Who are American politicians beholden to? The People? The Constitution?

[MRT144]

Also, I'm surprised nobody has picked up on this story:

http://www.lesechos.fr/economie-politique/france/document/0202577006715-goodyear-la-lettre-de-titan-a-montebourg-540115.php

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9885369/French-minister-hits-back-at-three-hour-day-attack.html

Arnaud Montebourg, minister for industrial renewal in France, was subject to a written barrage of abuse from Maurice Taylor, chief executive of US tyremaker Titan, after the French politician appealed for financial support for an ailing Goodyear factory.

Mr Taylor berated French workers for putting in just "three hours" a day, and said his company would be "stupid" to invest in the loss-making tyre plant in Amiens, northern France.

"The French workforce gets paid high wages but only work for three hours. They get one hour for breaks and lunch, talk for three and work for three. I told this to the French union workers to their faces. They told me that's the French way!" Mr Taylor wrote.

Mr Montebourg, who declined to comment on Wednesday, added his voice to a rising tide of outrage in the Gallic nation in a written response telling the Titan boss "your words, as extremist as they are insulting, show a perfect ignorance of our country."

He went on to point out that since Titan is "20 times smaller" than "French technology leader" Michelin, which is "35 times more profitable", Mr Taylor "could have learnt and gained enormously from a French base."

CLICK LINK FOR MORE

I would never buy tires from a nationalist outfit like Titan

[molly bloom]

I love when you guys mention Greece

Which was ruled by a right wing junta between 1967 and 1974, and a Conservative government between 1974-1981 & 1990-1993. Rather pointless blaming Greece's financial woes simply on Socialism.

Was reminded by watching the Aussie film 'Head On'- it had a well-known Greek song about the violent junta response to the students in the Athens Polytechnic on the soundtrack....

[MrFun]

My problem is that when you have these social contracts that a certain segment of the population begins to rely on them instead of relying on themselves...certainly a recipe for disaster in the long run.

I agree with you. I hate the idea of corporate welfare.

[Straybow]

I love when you guys mention Greece to push your idiotic talking points about how terrible Europe is. It's kind of like using Mississippi as an example of how utterly backwards America must be.

You're more correct than you know, it is a good example. As much as we poke fun at Mississippi or West Virginia for being backwards it is mostly about the ignorant people and the politics. We don't pretend that in the US all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average. The American success story is that you don't need a government program to get out of some backwater hick town. Nobody owes you anything, and the sooner you realize that the sooner you can get off your duff and do something for yourself in the workplace.

Let's be vaguely honest here, blah blah blah.

None of which had anything to do with the subject. Capitalism isn't responsible for the problems Europe has faced in the last century or so, except in providing Marxists a target. Social policy spending is the problem in the countries I've listed. In Greece they gave government-job-for-life guarantees to left wing protestors who couldn't hold down a real job. These are the guys who've driven up labor costs, waste, and corruption in state-owned telecom, water, power, fuel and mining. The austerity program requires privatizing a portion of these industries to raise €50B and lower costs through competition.

When you Americans talk about the evils of socialism, you just sound incredibly naive to people who actually lived through repressive regimes, domestic war and constant turmoil.

Many Americans came from oppressive regimes and war-torn Europe and now recognize the same creeping socialist tyranny they left behind. Quit whining about your past and using it as an excuse for failure.

Basic socialism to us IS freedom. The freedom to live, work and raise families without an oppressive level of control imposed by government or corporations.

I don't know what country you come from. Try starting a business and you'll find out how much oppressive control your government exerts.

How are you free if you are at the utter mercy of an employer who can fire you at will, pay you anything they like and leave you destitute and without access to medical care if anything goes wrong in your life? A basic level of socialism should be the ultimate American dream, all men created equal and with the same opportunities. Unfettered capitalism is the ultimate pyramid scheme.

No, socialism is the pyramid scheme, always thinking somebody else will foot the bill when the government promises fail. The government has no magical powers to make any guarantee a reality except in taking by force from somebody else, and even then sometimes there isn't enough to be seized to make good. That's what happened in Greece, and now everybody is whining about losing benefits their economy could never support to begin with. Cry me a river.

The concept of an employer who can't fire you at will is absurdity. If you are dependent upon the government to guarantee your income and medical care you are no more free than if you are dependent on an employer.

