Things to consider—

Since early 2011, Obama's been waging proxy war on Syria. Imported death squads masquerade as freedom fighters. The scheme's familiar. It repeats. It reflects US imperialism's dark side. In the 1980s, CIA-recruited mujahideen fighters battled Afghanistan's Soviet occupiers. Ronald Reagan called them "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers." He characterized Contra killers the same way. —Stephen LendmanFor over a century now US ambassadors have acted as fifth columns in the nations they are embedded in, their role chiefly to foster corporate and plutocratic power and coordinate machinations against any truly pro-democratic government.•••••"The dead end identity politics of SF Pride, which sells out a peace hero like Bradley Manning to curry favor with the American ruling class, is what I had in mind. The empire loves your tameness, irrelevance and cowardice, SF Pride. You don’t bother the American ruling class — a five foot two, 105 pound soldier does because he has a conscience and because he didn’t make comfort the guiding principle of his life...." —Randy Shields
Apr 062013
 
PrintFriendly and PDF


By Ezra Klein, Updated: 

Every year, the International Federation of Health Plans — a global insurance trade association that includes more than 100 insurers in 25 countries — releases survey data showing the prices that insurers are actually paying for different drugs, devices, and medical services in different countries. And every year, the data is shocking.

The IFHP just released the data for 2012. And yes, once again, the numbers are shocking.

This is the fundamental fact of American health care: We pay much, much more than other countries do for the exact same things. For a detailed explanation of why, see this article. But this post isn’t about the why. It’s about the prices, and the graphs.

One note: Prices in the United States are expressed as a range. There’s a reason for that. In other countries, prices are set centrally and most everyone, no matter their region or insurance arrangement, pays pretty close to the same amount. In the United States, each insurer negotiates its own prices, and different insurers end up paying wildly different amounts. That’s what Steven Brill’s explosive article was about, and it’s why you see U.S. prices expressed as a range rather than a single number. Continue reading »

Did you like this? Share it:
Apr 012013
 
PrintFriendly and PDF

By Andre Damon, wsws.org

Obama-talking-Medicare-Social-Security-cuts

Following the imposition of “sequestration” budget cuts that will amount to $1.2 trillion over the next decade, Obama and the Republicans are quickly turning their attention to slashing and ultimately dismantling Medicare, the government health insurance program for the elderly in the United States.

The New York Times published an article last week detailing ongoing closed-door negotiations between the Obama administration and congressional Republicans, pointing to broad agreement between the Democrats and Republicans on a deal to cut Medicare costs. Continue reading »

Did you like this? Share it:
Mar 252013
 
PrintFriendly and PDF

by Stephen Lendman

Misguided liberals as usual have rallied behind this imposture, chiefly because their idol, Obama, sold them on the idea.

Misguided liberals as usual have rallied behind this imposture, chiefly because their idol, Obama, endorsed the idea. Meanwhile, wingnuts attack it, but for all the wrong reasons.

Obamacare is a healthcare rationing scheme. It enriches insurers, drug companies and large hospital chains. Universal, single-payer coverage alone works. Obama and complicit Democrats spurned it. They prioritize taxing more, rationing care, placing profits above human need, and forcing ordinary people to bear a greater burden than previously. Continue reading »

Did you like this? Share it:
Mar 012013
 
PrintFriendly and PDF
Salon [1] / By Laura Miller [2]
historyofsex

Academic history — the kind backed up by piles of primary-source research and hedged with cautionary remarks — is often useful, but rarely fascinating. Most of it, however, isn’t about a subject as perennially engaging as Faramerz Dabhoiwala’s. The Oxford historian’s new book, “The Origins of Sex: A History of the First Sexual Revolution,” [3] describes how sex became modern in 18th-century England, a transformation that explains “the profound chasm between our present attitudes to sex and those that prevailed for most of western history.” We tend to think of sex as something primal and unchanging, but as Dabhoiwala tells it, nothing could be further from the truth. Continue reading »

Did you like this? Share it: