Canadian middle class passes American- Thanks Reaganism...

[Listening]

Yes, Canadians live longer. In 2007, 86% of Canadians approved their health system, 34% of Americans. Also, more than 80% of all modern countries approved their universal systems...where did they get that audience lol?

That means nothing. I've discussed health care with Canadians who hate their system but would never give it up for ours. Why ? Because of all the B.S. from people like you.

The authors conclude that while it is commonly supposed that a single-payer, publicly-funded system would deliver better health out-comes and distribute health resources more fairly than a multi-payer system with a large private component, their study does not provide support for this view. They suggest that further comparisons of the U.S. and Canadian health care systems would be useful, for example to explore whether the higher expenditures in the U.S. yield benefits that are worth their cost.

Comparing the U.S. and Canadian Health Care Systems

Next.....

34% of Americans ? You are such a troll.

66% of U.S. Residents Satisfied With Health Care System, Poll Finds

66% of U.S. Residents Satisfied With Health Care System, Poll Finds - California Healthline

And it was much higher before Obamamanic and his lying group of "you can keep your plan" assholes started up the rhetoric campaign.

BTW: Go to Real Clear....Obamacare is still down 11 points mean most people don't like it.

Move to Cuba you lazy bastard.

I'm a retired teacher, dingbat lol.....ACTUALLY, all the tidal wave of Pub propaganda have scared people, and of course the hater dupes, who used to not approve it. Being "satisfied" is not the same thing, and of course that survey was done by a group fighting O-care...O-Care will rise to 80% like every other real system, and continue to cut costs, FINALLY we don't have a Pub SCAM of a system...

Yes, you've made that claim before. Heaven help those kids if what you say is real.

No republican propaganda was in place to get people to approve of the current system.

Satisfied is more important. Approved only means people think it need modification...it does not mean they think O-crapcare is the anwer...and, in fact, they ar down. Never mind that EVERY poll shows that people don't approve of O-crapcare as a majority.

The only SCAM was:

You can keep your doctor...

You can keep your plan if you like it....

This is going to save you 2500/year......

You are a liar who supports a bigger liar.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

We need higher tax rates so we can spend more on social services, programs, agencies, welfare, assistance, and handouts. For , you guessed it... The common good.

 

[francoHFW]

That means nothing. I've discussed health care with Canadians who hate their system but would never give it up for ours. Why ? Because of all the B.S. from people like you.

The authors conclude that while it is commonly supposed that a single-payer, publicly-funded system would deliver better health out-comes and distribute health resources more fairly than a multi-payer system with a large private component, their study does not provide support for this view. They suggest that further comparisons of the U.S. and Canadian health care systems would be useful, for example to explore whether the higher expenditures in the U.S. yield benefits that are worth their cost.

Comparing the U.S. and Canadian Health Care Systems

Next.....

34% of Americans ? You are such a troll.

66% of U.S. Residents Satisfied With Health Care System, Poll Finds

66% of U.S. Residents Satisfied With Health Care System, Poll Finds - California Healthline

And it was much higher before Obamamanic and his lying group of "you can keep your plan" assholes started up the rhetoric campaign.

BTW: Go to Real Clear....Obamacare is still down 11 points mean most people don't like it.

Move to Cuba you lazy bastard.

I'm a retired teacher, dingbat lol.....ACTUALLY, all the tidal wave of Pub propaganda have scared people, and of course the hater dupes, who used to not approve it. Being "satisfied" is not the same thing, and of course that survey was done by a group fighting O-care...O-Care will rise to 80% like every other real system, and continue to cut costs, FINALLY we don't have a Pub SCAM of a system...

Yes, you've made that claim before. Heaven help those kids if what you say is real.

No republican propaganda was in place to get people to approve of the current system.

Satisfied is more important. Approved only means people think it need modification...it does not mean they think O-crapcare is the anwer...and, in fact, they ar down. Never mind that EVERY poll shows that people don't approve of O-crapcare as a majority.

The only SCAM was:

You can keep your doctor...

You can keep your plan if you like it....

This is going to save you 2500/year......

You are a liar who supports a bigger liar.

O-Care didn't cause ANY of that. Insurer networks have. NOW we can start to get that stuff under control. NO more 300k bills, no more cutoffs, no more getting turned down, no more no way of finding out how expensive different hospitals are. I though the GOP was in favor of transparent competition. Guess what dupes- just moe Pubcrappe...

The 2500 thing is after a few years, dingbats. Change the channel fer chrissake.

 

[Listening]

I'm a retired teacher, dingbat lol.....ACTUALLY, all the tidal wave of Pub propaganda have scared people, and of course the hater dupes, who used to not approve it. Being "satisfied" is not the same thing, and of course that survey was done by a group fighting O-care...O-Care will rise to 80% like every other real system, and continue to cut costs, FINALLY we don't have a Pub SCAM of a system...

Yes, you've made that claim before. Heaven help those kids if what you say is real.

No republican propaganda was in place to get people to approve of the current system.

Satisfied is more important. Approved only means people think it need modification...it does not mean they think O-crapcare is the anwer...and, in fact, they ar down. Never mind that EVERY poll shows that people don't approve of O-crapcare as a majority.

The only SCAM was:

You can keep your doctor...

You can keep your plan if you like it....

This is going to save you 2500/year......

You are a liar who supports a bigger liar.

O-Care didn't cause ANY of that. Insurer networks have. NOW we can start to get that stuff under control. NO more 300k bills, no more cutoffs, no more getting turned down, no more no way of finding out how expensive different hospitals are. I though the GOP was in favor of transparent competition. Guess what dupes- just moe Pubcrappe...

The 2500 thing is after a few years, dingbats. Change the channel fer chrissake.

No asshole....when O-Care went into effect lots of people lost their coverage. It could not be renewed because of the war on what they called junk plans (which were just fine...you dickweeds would not know value if it jumped up and bit you on your ass).

People with plans didn't have to get turned down. When Reid was out running of at ass, people were losing coverage and COULD NOT AFFORD THE REPLACEMENTS (if they could get on the website at all).

Obama never qualified his 2500 savings. You were not a teacher. I refuse to accept that even the most backwoodsy places in the country don't have some standards.

 

[francoHFW]

We need higher tax rates so we can spend more on social services, programs, agencies, welfare, assistance, and handouts. For , you guessed it... The common good.

And they would only be on the bloated rich and corporations who've been getting away with murder for YEARS. Mainly since REAGANISM, which Pubs defend like, well, greedy mega rich a-holes, hater dupes.

All Americans are paying 21%of their income in ALL taxes, except the bottom fifth, who pay 17%. Corporations paid 35% ofr all taxes in the fifties, now 10%. HELLO?!? In other worlds, your a-hole lying, thieving heroes are FOS. See sig

 

[Andylusion]

Yes, you've made that claim before. Heaven help those kids if what you say is real.

No republican propaganda was in place to get people to approve of the current system.

Satisfied is more important. Approved only means people think it need modification...it does not mean they think O-crapcare is the anwer...and, in fact, they ar down. Never mind that EVERY poll shows that people don't approve of O-crapcare as a majority.

The only SCAM was:

You can keep your doctor...

You can keep your plan if you like it....

This is going to save you 2500/year......

You are a liar who supports a bigger liar.

O-Care didn't cause ANY of that. Insurer networks have. NOW we can start to get that stuff under control. NO more 300k bills, no more cutoffs, no more getting turned down, no more no way of finding out how expensive different hospitals are. I though the GOP was in favor of transparent competition. Guess what dupes- just moe Pubcrappe...

The 2500 thing is after a few years, dingbats. Change the channel fer chrissake.

No asshole....when O-Care went into effect lots of people lost their coverage. It could not be renewed because of the war on what they called junk plans (which were just fine...you dickweeds would not know value if it jumped up and bit you on your ass).

People with plans didn't have to get turned down. When Reid was out running of at ass, people were losing coverage and COULD NOT AFFORD THE REPLACEMENTS (if they could get on the website at all).

Obama never qualified his 2500 savings. You were not a teacher. I refuse to accept that even the most backwoodsy places in the country don't have some standards.

Completely accurate, but this moron has proven over and over that you could beat him over the head with reality until the end of time. He's got his head stuck so far up the butt of his own ideology, absolutely nothing will convince him of anything but the Utopia of socialism.

This is one of those 'special people', that kind that if they lived in Russia in 1989, while cannibalism was rampant because socialized food markets had mass shortages nation wide, even in the capital city, would still be there talking about how great the soviet system was "Everyone is equal! No rich people! No one has to pay for food! Monsanto isn't here! Yay Workers Paradise!"

There's a reason I have this doofus on ignore. You want to keep debating him, fine, but just understand you'll never get anywhere with him. He couldn't see the facts, if you plastered them all over his face super glue.