Which was ruled by a right wing junta between 1967 and 1974, and a Conservative government between 1974-1981 & 1990-1993. Rather pointless blaming Greece's financial woes simply on Socialism.

I don't see that the so-called conservative governments balanced the budget and cut waste. The blokes who took over after the junta are the ones who promised jobs for life to the poor leftists who had been persecuted.

[kentonio]

The American success story is that you don't need a government program to get out of some backwater hick town. Nobody owes you anything, and the sooner you realize that the sooner you can get off your duff and do something for yourself in the workplace.

Which is why you have people living in levels of poverty that would never be tolerated in western Europe, and hey they may have grown up hungry in a ghetto, but they should have just worked harder right? Pathetic.

None of which had anything to do with the subject. Capitalism isn't responsible for the problems Europe has faced in the last century or so, except in providing Marxists a target. Social policy spending is the problem in the countries I've listed. In Greece they gave government-job-for-life guarantees to left wing protestors who couldn't hold down a real job. These are the guys who've driven up labor costs, waste, and corruption in state-owned telecom, water, power, fuel and mining. The austerity program requires privatizing a portion of these industries to raise €50B and lower costs through competition.

Firstly you don't understand what the hell you're talking about, and second its utterly irrelevant to any serious discussion about Europe. Seriously, please stop trying to use ****ty countries like Greece as an example of anything.

Many Americans came from oppressive regimes and war-torn Europe and now recognize the same creeping socialist tyranny they left behind. Quit whining about your past and using it as an excuse for failure.

I'm from England, and don't have any problems at all with my past. Even in our highly capitalist country however we have a guaranteed level of socialism that the population would literally overthrow any government if they tried to remove. This is why I know that like so many Americans you are utterly retarded on the subject of socialism. We've had socialized medicine for over 70 years, and you could probably count on one hand the number of people in the country rich or poor who'd want to get rid of it. All your bull**** about evil government and socialism being the poor stealing from the rich is just that, bull****.

I don't know what country you come from. Try starting a business and you'll find out how much oppressive control your government exerts.

Sure, it's much better to let factories poison the rivers and air, employers force their employees to work in dangerous unsanitary conditions, and to not worry about things like lead in kids toys or dangerous flammable furniture or any of the other million reasons why government regulations over business exist. We tried it your way for centuries, and people got tired of being treated like **** so some ****er with no sense of social responsibility could turn a buck.

No, socialism is the pyramid scheme, always thinking somebody else will foot the bill when the government promises fail. The government has no magical powers to make any guarantee a reality except in taking by force from somebody else, and even then sometimes there isn't enough to be seized to make good.

Socialism is civilized people contributing a small proportion of their wages to ensure that everyone can be provided with a decent life, including the payee. We recognize that civilization is about society not about selfish ****** with wild west fantasies believing that it's every man for himself.

The concept of an employer who can't fire you at will is absurdity.

Don't be so ridiculous, the ability to terminate employment on a whim makes the employee a damn indentured servant. In this country you get a verbal warning, a written warning and then you can be fired. You have the right to bring someone with you to ensure you're being treated fairly and if you think you've been fired without legitimate reason you can take your employer to a tribunal. You don't need to treat people like utter **** to get them to work.

If you are dependent upon the government to guarantee your income and medical care you are no more free than if you are dependent on an employer.

Government is dependent on the people, it has no incentive to **** people. It IS the people. The government isn't just a small group of top people trying to turn a profit, it's actually representative.

P.S. Please stop talking about Greece, you're looking more and more idiotic every time you do it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

P.S. Please stop talking about Greece, you're looking more and more idiotic every time you do it.

Not possible. He already started off at the highest level of idiotic.

[Straybow]

Which is why you have people living in levels of poverty that would never be tolerated in western Europe, and hey they may have grown up hungry in a ghetto, but they should have just worked harder right? Pathetic.

I suppose you think we don't spend anything on welfare, WIC, and dozens of other programs to help the poor. Do you really think your counsel housing is any better than the US ghettos? No. And for that you can only blame yourselves, because your socialism created the counsel housing instead of creating jobs so the poor schlubs could earn better housing. It makes you feel good to think you're "doing something" when really you are perpetuating the poverty just as much as the American system does. You cannot legislate poverty away, and the more you try, the more you spend yourself into the poor house with little to no effect.

