U.S. military chief foresees 'no war' with Iran
Commander of Mideast forces urges emphasis on dialogue, diplomacy
Updated: 7:44 a.m. ET Sept 23, 2007
BAGHDAD - The commander of U.S. military forces in the Middle East does not believe current tensions with Iran will lead to war and urges for greater emphasis on dialogue and diplomacy.

“This constant drum beat of conflict is what strikes me which is not helpful and not useful,” Adm. William Fallon said in an interview with Al-Jazeera television, which made a partial transcript available Sunday.

Fallon, the head of U.S. Central Command, wraps up a seven-nation tour of the region on Tuesday that included stops in Persian Gulf countries, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Many of the talks with military and political leaders were dominated by worries about expanding Iranian influence and U.S. accusations that Iran is supplying arms and training to Shiite militiamen in Iraq.

“I expect that there will be no war and that is what we ought to be working for,” said Fallon during the Friday interview at Al-Jazeera’s headquarters in Qatar. “We should find ways through which we can bring countries to work together for the benefit of all .... It is not a good idea to be in a state of war. We ought to try and to do our utmost to create different conditions.”

Al-Jazeera was expected to broadcast the complete interview later this week.

Fallon — who leads U.S. forces in Central Asia, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa — was in Iraq on Sunday for a second day of meetings.

At the United Nations, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Saturday that the world body plans to open a new office in Baghdad to encourage cooperation between Iraq and its neighbors, calling Iraq’s stability “a common concern.” The U.N. greatly scaled back its presence in Iraq since a 2003 bombing at its Baghdad headquarters that killed 22 people.

Watch your sarcastic words Philly, you may regret it. Your getting older and therefore more prone to disease and injury. 7 bucks of Nyquil won't treat a heart attack, prostate cancer, erectial disfunction, or nor does 7 bucks buy any amount of healthcare insurance.

Though 7 buck might get you some type of Colonial Penn Life insurance but that just to bury you. Not to take care of you love ones.

Why don't I throw some more wood into the fire that is the debate of healthcare!

The National Coalition
on Health Care
1200 G Street, NW,
Suite 750
Washington, DC 20005

202.638.7151

www.nchc.org
info@nchc.org

This document is also available as a printable .pdf file.
Health Insurance Cost

Facts on the Cost of Health Care



Introduction

By several measures, health care spending continues to rise at the fastest rate in our history.

In 2005 (the latest year data are available), total national health expenditures rose 6.9 percent -- two times the rate of inflation (1). Total spending was $2 TRILLION in 2005, or $6,700 per person (1). Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

U.S. health care spending is expected to increase at similar levels for the next decade reaching $4 TRILLION in 2015, or 20 percent of GDP (2).

In 2006, employer health insurance premiums increased by 7.7 percent – two times the rate of inflation. The annual premium for an employer health plan covering a family of four averaged nearly $11,500. The annual premium for single coverage averaged over $4,200 (3).

Experts agree that our health care system is riddled with inefficiencies, excessive administrative expenses, inflated prices, poor management, and inappropriate care, waste and fraud. These problems significantly increase the cost of medical care and health insurance for employers and workers and affect the security of families.



National Health Care Spending

In 2005, health care spending in the United States reached $2 trillion, and was projected to reach $2.9 trillion in 2009 (2). Health care spending is projected to reach $4 trillion by 2015 (2).
Health care spending is 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense (4).
In 2005, the United States spent 16 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on health care. It is projected that the percentage will reach 20 percent in the next decade (2).
Although nearly 47 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens (4).
Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (5).
Employer and Employee Health Insurance Costs

Premiums for employer-based health insurance rose by 7.7 percent in 2006. Small employers saw their premiums, on average, increase 8.8 percent. Firms with less than 24 workers, experienced an increase of 10.5 percent (3)
The annual premium that a health insurer charges an employer for a health plan covering a family of four averaged $11,500 in 2006. Workers contributed nearly $3,000, or 10 percent more than they did in 2005 (3).The annual premiums for family coverage significantly eclipsed the gross earnings for a full-time, minimum-wage worker ($10,712).
Workers are now paying $1,094 more in premiums annually for family coverage than they did in 2000 (3).
Since 2000, employment-based health insurance premiums have increased 87 percent, compared to cumulative inflation of 18 percent and cumulative wage growth of 20 percent during the same period (3).
Health insurance expenses are the fastest growing cost component for employers. Unless something changes dramatically, health insurance costs will overtake profits by 2008 (6).
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust, premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance in the United States have been rising four times faster on average than workers' earnings since 2000 (3).
The average employee contribution to company-provided health insurance has increased more than 143 percent since 2000. Average out-of-pocket costs for deductibles, co-payments for medications, and co-insurance for physician and hospital visits rose 115 percent during the same period (7).
The percentage of Americans under age 65 whose family-level, out-of-pocket spending for health care, including health insurance, that exceeds $2,000 a year, rose from 37.3 percent in 1996 to 43.1 percent in 2003 – a 16 percent increase (8).
The Impact of Rising Health Care Costs

