Is it really hard to fathom why many people despise the US?

[biffvernon]

But why should I have to go through a bureaucratic process where some underpaid flunky decides if I'm sick enough or not to do myself in instead of walking, or crawling , or wheeling myself over to the gun safe and choosing the gun that no child or grand child will want to own after Gramps does himself in with it and ending it at a time of my choosing and at a location where I think it will the least upsetting to those that survive me.

We have a different approach:

The UK's end-of-life care is ranked first out of 80 countries around the world, in the 2015 Quality of Death Index.

The quality of care and affordability of care in the UK was ranked first out of 80 countrues – including Australia, France and America - and was given a score of 100 out of 100.

Community engagement was ranked third with 92.5 points, after Belgium and New Zealand and in joint third place with France.

Human resources and the palliative and healthcare environment in Britain also both scored highly with a ranking of 88.2 and 88.5 respectively.

The report read that the UK's ranking "is due to comprehensive national policies, the extensive integration of palliative care into the National Health Service, a strong hospice movement, and deep community engagement on the issue.

The UK also came top in the first Quality of Death Index, produced in 2010.

The 2015 Quality of Death Index, a measure of the quality of palliative care in 80 countries around the world was released yesterday by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU).

http://www.nursinginpractice.com/articl ... care-world

[biffvernon]

So now let's think deeply about how the whole sorry mess of Syria and all it's implications is down to the USA.

http://www.truth-out.org/progressivepic ... -bloodbath

[AutomaticEarth]

More shootings in the US:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/breaki ... lock-down/

[clv101]

To all those posters that feel their country has lived safely without guns in private hands for years I suggest that wars tend to come a generation or two apart and the fact that you have never experienced any need to defend yourself in your lifetime does not mean you won't have to in the years and decades to come.

I'm still flabbergasted that you see the threat of the US military vanishing and foreign power invading as justification for a policy that sees many thousands of American's die each year.

If it was a virus, or a terrorist group or anything else causing such damage there'd be uproar. That's it's your own country's policy, and one you support is just beyond belief.

[vtsnowedin]

To all those posters that feel their country has lived safely without guns in private hands for years I suggest that wars tend to come a generation or two apart and the fact that you have never experienced any need to defend yourself in your lifetime does not mean you won't have to in the years and decades to come.

I'm still flabbergasted that you see the threat of the US military vanishing and foreign power invading as justification for a policy that sees many thousands of American's die each year.

If it was a virus, or a terrorist group or anything else causing such damage there'd be uproar. That's it's your own country's policy, and one you support is just beyond belief.

Your comment lacks a sense of proportion. A country of some 330 million people has literally millions of deaths each year. Tens of thousands die each year in auto accidents and hundreds of thousands from cancers caused by tobacco. Homicides by all methods is the fifteenth leading cause of death falling behind Parkinson's disease. Out of every 100,000 Americans some 721 die each year, only 5 by homicide and more then half of them inner city Gang bangers. Suicides rank tenth with 12 per 100,000 which is a similar rate to the UK.

[vtsnowedin]

I'm still flabbergasted that you see the threat of the US military vanishing and foreign power invading ....

The US military is the most expensive armed forces in the history of the world. Let the money stop flowing and the whole thing could disappear within weeks.
If Bernie Sanders was elected president, ( something that now is at the least possible) spending on the military would be cut by half within months. He and his minions would not know at what level the USA could be beaten and only a battle field or American city strewn with American bodies would send them a clue.

[PS_RalphW]

If you believe that any president wuld be allowed to cut the US military budget by 50% then you are deeply naive about the extent of dmocratic power in your own country. You must have read here of the broadside attack on Corbyn being elected leader of the opposition from the established power base, and he is no more than a middle of the road socialist, 1980s style.

Power is far more entrenched in the corporations and military in your country than in ours.

Of course the most expensive military budget in history cannot be sustained indefinitely, any more than the Roman empire did, but the days pf massive armies capable of invading entire continents is rapidly coming to an end.

[biffvernon]

Even if the US military were to disband by teatime today and the soldiers took up creative crafts like crochet, I can't see any other nation wanting to invade the land.

[Little John]

Even if the US military were to disband by teatime today and the soldiers took up creative crafts like crochet, I can't see any other nation wanting to invade the land.

You see, the thing is, on the one hand, VT comes out with the silly statements he does. But, you then go and undermine all serious points put to him that might cause him to reconsider his position by coming out with equally silly statements to the contrary. I know you think such statements demonstrate some kind of moral superiority. But, they don't. They merely demonstrate an insufferable smugness that is completely out of touch with reality.