I guarantee you, people living in poverty have choices. They're being told it isn't their fault, and they have a choice to blame "the man" or not. The ones who don't are the ones who make it out of the ghetto.

Firstly you don't understand what the hell you're talking about, and second its utterly irrelevant to any serious discussion about Europe. Seriously, please stop trying to use ****ty countries like Greece as an example of anything.

No, apparently you don't understand what you're talking about. You're very strong about voicing your opinion but strangely weak on actual argument. So tell me, what do you think the Greeks were spending all that government money on? Whose governing model were they following? You seem to think only evil capitalists exploit the people and cause such suffering.

I'm from England, and don't have any problems at all with my past.

Apparently you do, since you are convinced your evil countrymen were poisoning the rivers and throwing little old ladies down staircases until the government stepped in to rescue you.

Even in our highly capitalist country however we have a guaranteed level of socialism that the population would literally overthrow any government if they tried to remove. This is why I know that like so many Americans you are utterly retarded on the subject of socialism. We've had socialized medicine for over 70 years, and you could probably count on one hand the number of people in the country rich or poor who'd want to get rid of it. All your bull**** about evil government and socialism being the poor stealing from the rich is just that, bull****.

Yes, your people, well-to-do or poor, know nothing else after 70 years. You're convinced that without the government nanny you'd be kicked to the curb when your kidneys fail or what have you. All political parties have a vested interest in not upsetting that apple cart. The fact is that the NHS sucks. The rich, of course, can fly to Switzerland, the US, or anywhere else they please for anything they don't trust to your NHS, or fly in the doctors and treatments it won't provide for them. And they do.

In April, the British Medical Journal published an article about two studies conducted by the New York-based Commonwealth Fund. The studies compared the healthcare systems of 14 advanced countries, and on the 20 measures of comparison, Britain's centralized National Health Service performed well in 13, indifferently in two and badly in five.

On several measures, the NHS came out the worst of all the systems examined. For example, it ranked worst for five-year survival rates in cervical, breast and colon cancers. It was also worst for 30-day mortality rates after admission to a hospital for either hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke. On only one clinical measure was it best: the avoidance of amputation of the foot in diabetic gangrene.

This hardly seems like a cause for national rejoicing, yet according to the report, the British were the most satisfied with their healthcare of all the populations surveyed...

One explanation is ignorance... In my youth, I often heard the refrain that the NHS was "the envy of the world," and people in Britain are still inclined to believe that, even though they probably have never met anyone who envied the NHS and, indeed, probably know Continental Europeans residing in Britain who hurry home as soon as they require medical treatment, horrified by the prospect of subjecting themselves to a British hospital.

[From the LA Times, who disagree with you and must be a bunch of conservative neanderthals]

I don't know what country you come from. Try starting a business and you'll find out how much oppressive control your government exerts.

Sure, it's much better to let factories poison the rivers and air, employers force their employees to work in dangerous unsanitary conditions, and to not worry about things like lead in kids toys or dangerous flammable furniture or any of the other million reasons why government regulations over business exist. We tried it your way for centuries, and people got tired of being treated like **** so some ****er with no sense of social responsibility could turn a buck.

Oh, yes. Of course, evil capitalists are always keen to poison the land and people at every opportunity. Apparently you think that is a cogent argument, and then call me an idiot.

Second, I didn't say start a major manufacturing concern, I said, "start a business." Just try opening a shop and hiring one person, and you'll find yourself in a quagmire of bureaucratic nonsense. You'll find out how much the NHS really costs when you have to pay the employer's share of the employee's "contribution." You'll find out how much the unemployment and welfare system really costs when you have to pony that up. And here you are, arguing with me about how great your system is just because nobody you know is smart enough to complain.

Socialism is civilized people contributing a small proportion of their wages to ensure that everyone can be provided with a decent life, including the payee. We recognize that civilization is about society not about selfish ****** with wild west fantasies believing that it's every man for himself.

If only it were a "small portion." In your case, much of it is hidden from you in the form of the VAT. It imposes a hefty tax at every level of commerce. You actually think that "the man" has to pay it, but the "the man" doesn't get a dime unless he gets it from you. You have to buy the product for him to pay anything, and if you buy the product you are paying the tax for him. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp. Keep trying and it may come to you.



If you look at real GDP growth the curves show the interdependence of global economics. When the housing crisis hit the US everyone suffered. But there's a big difference between each of the countries, an offset that corresponds very closely to the degree of socialism each country has saddled itself with. I suppose that's just coincidence. It couldn't have anything to do with government inefficiency and waste in those lovely socialized programs. It couldn't have anything to do with siphoning off productivity and killing job creation through taxation.

If you are dependent upon the government to guarantee your income and medical care you are no more free than if you are dependent on an employer.

Government is dependent on the people, it has no incentive to **** people. It IS the people. The government isn't just a small group of top people trying to turn a profit, it's actually representative.

Yes, it is representative of the people, and they are thoroughly ignorant. I'm willing to admit I wouldn't make a good health care administrator. But for some reason you think the blowhards you send to Parliament are qualified to appoint the bureaucrats who make all those decisions for you, and for all the other people including the ones who really could do a better job of it in the private sector. They have an incentive to tell you the NHS is "the envy of the world" even when it isn't: so you'll vote for them. Keep trying and the concept may come to you.

P.S. Please stop talking about Greece, you're looking more and more idiotic every time you do it.

Why, because it makes my point too well? Just because you disagree with me doesn't make me an idiot. It could very well be you who is the idiot. How would you tell the difference? The facts point are not in your favor. Greece was doing what the rest of Europe does, just not as well.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Hey Stray, why not talk about socialist Germany, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, Austria, even Belgium?!? (with their constitutional crises) , actually more than half of Europe instead ?

For one they are more! socialst than Greece, Spain, Portugal or Ireland... but surprise surprise are doing betterr than the US, lower levels of unemployment, raising wages. Probably the most socialist of them all is Norway, and it's doing the best . Noone mention the natural resources as many other coutries have them too, but are not doing nearly as well as they are.

An interesting point about NHS is that it is probably the worst !?! national health service in the western world, but it still beats the US system in most important ways, and people would rather overthrow the government as opposed to not having it, and they are right too. USians when they clearly cannot compare with the average (let alone the best), pick the worst and try to make their arguments.

Anyhow - your ball is in wrong court. There are issues with Greece, Spain, EU as well, but they are certainly not socialism, or actually the "social policies" that are not real socialism, at least not by textbook definition.

This has been discussed here to death, in other EU "issues" related threads and one of the main points for European problems is having a common currency without having common institutions (plus a way they are imposed on the continent through the crisis without proper democratic process in addition). The problems are pretty clear but due to the history of the EU as an organization they are not being tackled in a sensible way, but instead of with US republican type solutions (austerity to the hilt) which are creating the massive unemployment and years of unnecessary pain the the countries who are at the "uncompetitive labour" end of the stick - namely Greece (fully deserved on all levels , as Dauphin mentioned a third world country with access to first world finance) and Spain (purely private sector caused, or if anything to be faulted from the governmnent is lack of additional regulation of some sectors - mostly banking and construction, when the time to deflate the "obvious" bubbles wha right, which was before the US started crisis). In short socialism has nothing to do with Europe's problems.

[Dauphin]

If you look at real GDP growth the curves show the interdependence of global economics. When the housing crisis hit the US everyone suffered. But there's a big difference between each of the countries, an offset that corresponds very closely to the degree of socialism each country has saddled itself with. I suppose that's just coincidence. It couldn't have anything to do with government inefficiency and waste in those lovely socialized programs. It couldn't have anything to do with siphoning off productivity and killing job creation through taxation.

Is that chart corrected for population growth? It looks to me like the countries with the largest population growths also had their GDP grow the most. I'd also be interested in knowing how you measure the metric "socialism" such that you can say "an offset that corresponds very closely to the degree of socialism each country has saddled itself with".

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Also for that graph, here is one from world bank, from 2003 to 2011 though, but you can see the divergence on the above graph allegedly happening all along.

I have added a few more countries, just to show how current socialist heaven - Norway, really performes in comparison ... and again for the record, there are many other countries with natural resources which are not using them nearly as efficiently as this country which is socialist for Germany, let alone UK or US. This chart is in current USD.

GDP per capita (current US$)

Data from World Bank

[Sava]

capcom debates are perhaps the most idiotic

[kentonio]

I suppose you think we don't spend anything on welfare, WIC, and dozens of other programs to help the poor.

Yes, America already has basic levels of socialism, they are just underfunded, woefully inefficient and badly coordinated, because dumb hicks like you vote against the very concept of them existing, so instead of funding them to an efficient level and the national conversation being about what works and what doesnt, they are constantly having to fight to even provide basic levels of service.

Do you really think your counsel housing is any better than the US ghettos? No.

There is not a single council estate in Britain that comes even close to the worst ghettos in America, not one.

And for that you can only blame yourselves, because your socialism created the counsel housing instead of creating jobs so the poor schlubs could earn better housing. It makes you feel good to think you're "doing something" when really you are perpetuating the poverty just as much as the American system does. You cannot legislate poverty away, and the more you try, the more you spend yourself into the poor house with little to no effect.

This is so stupid I don't even know where to start.

I guarantee you, people living in poverty have choices. They're being told it isn't their fault, and they have a choice to blame "the man" or not. The ones who don't are the ones who make it out of the ghetto.

The reason this is idiotic is because you create a system where the further down the ladder people start, the harder it is for them to achieve anything. You take some rich kid like HC growing up in a safe, well fed household with plenty of familial support and it's not difficult for that kid to make something of themselves. They have little or no other obligations other than to study and all the help they need to do so. Then take a ghetto kid who is underfed on ****ty artificial foods, lives in an area where the walk to school each day is a test of survival, where the classes are full of misbehaving violent kids and a home where they have no money for any kind of support, no parental encouragement to achieve and no experience of anything better. For that kid to make anything of themselves is a Herculean effort which is why so many fewer of them ever do make it.

Socialism is about trying to ensure that everyone has a fair chance at life, rather than the money and opportunity always rising up to an increasingly small elite while everyone else stays at the bottom. You may dream of a future where the privileged live in gated communities while the dirty masses rot in squalor, but to us that kind of dystopian future is the stuff of nightmares.

No, apparently you don't understand what you're talking about. You're very strong about voicing your opinion but strangely weak on actual argument. So tell me, what do you think the Greeks were spending all that government money on? Whose governing model were they following? You seem to think only evil capitalists exploit the people and cause such suffering.

Greece is a backwater second world nation in a highly volatile corner of the world which has been a mess for generations. Pointing at it and going 'Look, that's what socialism does!' is so mindnumbingly stupid that it's not worth dignifying with a response. It's like pointing at a tramp wearing a red sweater and going 'Look, that's what wearing a red sweater does to you!'.

Apparently you do, since you are convinced your evil countrymen were poisoning the rivers and throwing little old ladies down staircases until the government stepped in to rescue you.

Actually England does have a pretty bad history to point back on, our citizens spent generations living in urban ghettos in horrible conditions working for a pittance with many ending up decaying in the poorhouses. Environments full of crime, rape, murder, rampant alcoholism and addiction. It was the early industrial age, and you know what solved that? Here's a clue, it wasn't industry and business suddenly growing a conscience.

Yes, your people, well-to-do or poor, know nothing else after 70 years. You're convinced that without the government nanny you'd be kicked to the curb when your kidneys fail or what have you.

Sure, we're all just brainwashed by all that free healthcare into thinking it would be better to not have it. Please explain how a poor person in that wonderful pure capitalism system you clearly wish you had would get treatment for the kidney failure you mentioned?

The fact is that the NHS sucks. The rich, of course, can fly to Switzerland, the US, or anywhere else they please for anything they don't trust to your NHS, or fly in the doctors and treatments it won't provide for them. And they do.

The NHS provides a great service for most people, saying that it 'sucks' means that you know about as much about it as you do about Greece. If I get sick, I can attend a GP within a couple of days (often same day), be diagnosed and medicine prescribed with a small fee for the medicine if I'm a worker and free if I'm unemployed, a student or elderly. If it's something more serious the hospital referral follows quickly after, again with no form filling, no fees to pay or panic about how much being sick might cost me, no matter what the illness is or the treatment I might require. The NHS is not perfect of course, I've experienced French healthcare, and in some ways they are superior, in others we are. There was a problem for a long time with waiting lists for complex procedures, but major initiatives have brought those down considerably in recent years too.