National surveys show that the primary reason people are uninsured is the high cost of health insurance coverage (9).
Economists have found that rising health care costs correlate to drops in health insurance coverage (10).
Nearly one-quarter (23 percent) of the uninsured reported changing their way of life significantly in order to pay medical bills (10).
Almost 50 percent of the American public say they are very worried about having to pay more for their health care or health insurance, while 42 percent report they are very worried about not being able to afford health care services (11).
In a poll conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health, 43 percent of respondents named high costs as one of the two most important health care issues for government to address (12).
In a USA Today/ABC News survey, 80 percent of Americans said that they were dissatisfied (60 percent were very dissatisfied) with high national health care spending (13).
One in four Americans say their family has had a problem paying for medical care during the past year, up 7 percentage points over the past nine years. Nearly 30 percent say someone in their family has delayed medical care in the past year, a new high based on recent polling. Most say the medical condition was at least somewhat serious (13).
A recent study by Harvard University researchers found that the average out-of-pocket medical debt for those who filed for bankruptcy was $12,000. The study noted that 68 percent of those who filed for bankruptcy had health insurance. In addition, the study found that 50 percent of all bankruptcy filings were partly the result of medical expenses (14). Every 30 seconds in the United States someone files for bankruptcy in the aftermath of a serious health problem.
One half of workers in the lowest-compensation jobs and one-half of workers in mid-range-compensation jobs either had problems with medical bills in a 12-month period or were paying off accrued debt. One-quarter of workers in higher-compensated positions also reported problems with medical bills or were paying off accrued debt (15).
If one member of a family is uninsured and has an accident, a hospital stay, or a costly medical treatment, the resulting medical bills can affect the economic stability of the whole family (16).
A new survey shows that more than 25 percent said that housing problems resulted from medical debt, including the inability to make rent or mortgage payments and the development of bad credit ratings (17).
A survey of Iowa consumers found that in order to cope with rising health insurance costs, 86 percent said they had cut back on how much they could save, and 44 percent said that they have cut back on food and heating expenses (18).
Retiring elderly couples will need $200,000 in savings just to pay for the most basic medical coverage (19). Many experts believe that this figure is conservative and that $300,000 may be a more realistic number.
Time for Action on Reining in Health Care Costs

Policymakers and government officials agree that health care costs must be controlled. But they disagree on the best ways to address rapidly escalating health spending and health insurance premiums. Some favor price controls and imposing strict budgets on health care spending. Others believe free market competition is the best way to solve the problems. Public health advocates believe that if all Americans adopted healthy lifestyles, health care costs would decrease as people required less medical care.

There appears to be no agreement on a single solution to health care's high price tag. Many approaches may be used to control costs. What we do know is if the rate of escalation in health care spending and health insurance premiums continues at current trends, the cost of inaction will severely affect employer's bottom lines and consumer's pocketbooks.

From the looks of exchange between Steven and Abra, it looks like Abra handle Steven's hat to him.

Forge Bush just doesn't care.

Garden I was simply stating that Bush has the wrong priorities. Critics have and will continue to point out that Bush will appear to care for the war rather than the welfare and health of the people of country he suppose to represent. Rather he is look out for corporations to control healthcare. You saw how the he overlook the financial market in the Sub-prime loans mess. He just sat back hoping that the market would correct itself. If he continues to think that the market will in the balance out, wherther its the stock market or the healthcare market, then for certain it will crash spiraling down.

I point out to the crash of 1929 that cause the Great Depression. You may not remember it but your father did. It could a 25% unemployment rate to change how Washington regulated the business sector and now the is time to change the healthcare industry.

Holy writ! ‘God’ files response to lawsuit
Papers, 1 filed by lawyer (the other direct?) argue deity faultless, immune

Updated: 12:06 a.m. ET Sept 23, 2007
LINCOLN, Neb. - The mystery of one response to a lawsuit against God has been solved. Eric Perkins, an attorney in Corpus Christi, Texas, said Friday he filed a response to the lawsuit from Nebraska State Sen. Ernie Chambers. "It's kind of a turn on 'What would Jesus do?'" Perkins said. "I thought to myself, "What would God say?"

"Defendant denies that this or any court has jurisdiction ... over Him any more than the court has jurisdiction over the wind or rain, sunlight or darkness," according to Perkins' response.

