National Healthcare

The blog “Universal Healthcare: Yes or No?” addresses the controversial subject of the American healthcare system. The argument is weak because it lacks facts, is poorly researched, and based solely on opinion. The author provides several reasons wshy he believes the universal healthcare to be negative.

The first is that taxes would be higher and education and defense finances would decrease. This statement is partially true because taxes would increase. However the money doesn’t have to be taken from those areas; money could be taken from the millions spent on experimental space travel and professional sports. It is also interesting to see how much you spend just going to the doctor/dentist every year anyway. In my experience I spent less when I lived in a country with national healthcare than I do now, and I have good insurance.

The second is that healthy people would be caring for unhealthy people. The clear issue with this statement is that very few people live a perfectly healthy life, especially in America. Everyone deserves healthcare.

The third statement was very saddening to read. The author felt that “doctors in the future may give up on their aspirations because doctors would likely be paid less than they are now.” One reason private healthcare is bad is because a lot of the doctors care more for money than the patients they see. One example is that they receive a bonus when they turn down patients. In England, the doctors that work for the government receive a bonus when they stop someone from smoking, or stabilize a person’s blood pressure. Someone should not strive to be a doctor because they desire to be a millionaire. A doctor’s prime concern should be saving more people’s lives, not being unbelievably rich.

The fourth statement is concerns with legal liability and the problems associated with suing. This seems to be a general guess. I am guessing that people are more likely to sue if they’ve paid thousands for an operation rather than if they get it for free. Also, I’m sure the government is smart enough to set up ways of avoiding issues with suing, just like the doctors are today.

The fifth concern was higher taxing on fast food and smoking and this would restrict personal freedom. Drugs are illegal, there are age restrictions to alcohol use, and some states do not allow smoking in public anymore. The author failed to mention that there are already restrictions on many aspects of the American life. This is because without restrictions there is corruption. If it is for the good of the people, I see no problem in creating restrictions on smoking and fast food.

The sixth statement addresses the fact that people without insurance can still have healthcare at certain places, and that emergency treatment is required by law. Emergency is just a small part of healthcare and the care uninsured people receive is poor and does not apply to all Americans. Also, it is not just uninsured people that are denied healthcare. Insured people get denied for using the wrong hospital in an emergency, or because the procedure is believed to be experimental. In a personal life or death experience, the hospital, accepted my insurance card, and cared for me. However, the insurance company billed me $66,000 for going to the wrong hospital. This was the only hospital close to where I lived.
The problem with the private healthcare is that it becomes a business instead of a necessity. Even calling an ambulance costs around $1,000. In another personal experience, a man was having a heart attack, and not one person would call the ambulance for him and all said it was because they did not want to be charged.

The last point this person made was about the wait lists. In an emergency situation, the hospitals do not put you on a wait list for a few days, they tend to you immediately. I, nor anyone in my family, were ever put on a wait list. Also, I've waited far longer in the private healthcare system.

The author of this argument seems to have little knowledge of what it is like living with national healthcare, and provides few facts on the matter; therefore the argument is weak. I believe the national healthcare is the most humane way to go. America should tend to every citizen, not just the rich ones.

American Foreign Affairs

The terror suspects held in United States jails in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay were badly tortured previously to being released without any charges. This disrespect and belittlement of suspects gives America a bad international view and causes more citizens to lose faith in the Government’s foreign affairs possition. The eleven men that were physically examined for two days had evidence of severe abuse and harassment. These men had not yet even been convicted of any terror crimes and some had been imprisoned for several years and were not the only cases discovered. The White House continues to argue that all the men have been treated humanely even though there is substantial evidence of the torture.

The shocking facts of physical, sexual, and mental abuse give reason for the United States Government to take action. Not only should they admit to the crimes, but they should apologize to the innocent victims. There is no reason a person, American or not, should be treated so terribly while being held in a United States jail. The prisons containing terror suspects should treat them as any U.S. citizen suspect would be treated. To not do so causes America to be as guilty as the people they are hurting. To gain a better image and to maintain the respect of the citizens in America, the men guilty of the torturing should be forced to apologize and be punished. This kind of behavior should not be acceptable coming from the people that represent this country. To deny the facts is irresponsible and will weaken America’s respect in many foreign countries. It is shocking to hear what American people are capable of, and they should be held accountable.

U.S and Pakistan

In the article "A Dangerous Place," the author is directing his argument to the american public. He argues that the Bush administration needs to make a plan in aiding Pakistan. The main concern was the recent accidental shooting of twelve Pakistan soldiers. The Bush administration say that there had been a warning of the attack so friendly soldiers could be safe. However, there was obviously some kind of misunderstanding if the killings actually did take place. The arguement is strong because he states facts. One being that America has given $10 billion dollars already to Pakistan, but not much progress is occurring. The author is slightly convinsing; however, seems very one sided. I believe there is more data to be collected on what is actually happening in Pakistan. It just didn´t seem complete. His facts helped his case, but there were not enough. The mistake that happened in Pakistan is unacceptable, and the Bush administration should take full responsibility. There is evidently not enough communication between the two countries. The author believes to make any difference The US must aid Pakistan with structured government plans, economic aid, and a good example. The mistake has weakened an already weak bond. The author believes that there is potential for a good partnership between the two countries which helps the reader agree more readily. Overall the article was mediocre. The author convinced me that there was potential, but I felt there was some excluded information.

Federal Government's Potential Role in the Katrina Crisis Reconstruction

In the editorial “Helping the Katrina Homeless” the author argues that local, state, and federal government need to become involved in the reconstruction of people’s homes and lives that were destroyed by Hurrican Katrina. The argument is directed towards the general public and U.S. citizens so they can be aware of the devastation still present in New Orleans. The author argues that the first thing to be done is congress approving $73 million funding to help fix the issue. The next two actions are to “extend the disaster housing assistance program, which is set to expire in March 2009,” and to rewrite the federal disaster law. If these two steps are not taken, the author states that there will be even more homeless, and sick people than before. He also mentions that homelessness has doubled since the storm. These facts strengthen this argument and give readers a reason to agree with what is being stated. The reader is also convinced when the author states “such a measure passed the Senate . . .” which reveals there is real potential for these ideas. There are many people unaware that victims are still suffering from Hurricane Katrina, and this article brings the issue back to the surface. It is convincing because it states many facts of ill people and that the amount homelessness have increased. I feel even more strongly that the government should aid them after reading this article. The political importance is that it shows congress at work. The Senate agree but the House of Representatives do not, and because of the American system nothing can be done without further support. This is why this article is so critical; it persuades people to agree with the plans which can in turn encourage and influence the government's decision.

Obama's Search for Vice-President

Finally the drawn out battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is coming to an end. The article titled “Obama Begins Running-mate search” confirms that there are many rumors that Hillary Clinton will be conceding fairly soon. It explains that “A candidate needs 2,118 delegates to secure the nomination and Mr Obama now has the support of 2,154 delegates. Mrs Clinton has 1,919.” This reveals the outcome as quite obvious. According to the article Mr. Obama is in search for his vice president; therefore, he has formed a team of three people to help him make a decision. The team consists of Caroline Kennedy, former deputy Attorney General Eric Holder and Jim Johnson. It is said that Barack Obama has considered Hillary Clinton as his vice president, and she has confirmed to being “open” to this suggestion. This article is important to read because it reveals the next steps in the presidential election. It is important to know who is ahead, and to be aware of how each decision is being reached. This article introduces the subjects of vice-president, and the winning of the democratic party. These are two very significant issues at this time and people should keep up with it accordingly.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7436811.stm