[vtsnowedin]

Even if the US military were to disband by teatime today and the soldiers took up creative crafts like crochet, I can't see any other nation wanting to invade the land.

Surly in a resource strapped world several countries will want the resources the USA has in house. Or are you saying they are afraid of the population with it's 300 million guns that know how to use them?

[vtsnowedin]

If you believe that any president wuld be allowed to cut the US military budget by 50% then you are deeply naive about the extent of dmocratic power in your own country. You must have read here of the broadside attack on Corbyn being elected leader of the opposition from the established power base, and he is no more than a middle of the road socialist, 1980s style.

Power is far more entrenched in the corporations and military in your country than in ours.

Of course the most expensive military budget in history cannot be sustained indefinitely, any more than the Roman empire did, but the days pf massive armies capable of invading entire continents is rapidly coming to an end.

Your National health service has eaten Her Majesties Navy And Obama care may well destroy the Pentagon. With the national debt at 18.4 TRILLION dollars and counting I don't see the USA as secure either financially or militarily in the long term.

[biffvernon]

Even if the US military were to disband by teatime today and the soldiers took up creative crafts like crochet, I can't see any other nation wanting to invade the land.

Surly in a resource strapped world several countries will want the resources the USA has in house. Or are you saying they are afraid of the population with it's 300 million guns that know how to use them?

OK, so name a nation that would invade the USA. Who are you scared of?

There's Mexico, but they just want to improve their life chances a little by getting a job at McDonalds or wherever.

There's China, with it's zero-track record of invading other countries (for the sake of this discussion let's hold our noses and grant that Tibet has always been a part of China).

There's Russia, with plenty of it's own resources and no history of foreign invasion beyond securing a security buffer after the disastrous experiences of Napoleon and Hitler. (Afghanistan was an exception to their rule and they won't be making that mistake again.)

Which other nations are potential invaders? Most governments are kept pretty much busy keeping their own lands in order.

Oh, there's ISIS, or whatever they're called this week. But weren't they a US creation in the first place? Nah, they can't even invade much of a desert. They'd soon falter in rain or snow.

[PS_RalphW]

VT as you know the US has a bigger budget than the rest of the world's top ten spenders put together, near 1/3 of the entire global budget, for 4.4% of the global population.

You have a lot of resources to defend, but with only 2 national boundaries, and one of those a very stable ally, and any serious military adversary at least 2000 oceanic miles away, you have little to worry about this side of global economic collapse.

The NHS is beginning to be a significant burden due to demographic change, but to say it caused the collapse of UK military spending ($62B, world no 5 ) is simply not true.

US medical spending per capita is far higher than UK, and for far worse overall levels of health.

[Little John]

If you believe that any president wuld be allowed to cut the US military budget by 50% then you are deeply naive about the extent of dmocratic power in your own country. You must have read here of the broadside attack on Corbyn being elected leader of the opposition from the established power base, and he is no more than a middle of the road socialist, 1980s style.

Power is far more entrenched in the corporations and military in your country than in ours.

Of course the most expensive military budget in history cannot be sustained indefinitely, any more than the Roman empire did, but the days pf massive armies capable of invading entire continents is rapidly coming to an end.

Your National health service has eaten Her Majesties Navy And Obama care may well destroy the Pentagon. With the national debt at 18.4 TRILLION dollars and counting I don't see the USA as secure either financially or militarily in the long term.

Factually wrong again. If you care to research the actual numbers, you will find that the total cost, per head of population, for the NHS, is far lower than the total cost, per head of population, for your pathetically inefficient private healthcare system, both pre and post the piecemeal reforms of ObamaCare. But, hey, don't let facts stand in the way of your blind adherence to your ideology.

[vtsnowedin]

you have little to worry about this side of global economic collapse.

Which could happen any time and is increasingly likely.

The NHS is beginning to be a significant burden due to demographic change, but to say it caused the collapse of UK military spending ($62B, world no 5 ) is simply not true.

In 1982 the UK deployed 127 ships to the Falklands including two air craft carriers and a Nuclear Submarine. Today The total Navy is 76 ships and submarines with the largest in service being frigates. You have some large Aircraft carriers building but you are certainly a far cry from being the largest Navy in the world which you were up until the start of WW II Where the National health service started at the close of that war a clear change in priorities is hard to deny.

US medical spending per capita is far higher than UK, and for far worse overall levels of health.

True but that is immaterial to the breakdown between military and social service spending in the UK. [/quote]