As for Chambers' contention that God made terroristic threats, inspired fear and caused "widespread death, destruction and terrorization," Perkins wrote that God "contends that any harm or injury suffered is a direct and proximate result of mankind ignoring obvious warnings."

Perkins, who said he is a Christian, faxed one of at least two responses to Chambers' lawsuit. He said while he hopes the lawsuit was just a stunt by Chambers, "maybe his timing has something to do with world affairs. I'd hate to be that person who sat back and did nothing."

The problem of serving God a summons could land the lawsuit in the earthly scrap heap of failed legal actions.

But whether the issue goes before a judge may largely depend on how hard Chambers pushes the issue. The senator isn't asking that notice be served to God, but says in his lawsuit that if he doesn't get a summary judgment in the case, he wants a hearing — "if the court deems such a hearing not to be a futile act."

Chambers, a self-proclaimed agnostic, said he's trying to make the point that anybody can sue anybody. He said his filing was triggered by a federal lawsuit he considers frivolous.

It's still not clear where a second response from "God" came from. There was no contact information on the filing, which turned up on the counter at the Douglas County Court office, although St. Michael the Archangel is listed as a witness.

Attempts to reach Chambers by phone were unsuccessful.

There a perception that people who are devoutely religious appear to be pompus and fake. This is stunt that this comedian did just pokes fun at that those who are overtly religious.

The true joke for people who make themselves too high and mighty in their practice of their faith is that Jesus actually preach against it.

Matthew 6:6 'Be careful not ot parade your uprightness in public to attract attention; otherwise you will lose all reward from your Father in heaven....

Matthew 6:5 'And when you pray, do not imitate the hypocrites: they love to say their prayers standing up in the synagogues ant at the street corners for people to see them...

She Said What?
A 'D-List' star uttered a profanity about Jesus. Controversy ensues.

FEEDBACK
E-mail us your comments
By Lisa Miller
Newsweek
Oct. 1, 2007 issue - Some stories are best told straight. On Sept. 8, Kathy Griffin, a bawdy, foulmouthed comedian, accepted an Emmy Award for her reality show, "My Life on the D-List," and in her acceptance speech she explained that while other actors might thank Jesus for such an honor, she wouldn't consider it. "Suck it, Jesus," she exuberantly added, waving her statuette in the air. "This award is my God, now."

Outrage from Christian groups predictably followed, led (also predictably) by William Donohue of the Catholic League, who went on CNN to complain that "Hollywood laughs when she says 'Suck it, Jesus,' but if she'd said 'Suck it, Jews,' or 'Suck it, Muhammad' ... they wouldn't be laughing, would they?" Then, newspapers reported that E! Television would scrub the speech before airing it the following weekend, which triggered an equal and opposite outcry from liberal groups accusing E! of censorship. Around that same time, a group of college students in Hawaii, sitting around voraciously reading the news, "got a giggle," as 20-year-old Carlos Uretta puts it, out of the controversy. So they did what any atheist-minded group of 21st-century college students would do: they registered suckitjesus.com as a domain name and, a few days later, put up a petition in support of Kathy Griffin, which now has more than 2,500 signatures. "We got an e-mail from someone in Italy, and we thought—really? People are concerned about this in Italy?"

You might think that when the awards show aired the next weekend, edited but not completely airbrushed, the controversy would die. But you would be wrong. Last week a small Christian theater company based in Pigeon Forge, Tenn., took out two full-page ads in USA Today at $90,000 a pop, decrying Griffin's remarks and pleading for a new civility. Griffin, meanwhile, went on Larry King, who played the unedited clip and ignited the entire thing all over again. And who stands to benefit from this tempest? Well, Griffin, who's playing sold-out shows all over the country this fall. And Tennessee's Miracle Theater, just down the road from Dolly Parton's theme park and in its second year of staging a Broadway-type play about the life of Christ. "The phones have definitely picked up, and that's great," says manager Russ Hollingsworth. Now that they've scored the domain name, Uretta and his friends think it might be fun to expand their site, but "not to be too profound or anything," he says. No worries, Carlos. You're in good company.

Philly I'd like to recommend TexMex if your looking for Mexican food. But don't look for mexicans there, it's owned by Chinese immigrants who took Asian hard work, American business know how, and Mexican food into a successful business enterpise.

Philly are you as smart as that idiot Bush!

Now I have to teach you math!

35 billion over 5 years is 7 billion a year

35/5 = 7

Now the Democrat plans adds 4 million to the program.

7 billion / 4 million = $1750

I have no idea where you get 40 million kids.

I saw the your misleading figure of $8750 per child of actually

for coverage for 5 years.

