Obama - What is your opinion so far on his Presidency

ironsides

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Has the givt of gab and he lies a lot.


Just in case you have not seen these interesting statistics:

A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very
interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations
International Health Organization.

Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:

U.S. 65%

England 46%

Canada 42%

Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:

U.S. 93%

England 15%

Canada 43%

Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:

U.S. 90%

England 15%

Canada 43%

Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:

U.S. 77%

England 40%

Canada 43%

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:

U.S. 71

England 14

Canada 18

Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":

U.S. 12%

England 2%

Canada 6%


I don't know about you, but I don't want "Universal Healthcare" comparable to England or Canada.

Moreover, it was Sen. Harry Reid who said, "Elderly Americans must learn to accept the inconveniences of old age."

SHIP HIM TO CANADA OR ENGLAND!

He is "elderly" himself but be sure to remember his health insurance is different from yours as Congress has their own high-end coverage! He will never have to learn to accept "inconveniences"!!!

AND THE WINNER IS VERY INTERESTING!

The percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the
cabinet. You know what the private business sector is... a real life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages.

T. Roosevelt........ 38%

Taft.....................40%

Wilson ................52%

Harding..................49%

Coolidge.............. 48%

Hoover................. 42%

F. Roosevelt......... 50%

Truman..................50%

Eisenhower........... 57%

Kennedy.............. 30%

Johnson.................47%

Nixon................... 53%

Ford..................... 42%

Carter.................. 32%

Reagan...................56%

GH Bush................. 51%

Clinton ................. 39%

GW Bush................ 55%

And the winner of the Chicken Dinner is:


Obama................ 8% !!!

Yep! That's right! Only Eight Percent!!!...the least by far of the last 19 presidents!! And these people are trying to tell our
big corporations how to run their business? They know what's best for GM...Chrysler...Wall Street...and you and me?

How can the president of a major nation and society...the one with the most successful economic system in world history...
stand and talk about business when he's never worked for one?...or about jobs when he has never really had one??! And neither has 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers! They've spent most of their time in academia, government and/or non-profit jobs....or as "community organizers" when they should have been in an employment line.
 
Spade

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
11
Aether Island
The people of the United States invest so much of their power and aspirations in the office of the president, that those individuals who achieve that office are treated as demigods, or, if perceived as going counter to the "public" will, cast as devils. One would have thought that the notion of a divine Caesar would have declined with Rome.
 
ironsides

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Spade said:
The people of the United States invest so much of their power and aspirations in the office of the president, that those individuals who achieve that office are treated as demigods, or, if perceived as going counter to the "public" will, cast as devils. One would have thought that the notion of a divine Caesar would have declined with Rome.
Click to expand...

No, unfortunately it thrives well here, after all it has spread to more than movie hero's.
 
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
ironsides; [SIZE=2 said:
AND THE WINNER IS VERY INTERESTING![/SIZE]

The percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the
cabinet. You know what the private business sector is... a real life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages.

T. Roosevelt........ 38%
Click to expand...

You have to be careful, what you've written looks as if you are insinuating jobs in the public sector are less worthy than jobs in the private sector when it's simply not the case, in fact often the other way around. The public sector jobs are often ones that need doing that the private sector doesn't want. Eg. operating infirm people's facilities, looking after orphaned or abandoned children, public health nurses.
 
Spade

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
11
Aether Island
In many instances, the public sector is more efficient and cost effective, since the public weal is the overriding consideration, not profit. And, the public sector is more sensitive to the public will.
 
captain morgan

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Spade said:
In many instances, the public sector is more efficient and cost effective, since the public weal is the overriding consideration, not profit. And, the public sector is more sensitive to the public will.
Click to expand...



The issue at had is not related to profit as much as it revolves around an analysis of the expenditures. In terms of the public sector, are the taxpayers receiving a competitive service/product at a competitive price?
 
petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,287
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
The real problem is private sector who don't give a **** whether the taxpayers gain or lose as long as they have their cut which comes on the purchase and sale of an investment, win or lose.

They will simply wash their hands and say caveat emptor.
 
captain morgan

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
JLM said:
You have to be careful, what you've written looks as if you are insinuating jobs in the public sector are less worthy than jobs in the private sector when it's simply not the case, in fact often the other way around. The public sector jobs are often ones that need doing that the private sector doesn't want. Eg. operating infirm people's facilities, looking after orphaned or abandoned children, public health nurses.
Click to expand...


There is a catch-22 on your comments. In terms of the examples at the end of your post, the private sector (by in large) does not have direct access to the funds raised through the tax base. Further, regarding healthcare, it was legislated that the private sector could not participate in activities that were earmarked as public services. It has not been until recently that the private sector has been participating in this area on a head-to-head basis with the public sector. You can do the analysis relative to effectiveness, efficiency and costs in order to provide a judgement
 
captain morgan

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
petros said:
The real problem is private sector who don't give a **** whether the taxpayers gain or lose as long as they have their cut which comes on the purchase and sale of an investment, win or lose.

They will simply wash their hands and say caveat emptor.
Click to expand...


Who says that the public sector gives a hoot? You've heard of zero-budget policy?

By in large, the public sector has little or no accountability and it shows. In Canada, healthcare is not held to any comparable standard as it has been legislated to not exist. Only recently have we seen this in education, yet the same old demands and excuses are offered-up as to why things are "broken".

I am not suggesting that the answer is to privatize everything, however, swinging the pendulum to the other extreme is also of no use.

petros said:
They will simply wash their hands and say caveat emptor.
Click to expand...

That also exists in the public realm, however, there are limited opportunities to hold the public sector directly responsible for transgressions. The private side is subject to all kinds of scrutiny
 
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
captain morgan said:
There is a catch-22 on your comments. In terms of the examples at the end of your post, the private sector (by in large) does not have direct access to the funds raised through the tax base. Further, regarding healthcare, it was legislated that the private sector could not participate in activities that were earmarked as public services. It has not been until recently that the private sector has been participating in this area on a head-to-head basis with the public sector. You can do the analysis relative to effectiveness, efficiency and costs in order to provide a judgement
Click to expand...

I think in the healthcare sector we need both public and private participation, private often for their expertise, public to act as watch dogs and to do quality control. :smile:
 
Last edited:
ironsides

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
JLM said:
You have to be careful, what you've written looks as if you are insinuating jobs in the public sector are less worthy than jobs in the private sector when it's simply not the case, in fact often the other way around. The public sector jobs are often ones that need doing that the private sector doesn't want. Eg. operating infirm people's facilities, looking after orphaned or abandoned children, public health nurses.
Click to expand...


Goverment jobs are still considered less than their civilian counterparts, and more so back in T. Roosevelt's time. There is quite a difference in salaries.
In the U.S. today, private companies/organizations usually take care of operating facilities you mentioned outside of what the military, public health agencies and Veterans Administration operate. Orphanages, facilities for the disabled, home nursing care are pretty much run by the private sector. (the goverment sometimes will pay or supplement these organization for taking care of these individuals, but they still work as a for profit organization. (lots of money to be made, and for the most part do a better job)
 
ironsides

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
I think he will be a little more humble now that the Democrats were spanked. No more saying to us "Now listen", now he will listen. ;-)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom