OPEC accuses U.S. on oil prices

[jetflyer]

I've never seen Sicko but am going to in the next couple days.

Here is Sicko at Google Video:
SICKO

 

[svcta]

You insure my health care and I insure yours. Its a 2-way street. I could care less who made this film. I have no opinion on him, but take the information conveyed and use it, along with differing viewpoints to form my own opinion. I grew up in Europe in 3 different countries and did not experience any of the problems discussed by those against socialized medicine. Results will vary obviously, but how many people get screwed over in the USA and denied coverage? It goes both ways! My friends in Canada also have little to say against their system, yet my mother who has serious health problems cannot get affordable insurance coverage and keeps getting claims denied over and over! Really nice!

And you think that it will be more 'affordable' if the g'vt takes it all over? If it's a two-way street then why should I decide what kind of coverage you have and vice versa? You know best how to take care of you and your family, not me, not Hilary, not Barack. It's not a 'one size fits all' and that's the approach being taken. And the fact remains that a large sector of the population(the younger of us) will pay more for their coverage than is necessary in order to cover the older of us, driving up the cost of coverage for all over the course of their lives. Not to mention having to carry coverage that you might not need.

The only reason that this is such a hot issue these days is that it's another way for the big old g'vt to take responsibility for those who don't want it. It's people that by and large have made poor decisions and now want someone else to take up the slack for them. The result of which is that those of us that do want this responsibility have it forceably taken away. Leaving us paying a penalty for our success. Where's the fairness or equity in that?

If you want to control the cost of healthcare then attack the root of the high costs. Place limits on malpractice awards. The only reason that prescription drugs are so expensive here is because companies are at such constant risk of litigation, and therefore they protect themselves by keeping costs up to cover payouts. Why do you think you can get things so cheaply in Mexico? The costs are passed on to American consumers. Protect these companies A LITTLE. And for the love of God get drug commercials off of the TV. We are more medicated than ever and people have begun to ask for drugs that they think they need. AND THEY ACTUALLY GET THEM! Driving the cost of health care up once again.

How long must the g'vt make it clear to the lazy and less-productive that they can do no wrong? We as a culture sit around getting fatter and costing ourselves more and more money each day and we look to everyone around us to make it okay. Ugh. Big brother ain't the answer. I know that much. You don't give a spendthrift child more money to spend when he runs out, you cut him off to teach him how to be responsible. The same applies here.

 

[sat74]

If you want to control the cost of healthcare then attack the root of the high costs. Place limits on malpractice awards. The only reason that prescription drugs are so expensive here is because companies are at such constant risk of litigation, and therefore they protect themselves by keeping costs up to cover payouts. Why do you think you can get things so cheaply in Mexico? The costs are passed on to American consumers. Protect these companies A LITTLE. And for the love of God get drug commercials off of the TV. We are more medicated than ever and people have begun to ask for drugs that they think they need. AND THEY ACTUALLY GET THEM! Driving the cost of health care up once again.

How long must the g'vt make it clear to the lazy and less-productive that they can do no wrong? We as a culture sit around getting fatter and costing ourselves more and more money each day and we look to everyone around us to make it okay.

I cannot agree with you more on this!

 

[lowecur]

We're talking about the same people really. These people really running the show have infiltrated all of the multinationals and control everything through them.

Mmmm. I'm not against multi-national corps in general or globalization in general (pure mundialism). Everything is good in moderation, and providing the US taxpayer is not paying the freight as the "world's policeman & capitalistic integrator."

What disturbs me more is the that these idiots have left the backdoor open for our enemys. Chinese officials finally got smart and said, why not manipulate these ideals to get what we want. Give the people some freedoms, incorporate controlled capitalism, join the global economy.....and eventually rule the world. Russia has joined them now that the price of commodities (in particular oil) is giving them wealth. The Middle East needed the US to buy it's oil. Now with this world economy, the US is no longer the single most important client. All of these entities has something to gain from the US being relegated to being just another player, or eventually no player at all. The corporate greed of the multinational has lifted them all as threats to the US standard of living. What is laughable is the fact that the US gov't & many of these multinationals somehow believe the power of capitalism will negate the aspirations of these "police state/dictatorship" governments to a position of softness if and when democracy tries to rear it's head.

imp:​

 

[puddlejumper101]

so...what have we concluded from this thread?? that we are all FU#$% ???

 

[lowecur]

so...what have we concluded from this thread?? that we are all FU#$% ???

Yes, it's time to jump.

imp:​

 

[sat74]

Yet I continue to fly with a bunch of tools saying how America is the best! America is the best etc...

AT WHAT???

 

[Dizel8]

"The only reason that prescription drugs are so expensive here is because companies are at such constant risk of litigation, and therefore they protect themselves by keeping costs up to cover payouts. Why do you think you can get things so cheaply in Mexico?"

I tend to disagree with some of that, the Mexico part in particular. Mexico is more like incremental revenue, iow, the US consumer is paying the cost for research, development, marketing etc., because they US consumer has money, the Mexican consumer does not.

You can sell Celebrex, just an example, for 10 dollars a pill in the US, but probably less than a dollar in Mexico. The Mexican consumer canot afford it. So, the US consumer pays the cost.

$5 aspirin at the hospital, no, we are not getting screwed on that deal?

 

[mzaharis]

3. ANWR, anyone? 1.5 million acres of it was specifically set aside for oil recovery. And the Chinese are drilling within sight of Key West.....

taking oil that we could get for ourselves if it weren't for our overly restrictive environmental lawas. I like the environment as much as anyone, but we're only hurting ourselves with this stuff. And we're not saving the world from the rest of itself.

"Drainage!" "I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThZI-p8SKe0

 

[mzaharis]

One other point I failed to make....

Two bit dictators are bad for oil prices. Again, for emphasis, two bit dictators reduce oil prices. The crazier the better.

Why? Because they have to sell their oil to somebody. They can not afford to sit on it.

Hugo Chavez serves as an excellent example. He sells more oil at lower prices than anyone else. He has done a lousy job of managing Venezuela's economy and must bring in as much quick cash as he can to keep his corrupt government in power.

Saddam Hussein sold more oil, 3.5 million barrels a day, than the US/Iraqi partnerships can produce which has been nearly half that amount, 1.8 million barrells a day, which has been decreasing at around 4% a year.

The US needs to realize that a war is not required to maintain the flow of oil. Quite to the contrary, crazy dictators are the Crazy Eddie's of the oil biz. They help consumers by being unwilling to work with the other members of the Cartels, by running "fire sales" to prop up their governments and by subsidizing oil to other third world nations.

The OPEC members want to sell their oil. The crazies HAVE to sell their oil. There is a difference that benefits consumers.

Arguably, Bush removed Saddam to remove a competitor to his buddies in Arab nations and back in Texas who were heavily invested in the oil business.

The only problem is that crazy dictators mismanage their oil resources so badly that they reduce the productivity of their own fields. There was an article in the Economist recently about how Chavez was doing this in Venezuela. This can cause a reduction in supply that creates upward pressure on oil prices.