You know I hated hearing this news today. How much will this war cost? Can you repeat that please because I am to pick myself off the floor and I fainted too. WTF?
And I can't help but compare it to this story. So, let me get this straight? We need how much for war? But kids medical coverage gets the big EFF-UUU?OK, I am having some real trouble with this. War good. Healthy kids bad? That's what it sounds like to me.
In 2003 I traveled to Costa Rica. This is anecdotal, so I am not sure it is 100% accurate. This Costa Rican man that we met was telling us that when Costa Rica looked around a number of
years back, they realized they would have choices. They could provide basic needs for the huge influx of Nicaruagan refugees and pay now or they could ignore it and then pay later. Meaning - if we don't handle this well now, we will have so many and far more expensive social ills later.Beyond housing, a real focus was kids health care. Imagine that! Thinking ahead and planning humanely.
I can't say the CR government is great, I don't really know. But if they even applied only a little of that thought, they are still way ahead of us. I mean US.
Then I thought of this song from my youth. The words are great and wow, what a typically 60's lip-synch performance. And I love his look, nice threads man.
All kidding aside, Edwin Starr was right on man. Right on.
17 comments:
This morning when I heard how much they are requesting to continue the murder of people in Iraq, I thought of the same thing you did. We can afford to kill people but not make little kids healthy and well?
Jesus, if we don't have little kids growing up healthy, what are we going to use in the future for cannon fodder? (Yes, that is a snark bite)
Edwin Starr does "huuuh" better than anyone.
These days war is not good only for the undertaker it's good for the all the profiteers and military industrialists.
Amazing what you can do when your country doesn't have a military, eh? And look who they've got as neighbors. That took some real balls, IMO.
Go to Jesus' General. He has an awesome chart that I was unable to snag that puts into perspective how much war we can buy in exchange for not insuring children.
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/
I've always learned in Catholic school that God is patient. I have to say, I don't blame him if He runs out of patience with us...when we prefer killing in wars, to taking care of childrens health, we deserve another big ol' honkin' floods.
Awwww...."hug" was in my word verification. Isn't that nice?
I don't know what else to say, Fran.
Once again, the Bush administration favors guns over butter and really just about anything else.
It's a sad commentary on our society. We want short-term fixes and feel-good schemes, but we hardly ever want to plan for tomorrow. Oh, we certainly pay lip service to the concept, but we hardly ever do anything about it.
Perhaps that's because in this culture of instant gratification, politicians wish to placate the impatient by showing immediate results.
You are right on, sister! Now if only you were president, instead of the shrub. . . .
(Gymp was in my word verification---uh, is that a sign or something? A misspelling of the pet name of another of my least favorite presidents?)
what's few more billion down a rat hole when you have your legacy to protect?
It's funny I was talking about this very thing on one of my sites yesterday because Bush had already said that he would veto the bill the House has voted 265-159 to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
He warned that spending increases, which could add up to over $200 billion over five years would be too much to ask the tax payer to pay.
Then today he ask for $190 billion to fund the war through next year. This is sick and Congress has to push back.
franiam, you wrote:
"This Costa Rican man that we met was telling us that when Costa Rica looked around a number of years back, they realized they would have choices. They could provide basic needs for the huge influx of Nicaruagan refugees and pay now or they could ignore it and then pay later. Meaning - if we don't handle this well now, we will have so many and far more expensive social ills later."
I'd say your Costa Rican acquaintance has little knowledge of his country's activities.
That aside, the population of Costa Rica is slightly more than 4 million. Or half the population of New York City. And the entire country muddles along on a budget that is a small fraction of the NY City budget.
Meanwhile, though your friend claims many refugees arrived from Nicaragua, the influx could not have been much.
The net migration rate into Costa Rica is less than 0.5 immigrants per 1,000 residents. That's a rather puny number compared with the net migration rate into the US, which is 3.0 immigrants per 1,000 residents.
Meanwhile, though you claim Costa Rica takes care of its children, the infant mortality rate is 9.5 deaths per 1,000 births.
The infant mortality rate in the US is 6.3 deaths per 1,000 births. It's rather obvious it is better to be born in the US compared with Costa Rica.
Anyway, it's unfortunate that so many people hang their anti-US sentiments on issues totally unsupported by facts. Clearly people who want to find fault with the US do so without checking claims for accuracy.
There's lots to improve in the US, but little of it can occur when so many people are so easily diverted by nonsense.
Beyond housing, a real focus was kids health care. Imagine that! Thinking ahead and planning humanely.
I can't say the CR government is great, I don't really know. But if they even applied only a little of that thought, they are still way ahead of us. I mean US.
no_slappz, why are you stalking fran, disputing her comments and then summing up by saying "I can't say the CR government is great, I don't really know.
You really don't know.
Costa Ricans enjoy universal health care and have a longer life expectancy than US citizens. The infant mortality comparison isn't exactly valid. Since, once more, you are talking about a country you've never visited you probably aren't aware that many areas of Costa Rica are extremely remote. Could this have anything to do with infant mortality? I'd say definately, yes.
Let's compare Costa Rica, not to the US, who ought to lead the world actually, and not be ranked along with Balkan countries, shall we?
In fact, the comparison is with neighboring countries who have received military aid from the US. Obviously their choices were different than those of Costa Rica.
Guatamala: 56% population below poverty level
Honduras: 53% population below poverty level
Nicaragua: 48% population below poverty level
El Salvador: 35% population below poverty level
Costa Rica: 18%.
Infant Mortality rates:
Guatamala: 37/1000
Nicaragua: 30/1000
Honduras: 30/1000
El Salvador: 26/1000
Costa Rica: 10/1000
http://www.nationmaster.com
Further, having been to San Juan and actually talking to residents, I highly doubt the accuracy of your figure regarding Nicaraguans in Costa Rica. And since you provide no citations for your "facts" we'll just assume that one is flat wrong.
jess, you wrote:
"no_slappz, why are you stalking fran, disputing her comments and then summing up by saying "I can't say the CR government is great, I don't really know."
The lines you attributed to me were actually cut and pasted from Fran's post. I simply failed to delete them from my response.
I copied:
"Beyond housing, a real focus was kids health care. Imagine that! Thinking ahead and planning humanely..."
and:
"...I can't say the CR government is great, I don't really know. But if they even applied only a little of that thought, they are still way ahead of us. I mean US."
You wrote:
"And since you provide no citations for your "facts" we'll just assume that one is flat wrong."
My numbers come from the CIA data site, which provides reams of data on every country in the world.
Meanwhile, the fact the Costa Rica is a better place than some of its neighboring countries only proves that countries moving toward market economies are more prosperous and healthier places to live than dictatorships and the various socialist workers' paradises that exist in the world.
The military aid we send to the neighboring countries is aid meant to assist them in moving toward the same improvements experienced by all countries that embrace freedom, democracy and capitalism.
The military aid we send to the neighboring countries is aid meant to assist them in moving toward the same improvements experienced by all countries that embrace freedom, democracy and capitalism.
Then why is the country that doesn't take the military aid succeed beyond those that do? After 50 years you could call that a failed experiment.
Embrace military dictatorships (backed by the US) to garner freedom. And all statistics prove it wrong.
But then again, who can argue with your "feelings"?
*yawn*. i wonder if Mr. Limbaugh realizes that posting under the nom de spew, 'no_slappz' is insipidly transparent.
Commander Other- that is pretty funny. And true.
Speaking of commanding, I say we all just ignore no_slappz at this point.
This nameless/faceless angry tiresome bore is totally on my last nerve.
Honestly slappz, even if your opinions were different than mine I'd love to discuss them.
But you spew feelings and just regurgitate other people's words.
Addressing you is flaming the fans. I hereby douse you with water and remove all oxygen.
You seem to have had some blog real estate that you stopped 2 years ago. Go back to it or go pay your damn props to the blogs that you think deserve respect. Or go back to that other communal blog that you were a part of.
Or go comment on blogs that would actually welcome your boring and angry spew.
I am so over you. You are duller than dirt.
People, please join me in declaring this a slappz free zone.
jess, you wrote:
"Then why is the country that doesn't take the military aid succeed beyond those that do? After 50 years you could call that a failed experiment."
Ah, the logic. In other words, democracy only exists where the US does NOT tread? Or do you mean that wherever the US goes, democracy and freedom are not among the goals driving our presence?
Meanwhile, for what reason is Costa Rica is buffered from destablizing efforts originating in neighboring countries?
You wrote:
"Embrace military dictatorships (backed by the US) to garner freedom. And all statistics prove it wrong."
Really? What statistics?
People with your mindset seem to believe all events in the world occur within individual spheres where no overlap occurs. That would be nice, but things don't work that way.
The statistics that I listed above. Do you suffer from some medical condition? Scroll up, idiot.
Sheesh. And no, everytime you try to respond to my statements with an "in other words" you are creating strawmen that don't even belong in the debate.
Oh, you do have one thing right. We do not go elsewhere in the interest of democracy and freedom. We go in the interest of capitalism.
Sorry fran. I'll ignore him over here for now.
He is a last worder, so no doubt there will be more last words. I can't imagine they'll have any value but we'll see.
Post a Comment