 

[francoHFW]

O-Care didn't cause ANY of that. Insurer networks have. NOW we can start to get that stuff under control. NO more 300k bills, no more cutoffs, no more getting turned down, no more no way of finding out how expensive different hospitals are. I though the GOP was in favor of transparent competition. Guess what dupes- just moe Pubcrappe...

The 2500 thing is after a few years, dingbats. Change the channel fer chrissake.

No asshole....when O-Care went into effect lots of people lost their coverage. It could not be renewed because of the war on what they called junk plans (which were just fine...you dickweeds would not know value if it jumped up and bit you on your ass).

People with plans didn't have to get turned down. When Reid was out running of at ass, people were losing coverage and COULD NOT AFFORD THE REPLACEMENTS (if they could get on the website at all).

Obama never qualified his 2500 savings. You were not a teacher. I refuse to accept that even the most backwoodsy places in the country don't have some standards.

Completely accurate, but this moron has proven over and over that you could beat him over the head with reality until the end of time. He's got his head stuck so far up the butt of his own ideology, absolutely nothing will convince him of anything but the Utopia of socialism.

This is one of those 'special people', that kind that if they lived in Russia in 1989, while cannibalism was rampant because socialized food markets had mass shortages nation wide, even in the capital city, would still be there talking about how great the soviet system was "Everyone is equal! No rich people! No one has to pay for food! Monsanto isn't here! Yay Workers Paradise!"

There's a reason I have this doofus on ignore. You want to keep debating him, fine, but just understand you'll never get anywhere with him. He couldn't see the facts, if you plastered them all over his face super glue.

Retired teacher, Masters in World History, fluent in 3 languages, have lived in UK, France, and Spain- never ignored any of you ignorant, brainwashed fools.

When you got really sick on those junk plans, you'd be a prime target for being cut-off or bankruptcy and losing everything. Change the channel, dingbat. You can't handle the truth.

And no I'm not a communist- just for fair, well-regulated capitalism, not the oligarchy/banana republic that unfair voodoo taxation and scam health care is getting us...FACTS? absolute idiocy is what you've got, Fox/Rush/Beckbot...

 

[Iceweasel]

There's a reason I have this doofus on ignore. You want to keep debating him, fine, but just understand you'll never get anywhere with him. He couldn't see the facts, if you plastered them all over his face super glue.

Same here, weeks ago. You can't fix stupid.

 

[Andylusion]

There's a reason I have this doofus on ignore. You want to keep debating him, fine, but just understand you'll never get anywhere with him. He couldn't see the facts, if you plastered them all over his face super glue.

Same here, weeks ago. You can't fix stupid.

Exactly. I'll debate an intelligent honest person that I disagree with, until the end of time. But 'plane stupid' is not something you can debate. You can only ignore it.

 

[alan1]

There's a reason I have this doofus on ignore. You want to keep debating him, fine, but just understand you'll never get anywhere with him. He couldn't see the facts, if you plastered them all over his face super glue.

Same here, weeks ago. You can't fix stupid.

Yes you can, it's called death.
Not that I would ever advocate for the death of another.
But once somebody dies, their stupid dies with them.

 

[francoHFW]

So no argument, just stupid insults and run away? I'm shocked lol.

 

[Meathead]

No asshole....when O-Care went into effect lots of people lost their coverage. It could not be renewed because of the war on what they called junk plans (which were just fine...you dickweeds would not know value if it jumped up and bit you on your ass).

People with plans didn't have to get turned down. When Reid was out running of at ass, people were losing coverage and COULD NOT AFFORD THE REPLACEMENTS (if they could get on the website at all).

Obama never qualified his 2500 savings. You were not a teacher. I refuse to accept that even the most backwoodsy places in the country don't have some standards.

Completely accurate, but this moron has proven over and over that you could beat him over the head with reality until the end of time. He's got his head stuck so far up the butt of his own ideology, absolutely nothing will convince him of anything but the Utopia of socialism.

This is one of those 'special people', that kind that if they lived in Russia in 1989, while cannibalism was rampant because socialized food markets had mass shortages nation wide, even in the capital city, would still be there talking about how great the soviet system was "Everyone is equal! No rich people! No one has to pay for food! Monsanto isn't here! Yay Workers Paradise!"

There's a reason I have this doofus on ignore. You want to keep debating him, fine, but just understand you'll never get anywhere with him. He couldn't see the facts, if you plastered them all over his face super glue.

Retired teacher, Masters in World History, fluent in 3 languages, have lived in UK, France, and Spain- never ignored any of you ignorant, brainwashed fools.

