The most powerful military powers

[The Colonel]

Nearly 47 million Americans, or 16 percent of the population, were without health insurance in 2005, the latest government data available.

The number of uninsured rose 2.2 million between 2005 and 2006 and has increased by almost 9 million people since 2000.

The large majority of the uninsured (80 percent) are native or naturalized citizens.

The increase in the number of uninsured in 2006 was focused among working age adults. The percentage of working adults (18 to 64) who had no health coverage climbed from 19.7 percent in 2005 to 20.2 percent in 2006.

Nearly 1.3 million full-time workers lost their health insurance in 2006.

Nearly 90 million people - about one-third of the population below the age of 65 spent a portion of either 2006 or 2007 without health coverage.

Over 8 in 10 uninsured people come from working families - almost 70 percent from families with one or more full-time workers and 11 percent from families with part-time workers.

The percentage of people (workers and dependents) with employment-based health insurance has dropped from 70 percent in 1987 to 59 percent in 2006. This is the lowest level of employment-based insurance coverage in more than a decade.

In 2005, nearly 15 percent of employees had no employer-sponsored health coverage available to them, either through their own job or through a family member.

In 2006, 37.7 million workers were uninsured because not all businesses offer health benefits, not all workers qualify for coverage and many employees cannot afford their share of the health insurance premium even when coverage is at their fingertips.

The number of uninsured children in 2006 was 8.7 million - or 11.7 percent of all children in the U.S.1 The number of children who are uninsured increased by nearly 610,000 in 2006, the second year that the number of uninsured children increased.

Young adults (18-to-24 years old) remained the least likely of any age group to have health insurance in 2005 - 29.3 percent of this group did not have health insurance.

The percentage and the number of uninsured Hispanics increased to 34.1 percent and 15.3 million in 2006.

Nearly 40 percent of the uninsured population reside in households that earn $50,000 or more. A growing number of middle-income families cannot afford health insurance payments even when coverage is offered by their employers.

[The Colonel]

A fine example of Britain's SAS and what we can do.

Note: it says ONE WEEKEND to molibise 100 ships and thousands of soldiers.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7CvyGK-4kdI&feature=related

The US took weeks to respond to New Orleans.

What are you talking about?

If you're talking about Katrina, that was not a military operation.

You're comparing apples and oranges, you lying idiot.

You left your own people to die.

No different than the boy who died because they wouldn't treat him.

No one was left to die and it was not a military operation, you idiot -- see thread title.

How many people died from Katrina? Nowhere near the thousands of innocent civilians you have murdered in Northern Ireland.

How many Brits have died waiting for treatment from the NHS or being contaminated by MRSA in a NHS hospital?

Quite a lot. But not nearly as many as in the US where people often have no medical insurance.

You let children die. That is all people need to know.

You let children die as well.

And you personally have murdered women and children.

We do NOT let children die. We treat them as best we can. At least we try - and take the money out of our pockets rather than spend it on aircraft carriers or nukes you simply don't need.

I've never murdered anyone, nor have I ever killed anyone that was female or a child.

You are a liar. That is slander.

[myron myron]

In the U.S., poor citizens without medical insurance are provided free medical care paid for by the government under the Medicaid program.

The U.S. federal and state governments spend more on Medicaid than Britain spends on the entire NHS.

More people are covered under Medicaid in the U.S. than the entire population of Britain.

Moreover, publicly owned hospitals are required to treat people regardless of ability to pay and private hospitals that receive government funding (i.e., virtually all of them) are required to treat a certain number of people free of charge.

The one anecdotal incident you repeatedly refer to -- indeed anecdotal evidence generally -- does not prove a pattern and practice.

[Cambridge]

In the U.S., poor citizens without medical insurance are provided free medical care paid for by the government under the Medicaid program.

So, you’re saying that Medicaid is the equivalent of the British NHS? Yes or no?? Medicaid has ridiculous qualifying barriers, does it not? Aren't you avoiding the issue by speaking about the “poor” when the issue is the availability of medical insurance for the “average” American?

The U.S. federal and state governments spend more on Medicaid than Britain spends on the entire NHS.

More people are covered under Medicaid in the U.S. than the entire population of Britain.

If you mean proportionately, that is patently false. If you don’t mean proportionately, that is a dishonest use of statistics.

Moreover, publicly owned hospitals are required to treat people regardless of ability to pay and private hospitals that receive government funding (i.e., virtually all of them) are required to treat a certain number of people free of charge.

Not quite. Those hospitals just can’t turn patients away from emergency wards because the patients can’t demonstrate an ability to pay—that is what you mean. The patients still get billed, and it goes on their credit report if they don’t pay. What is your basis for the claim of “free of charge” quotas? Are you talking about Medicaid?

The NHS of the UK demonstrates the British commitment to caring for its citizens. If it were up to GWB he would say people who don’t pay their bills shouldn’t be able to have health insurance. Isn’t that what he said about the present mortgage crisis: people who don’t pay their mortgage should be defaulted—regardless of the predatory lending practices that led to the problem?