The magic of the NHS is that nobody falls through the net. Nobody gets sick and has to start worrying about whether they can afford a doctor or whether they should just ride it out and hope its nothing serious. Oh and you know what? If people want to pay for faster treatment or better rooms, we also have a private healthcare industry that allows them to do so. The number of people who would bother flying to the US for treatment is so minuscule as to be irrelevant. Considering the US has some of the best top level treatment in the world though, good on them if they can afford it. The shame is that so few Americans can either.

Oh, yes. Of course, evil capitalists are always keen to poison the land and people at every opportunity. Apparently you think that is a cogent argument, and then call me an idiot.

Yep, you're an idiot. Business cares first and foremost about profit, things like responsible environmentalism come very low on their priority list. You must have missed the long, long list of US factories that got sued over the last few decades for poisoning rivers and local air.

Second, I didn't say start a major manufacturing concern, I said, "start a business." Just try opening a shop and hiring one person, and you'll find yourself in a quagmire of bureaucratic nonsense. You'll find out how much the NHS really costs when you have to pay the employer's share of the employee's "contribution." You'll find out how much the unemployment and welfare system really costs when you have to pony that up. And here you are, arguing with me about how great your system is just because nobody you know is smart enough to complain.

That must be why there are no profitable businesses in Britain because its all just so terrible. Our unemployment rate must be WAY higher than yours, yes?

If only it were a "small portion." In your case, much of it is hidden from you in the form of the VAT. It imposes a hefty tax at every level of commerce. You actually think that "the man" has to pay it, but the "the man" doesn't get a dime unless he gets it from you. You have to buy the product for him to pay anything, and if you buy the product you are paying the tax for him. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp. Keep trying and it may come to you.

'The man'? Are we living in a bad seventies movie now?

We're quite aware of what we pay out thank you, and we do so knowing that having to pay for those things ourselves would require a far larger proportion of earnings. This is why your healthcare is so utterly ****ed, by buying our services en masse we can ensure far lower costs for all. It's called single payer, you might want to look it up.

If you look at real GDP growth the curves show the interdependence of global economics. When the housing crisis hit the US everyone suffered. But there's a big difference between each of the countries, an offset that corresponds very closely to the degree of socialism each country has saddled itself with. I suppose that's just coincidence. It couldn't have anything to do with government inefficiency and waste in those lovely socialized programs. It couldn't have anything to do with siphoning off productivity and killing job creation through taxation.

No it probably couldn't, but even if socialism did produce slightly lower GDP growth, you know something? I really wouldn't care so much. Why exactly would I care about huge growth rates when such a vast proportion of wealth is increasingly siphoning off to a tiny, tiny minority of super rich folks? Is that going to make a family on the poverty line get their medical bills paid any easier or their rent paid on time? I know you love to imagine that that wealth trickles down, but it's a fantasy. Income inequality is a poison, and unless you do something to deal with that it really doesn't matter how much money you have coming into the country.

They have an incentive to tell you the NHS is "the envy of the world" even when it isn't: so you'll vote for them. Keep trying and the concept may come to you.

You like numbers don't you, so please explain these numbers to me..

Total Healthcare expenditure as % of GDP:
USA: 17.6%
UK: 9.6%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

Life Expectancy:
UK: 79.58 Years
USA: 77.97 Years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ife_expectancy


http://www.commonwealthfund.org/News...Countries.aspx

Please tell me more about how efficient your system is.

Oh and let's not forget..

Preventable deaths
In 2009, lack of health insurance was responsible for about 45,000 excess preventable deaths in the U.S. Since then, as the number of uninsured has risen from about 46 million in 2009 to 48.6 million in 2012, the number of preventable deaths due to lack of insurance has grown to about 48,000 per year.

[Elok]

capcom debates are perhaps the most idiotic

Yeah, Capcom Debates was kind of boring, and silly too; I just can't take E. Honda and Mega Man seriously as policymakers, especially when E. Honda's wearing a red power tie across his fat, shirtless belly. But you have to give them credit for trying something different instead of Street Fighter Part XXIII.

[DinoDoc]

Please tell me more about how efficient your system is.

If the Francis Report is credible, I'd rather not have your system here.

[kentonio]

If the Francis Report is credible, I'd rather not have your system here.

Yes, failings in the Mid Staffordshire Foundation Trust is certainly proof that the entire socialized medicine system is inherently bad.