't imagine many of the indigenous population applying to be a nurse at circa £5.80/hr.

I dont believe any Nursing staff are paid 5.80 an hour!!!!

maybe a cleaner or a porter from an outside agency but not an NHS employee!

Originally Posted by Balthazar

The US is the richest nation on earth. You've not defaulted on a single loan. You've got a tip-top international credit rating. The Chinese would LOVE to lend you the cash.

Typical leftist economics. Just because you have a good credit rating doesn't mean that you can afford anything you want. Fiscal discipline is what maintains a good credit rating. We're already going to be facing massive tax increases to cover the money that the jug-eared Kenyan Marxist has already spent.

So Hitler would have controlled the whole of Europe, and America face a war on two fronts with no European base. That's the scenario the Yankee delay almost caused, i.e. without Britain standing firm you'd now be speaking German and Japanese and possibly have a British king (again).

Doubtful. American resistance to entering WWII was not due to fascism, but Americans' belief that Hitler was Europe's problem, not ours. They also believed that Imperial Japan was Asia's problem, not ours. They were incorrect on both accounts. I can't speak for Hitler, but Japan had no urge to conquer the U.S. The only reason for attacking Pearl Harbor was to knock out the Pacific Fleet so that they could continue having their way with southeast Asia unmolested by the U.S Navy. As for Germany launching an invasion of the U.S......wasn't going to happen. As Admiral Yamamoto warned the Emperor, "there would be rifle behind every blade of grass." Don't think Hitler didn't know it too. If you think Americans are violent barbarians now (and I know you do), just imagine our reaction to an aggressive foreign army putting boots on our soil.

And you wouldn't have paid a single medical bill............

Then who would've paid it? And why should they be forced to?

It's terrible you were placed in the position of having to pay for his treatment. It's a scandal it happened.

Why? He's MY son, he received excellent care, and the medical professionals that saved his life deserve to be compensated.

The money should be returned to you to spend with your son now.

By who? Should it be taken from the personal bank account of the doctor that saved his life? From the nurses who provided care?

The vile insurance companies who took it, and their filthy political enablers, should say sorry and hang their heads in shame.

The insurance company didn't take it, the doctors and the hospitals did. Insurance is a gamble. You're betting you'll get sick, they're betting you won't. I pay premiums for myself, yet never get sick, so the insurance company has made money on MY policy. My son OTOH has cost them plenty. So, they MADE money off of ME, yet LOST money on my son. Who's ahead? Who knows?

If I had my way they'd be jailed for demanding money with menaces - they threatened the survival and health of your son if you didn't pay up.

I pay my money to the insurance company whether I get sick or not. The insurance company paid exactly what the policy declarations said that they would pay, so I have no complaints about them. The reason that it cost me money was that I have to pay a certain amount of money out-of-pocket before the insurance kicks in. My premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket expenses were agreed upon when I purchased the policy. Once my deductibles and maximum out-of-pocket expenses were met, the insurance company held up their end of the contract, so what's to complain about?

If a private citizen threatened your son's life and health you'd shoot him (and good luck to you).

Once again, this had nothing to do with the insurance company. The money went to the physicians, hospital, and nurses who did an admirable job. None of them threatened my son's life. NATURE, in one case just a genetic fluke, and another a particularly nasty germ, is what threatened my son's life. These people saved him.

Because you're part of a community. They owe you and you owe them.

No. I don't want to be FORCED into a commune. I want to be in community with people I choose to commune with, not just anyone who happens to have been born within the same geographical borders. I commune with my family, friends, and members of my church.

It's unnatural for you to be a tiny, atomised, individualised unit.

No, it's not. Some animals are communal pack animals, some are not. I am an individual, a free man, and don't care to be forced into a herd because someone decides that it's for my own good.

I admire American individualism, the get-up-and-go, the 'I take responsibility for my life' attitude, but those qualities should be put to work for the common good. You're leading an unnatural, de-humanised life.