When you got really sick on those junk plans, you'd be a prime target for being cut-off or bankruptcy and losing everything. Change the channel, dingbat. You can't handle the truth.

And no I'm not a communist- just for fair, well-regulated capitalism, not the oligarchy/banana republic that unfair voodoo taxation and scam health care is getting us...FACTS? absolute idiocy is what you've got, Fox/Rush/Beckbot...

I refuse to believe that anyone who posts that stupidly could possibly be anything beyond a American high school graduate. Sorry.

 

[francoHFW]

''The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.'


1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Researc...s/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/imag...ving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...&LastYear=2010
4 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php...or-debt-of-gdp
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--March 6, 2014
5/6 = Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insider

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/...e-roost-charts''

''We need higher tax rates so we can spend more on social services, programs, agencies, welfare, assistance, and handouts. For , you guessed it... The common good.''

And they would only be on the bloated rich and corporations who've been getting away with murder for YEARS. Mainly since REAGANISM, which Pubs defend like, well, greedy mega rich a-holes.

All Americans are paying an average. 21%of their income in ALL taxes, except the bottom fifth, who pay 17%. Corporations paid 35% ofr all taxes in the fifties, now 10%. HELLO?!? In other worlds, your lying, thieving heroes are FOS. See sig

I don't care what you think about my writing style, just the facts. And my secretarial/typing skills sug lol.

 

[francoHFW]

Actually, what we're waiting for is the selfish, ignorant, chickenhawk, racist, bigoted, cold war dinosaur,short sighted, angry white Tea Party GOP to die off...

You can't handle the truth.

 

[Meathead]

Actually, what we're waiting for is the selfish, ignorant, chickenhawk, racist, bigoted, cold war dinosaur,short sighted, angry white Tea Party GOP to die off...

You can't handle the truth.

I refuse to believe that anyone who posts that stupidly could possibly be anything beyond a American high school graduate. Sorry.
__________________

 

[francoHFW]

Everything you believe is wrong then LOL. Politically. I'm sure you're ok otherwise...

 

[Listening]

The class envy meme is getting old. The middle class is working harder and earning less. That has nothing to do with envy. Honestly, the vast majority of the middle class could give a shit about the super wealthy. They are just concerned with their own circumstances, and those circumstances have been getting worse for quite some time now. What is astonishing is that so many people like yourself have been brainwashed into believing that this great transfer of wealth from the middle class to the super wealthy is a good thing for this country.

Please provide the metrics you are utilizing to make this claim.

The last I read, the average person in "poverty" has more (in terms of material goods) than the average solid "middle class" citizen of 50 years ago.

Not that material goods mean everything. But it sure says people are not starving.

Look at actual FACTS, not Pubcrappe. The nonrich have gone to HELL under Reaganist tax rates and policy, and still are...


''The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.'


1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Researc...s/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/imag...ving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...&LastYear=2010
4 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php...or-debt-of-gdp
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--March 6, 2014
5/6 = Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insider

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/...e-roost-charts''
''

This means nothing if you don't tell us the size of the pie they are getting. They can be losing in relative terms and gaining in absolute terms.

Please provide the necessary information. Otherwise this is nothing but class envy.

 

[Listening]

Actually, what we're waiting for is the selfish, ignorant, chickenhawk, racist, bigoted, cold war dinosaur,short sighted, angry white Tea Party GOP to die off...

You can't handle the truth.

You'll be dead long before they even peak.

Don't hold your breath. Obama has provided more reason for people to join the Tea Party than anything to date.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Workers of the world ... UNITE !!! Lol

 

[francoHFW]

Please provide the metrics you are utilizing to make this claim.

The last I read, the average person in "poverty" has more (in terms of material goods) than the average solid "middle class" citizen of 50 years ago.

Not that material goods mean everything. But it sure says people are not starving.

Look at actual FACTS, not Pubcrappe. The nonrich have gone to HELL under Reaganist tax rates and policy, and still are...


''The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.'


1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Researc...s/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/imag...ving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...&LastYear=2010
4 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php...or-debt-of-gdp
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--March 6, 2014
5/6 = Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insider

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/...e-roost-charts''
''

This means nothing if you don't tell us the size of the pie they are getting. They can be losing in relative terms and gaining in absolute terms.

Please provide the necessary information. Otherwise this is nothing but class envy.

Look at how much people are saving-that doesn't. In fact, the pie hasn't changed that the non-rich are getting, the rich pie has... In real terms, the non-rich's wealth and income hasn't changed much in the last 30 years while the rich's wealth has gone up 280%...