Now compare to the $200 billion Bush is asking for the war for a year and to the $35 billion over 5 YEARS, $35 billion is chump change!

I see debate with you is like debate with a child who's has some concept of math but like Bush is a C student.

Philly you a CONSERVATE so I'd expected a such a response from you. The reason I brought up the history lesson is the fact people and their views CHANGE.

He has said some outragous things but of course his audience may not have been the world but to the hard line CONSERVATES that back him in his nation.

The fact of the matter it takes LIBERALS for CHANGE to happen.

Another thing Spider we don't know what level of coverage you plan covers and what the Democrat plan covers. It could be that with their plan better coverages with little to no out of pocket cost for the poor parents of the child. Your plan may have a high co-pay for medication, or other deductibles that if something were to happen you may ask for government assistance to cover the high costs.

Spider! You have private insurance? Or does your employer cover some of your cost for health insurance? In any case most companies are cutting out health care plans in order to retain more profits.

You may have to pay more for your insurance if your employer changes the plan coverage in the near future.

The fall of Soviet Union and communism in europe was not by done by military means but instead of being on cautiously defensive and being open to diplomacy. Heck Regan call the communism the Evil Empire but both he and then leader of USSR both talked to ease cold war intensions. When Regan visted the Soviet Union his view of the "Evil Empire" changed.

I'm not saying that Mr. Ahmadinejad is looking to extend an olive branch but he may be instend looking if America is reasonable in negotications. He was of course elected into office because his constituants feared an invasion. In other words because he appeared strong in his stance of "Nation Defense" of his nation he was elected.

In any case the appearence is questions and answers. It gives us an opportunity to see if he is really out for war or if he's just bluffing.

Garden it's Bush that's saying it's costly and that it will make people switch to this program from private insurance. And with how we got to the Iraq war, the mess over the US District attorneys, the hoodwinking of the elections of 2000, you just can't trust George Bush Jr.

Philly I think your using Fuzzy math to come up with $8,750. Your forgetting that $35 billion is for 5 years of coverage. Divide $8,750 by 5 is $1,750. $1,750 a year for a poor child who would otherwise be naked in healthcare insurance coverage. Come on Philly have a heart!!!

Philly I like to see your math just to be sure it's not "fuzzy math" your using.

I've been searching for that elusive 80 thousand sumthing cut off point but no luck yet but...

More NEWS on this topic


The US House of Representatives voted 225 to 204 yesterday to expand the government sponsored child health insurance scheme SCHIP and increase its budget by nearly 50 billion dollars over five years, despite a threat by President Bush that he would veto the legislation because it would move America toward nationalized healthcare.

The move, which was mostly a Democrat-Republican split in the voting, renews and expands the State Children's Health Insurance Program, SCHIP. The scheme grants federal money to help states cover the health insurance costs of families who are just above the earning limit for the state sponsored Medicaid but don't earn enough to pay for private insurance. It is estimated this will continue coverage for 6 million children and extend it to another 5 million or so ininsured children.

The bill also includes an increase of 19.3 billion dollars spending on Medicare payments to doctors, more support for mental health and other benefits under the state sponsored Medicare insurance scheme for people aged 65 and over.

The increased funding would be paid for by a considerable increase in tobacco taxes (raising tax on cigarettes by 45 cents per pack for example) and cutting back Medicare payments to private insurers.

President Bush said is against the bill because it expands the government's control of healthcare and is financed by a large tax increase. He favours a system of tax breaks that encourage uninsured people to take out private insurance.

The President is proposing a scheme that extends the current SCHIP spend from 25 to 30 million dollars over five years. According to congressional budget analysts that proposal would be 14 billion dollars short of what is needed to maintain the current coverage over that period of time.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, told Reuters news agency:

"Contrary to the claims of the president and other opponents of this bill, it does not constitute a 'government takeover of health care'."

"In fact, three-fourths of the children in the SCHIP program receive care today through private insurance plans that contract with the states," added Hoyer.

Republican Representative Jim McCrery of Louisiana agreed with the President that the Democrat led bill was "a massive expansion of government-controlled health care". He said it was a ploy to "lure" middle class families out of private health insurance.

In the meantime the Senate has also been working on a similar bill that would expand SCHIP by 35 billion dollars, with no changes to Medicare, but the tax on tobacco would be higher (61 cents more than the current 39 cents per pack of cigarettes, and even higher increases for cigars). Bush has threatened to veto this bill as well. The two bills will have to be made into one before being sent to the President.

80 thousand sumthing? Well that's an exact number! Where did that number come from? It didn't come from this article! I dare you to provide to quote that number from the democrat proposal than from what President says that democrats are proposing to do!