[myron myron]

The Colonel contends that American children are routinely denied medical treatment and "left to die" because they don't have medical insurance. The Colonel's contention is false.

Of course people who don’t pay their mortgage should be defaulted. They certainly should not be bailed out by taxpayers, many of whom do not even own a home.

[Cambridge]

The Colonel contends that American children are routinely denied medical treatment and "left to die" because they don't have medical insurance. The Colonel's contention is false.

But how does resorting to the care programs given exclusively to the “poor” (i.e., with qualifying barriers) help the overwhelming majority of children? I don’t know about “left to die,” but I see a real problem there.

Of course people who don’t pay their mortgage should be defaulted. They certainly should not be bailed out by taxpayers, many of whom do not even own a home.

Ah-ha, I knew I had the right metaphor. And, I presume, people who can’t afford medical insurance “should not be bailed out by taxpayers” as well, because of the sin of not being able to afford it?

Well, after all, many of those other taxpayers don't have medical insurance, either. Opps! Stumbled upon a flaw on your reasoning, didn't I. You know, it strikes me that whether we're talking about owning a home or having health insurance, the one thing Americans cannot afford is a stupid, f*** war against Muslims who did nothing wrong and who only want us out, and it's costing us a trillion a year overall.

Mortgages and health insurance vs. the Muslim American war...a little sanity, please.

[myron myron]

Not having medical insurance and defaulting on a private home mortgage are separate and distinct issues.

The American taxpayers already pay about $300 billion annually for de facto medical insurance covering some 55 million people under Medicaid.

[Cambridge]

Not having medical insurance and defaulting on a private home mortgage are separate and distinct issues.

The American taxpayers already pay about $300 billion annually for de facto medical insurance covering some 55 million people under Medicaid.

Medical insurance and a mortgage on a private home are wholly unrelated issues.

TBH, not quite. The same American dollar is used to pay for each. What happens when there are not enough of those dollars to stretch across each…and food for your children at the table…and clothes…and schooling…and everything else honest people are not able to afford today because Chevron just posted record profits of $5.7-billion for the first quarter of this year and gasoline is at $4/gallon and a tank of gas costs $75-$90/per. Are all of these people like the defaulters who can’t afford homes? Can we, as stockholders in Chevron, scold them for not being able to make it stretch…tell them how irresponsible they are for not being able to meet their obligations?

The American taxpayers already pay for de facto medical insurance covering millions of people under Medicaid.

Stop with the Medicaid. That is a very parochial program with entrance barriers that prohibit availability to most Americans. To make your argument precise, exactly what percentage of Americans does Medicaid fullly cover?

[myron myron]

Medicaid covers about 55 million people, not a "very parochial" number at all.

If someone cannot afford to own a home, that person can rent. Taxpayers who rent should not have to pay the mortgages of people who want to own but cannot afford to own.

Chevron is a publicly traded corporation owned by its shareholders, many of them mutual funds in which American workers own shares by investing their 401k pensions.

[Cambridge]

Medicaid covers about 55 million people, not a "very parochial" number at all.

And that is not full coverage. Even so, it is approximately 18% of Americans. Not a proud number.

If someone cannot afford to own a home, that person can rent; taxpayers who rent should not have to pay the mortgages of people who cannot afford to own.

And if someone cannot afford medical insurance…what, pound sand?

Chevron is a publicly traded corporation owned by its shareholders.

I'm beginning to think we should change that.

[myron myron]

Medicare covers about 45 million elderly Americans.

Together, Medicaid and Medicare cover about one-third of the U.S. population.

[Cambridge]

Medicare covers about 45 million elderly Americans.

Together, Medicaid and Medicare cover about one-third of the U.S. population.

Medicare is a different story. We were talking about Medicaid.

[myron myron]

Medicare covers about 45 million elderly Americans.

Together, Medicaid and Medicare cover about one-third of the U.S. population.

Medicare is a different story. We were talking about Medicaid.

Medicare and Medicaid may cover different classes of people, but they are both government programs that pay for medical care for a combined total of one-third of the U.S. population.

[Cambridge]

Two points. Medicare covers seniors, currently the most populous of age groups. So that's a matter of fortuitous statistics.

And if only one-third of the population is covered, what is happening with the other two-thirds? I think you just made Colonel’s point.

[myron myron]

Two points. Medicare covers seniors, currently the most populous of age groups. So that's a matter of fortuitous statistics.

And if only one-third of the population is covered, what is happening with the other two-thirds? I think you just made Colonel’s point.

The U.S. does not have nationalized medicine.

Almost 60% of all Americans are covered under private health insurance.

About 33% of Americans (roughly 100 million) are covered under Medicaid or Medicare.

The remaining 7% or so of Americans without health insurance or Medicaid/Medicare are undoubtedly a problem, but they can still obtain medical care in publicly-owned hospitals.

The Colonel's so-called "point" that American children without medical insurance are routinely denied medical treatment and "left to die," is patently false.

Figures cited by politically biased media on the number of Americans without health insurance dishonestly count as "uninsured" people covered by Medicaid and sometimes even people covered by Medicare.