No. An unnatural and dehumanised life is one of forced sacrifice and coerced altruism at the barrel of the government's gun. I'm not sure how long you've been here or how many of my posts you've read. Upon cursory examination, one might think that I am a stingy, greedy, wealthy man. That is not the case. I'm just a simple policeman. Not a 'high ranking police official', but a meager beat cop living on a typical public servant's salary. Mrs. Tantal is a nurse. Not 'Clinical Director' or 'Nurse Manager', but a lowly floor nurse spending 12 hours a day on her feet.....even at 8 months pregnant. The point being that we are hardly the cultural or financial elite. We're just blue collar types that want to be left alone to raise our family in peace with minimal governmental interference and minimal confiscation of what we work so hard for.

* Forgives Tantal. Posts him Das Kapital to read in the tub *

Forgives Tantal for what? Working hard? Paying my own bills? Not being a financial burden to my fellow citizens? Providing for my own son's medical care? Didn't realise I owed anyone an apology for such things.

Originally Posted by Tantal

...The reason that it cost me money was that I have to pay a certain amount of money out-of-pocket before the insurance kicks in. My premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket expenses were agreed upon when I purchased the policy. Once my deductibles and maximum out-of-pocket expenses were met, the insurance company held up their end of the contract, so what's to complain about? Once again, this had nothing to do with the insurance company. The money went to the physicians, hospital, and nurses who did an admirable job. None of them threatened my son's life. NATURE, in one case just a genetic fluke, and another a particularly nasty germ, is what threatened my son's life. These people saved him.

Turns out I'm a big idiot (I know none of you are surprised!), all this time I didn't realise that the medical insurance companies were non-profit organisations! Here I was thinking that it was bottom line profit that motivated which claim these companies chose to pay out on !

Originally Posted by Opinionated74

Turns out I'm a big idiot (I know none of you are surprised!), all this time I didn't realise that the medical insurance companies were non-profit organisations! Here I was thinking that it was bottom line profit that motivated which claim these companies chose to pay out on !

The insurance company paid exactly what they had agreed to pay when the policy was written. No more, no less. I still don't see the problem. They met their contractual obligations.

Originally Posted by Tantal

The insurance company paid exactly what they had agreed to pay when the policy was written. No more, no less. I still don't see the problem. They met their contractual obligations.

I'm glad for you (and your son in particular) that that was the case, but you know it's not the case for everyone right? You realise that there are Americans who (in your words) have always been responsible and paid insurance, only for the company to refuse payment calling the illness pre-existing. That some doctors and other employees of insurance companies and HMOs are promoted and given bonuses based on the number of medical procedures denied? You know about the young woman with cancer who was denied medical treatment because she once had a yeast infection (as featured in the film Sicko), which the company claimed was a pre-existing condition.
Is our NHS perfect? No! However, someone who has paid NI their entire working life will not have to sell their home in order to afford chemotherapy.

Originally Posted by Expounder

.

My grandson and his wife are in a similar situation, a daughter born clinically dead and resuscitated her brain starved of oxygen after a complicated birth. She cannot see or talk and cannot communicate and only responds to touch and sound.

I hate to imagine what they go through daily. My son's missing his right kidney (had it removed), almost died of severe mastoiditis, suffers from mild Tourettes Syndrome (easily controlled through medication) and has a G-button to take in most of his calories through a feeding tube. The upside is that he's extremely intelligent and, if you saw him, you would never know that he even had any medical issues.

When I hear about someone like your grandson, it makes me thank the Lord that I've been blessed with what I have. My prayers for his continued peace and strength.

Originally Posted by Balthazar

So did the Germans. It took, on average, three Yanks to kill one German after D-Day. That was partly due to the light armour necessary in a seaborne invasion, but man for man, tank for tank the Germans were roughly twice the fighting men of the average Yankee.

This simply proves your lack of knowledge of military matters. When technology is equal, the general rule of thumb is that invaders will take 3-to-1 casualties against and entrenched enemy. It has nothing to do with inferiority or superiority of EITHER army.