>Jake,
>
>>You seem to see the free-market as an opressing entity forcing the "little guys" to make profits for the rich. I see is as full of opportunity around every corner and I am damn glad I was born in America where I have the chance to achieve whatever I wish. I feel that being born in this country has given me a much greater advantage over other countries and I am not going to waste that chance. I think people need a better economic education to understand the free market better. Understanding the basic principals of supply and demand would be a great start. Too often I hear complaints about things being unfair for the "little guy". Well guess what, the little guy has the same opportunities as many "big guys" who used to be "little". This country offers the greatest opportunity to become prosperous beyond our grandparents wildest dreams, yet we're such a sniveling society of crybabies that a minor setback becomes a crisis.
>
>What do you know about economics and compatative markets elsewhere in the world? I doubt that you know much about that, because if you do, you'd come to the conclusion that this is not exclusively held for the US. For example the scandanavian countries are even doing better than the US in this regard (esspecially finland). At the same time they do have strong provision of social health care and are an example that it can be done.

You are referring to the Global Competitiveness Report. This is a great accomplishment for those countries. More finacial freedom is a good thing and the rest of Europe could learn valuable lessons from them. That being said, one cannot compare a country of 9 million to on of 300 million. A lot of different policies can be easily implemented when one is dealing with a country with the population of a large city. The US remains the financial center of the world and FWIW Sweden has also been inviting private, for-profit companies into their health system.

>>This has already happened in my family and we paid for it. What a concept huh? Paying for something on your own. This used to be the standard way of things until insurance and single-payor plans came in and took the control away from the individual.
>
>So you want control, even though taking the risk you won't be able to draw up the cash and die as a consequence of that?

We have planned accordingly so that the next crisis can be better managed. Over the years we've dealt with 2 severe cancers and a major heart attack. Extended care was expensive but managed. Hope for the best and plan for the worst.

>This is why social health care is there. As a constitutional right rather than a privilage. In this respect the US is in the stone age and backward compared to much of the rest of the western world. As I can see you're trapped in the heritage of greedy insurance companies making big $ and will use their influence to keep social healthcare out of the door, while it is a proven concept in being more efficient than the commercialisation of it.

I think we may have a minor point we can agree on here. The insurance companies, like all companies, are in the business of making money. Where we differ is you seem to think this is a bad thing in principal. Whereas I see it as a bad thing because the control is taken away from the individual.

>>Each year it gets easier. Plans have been made and businesses started which show great potential. I do not let outside influences that are reasonably within my control affect me. I am in charge of my destiny, not fate, or bad luck, or political parties. Government can still press its heavy hand down on me but hopefully this country, and the rest of the free world for that matter, will elect leaders that understand and recoil at the oppressive power of centralized government and seek to restrain it in favor of more local jurisdiction.
>
>I am impressed by your typical american optimism, but I hope you'll not be struck with a severe medical problem that will block your personal goals.

I find it amusing that both you and Jim have said this to me. Why do you focus on the negative? If I come down with a severe problem I will attack that challenge as I have attacked others in the past. I will not let it stand in the way of what I want to accomplish.

>I guess you don't feel sorry for that guy who was not so lucky in his life,

It is not luck.

>who was wishing the government was doing more for him to be an active part of society again.

He can do more for himself.

>I guess you don't feel sorry for those poor people living new orleans who are abondoned from the rest of the US because they were not able to take care of themselves.

I feel compassion for the suffering of the individuals as they were going through the horrors of a natural disaster, however, there is the matter of chosing to live in an area of the country that is in the path of hurricanes and New Orleans is below sea level and beneath a giant lake. Combine that with a government (local, state and federal) that ignores the known dangers of not reinforcing the levees and something had to give. Now, before you explode let me also say that I live in a flood zone. We have been flooded, rather badly, in 1986 and 1998. I recognize where I live and that it is my choice. I feel the same about people in Florida (hurricanes), the Bay Area (earthquakes) and Texas (tornados). If you want to talk about those hit by mother nature without any warning then we can discuss the tsunami. That's where I feel that people went through hell with zero warning and it was truly unavoidable.

>It seems that you are a big supporter, as some other (US) member stated here, every dog for himself. If that is truly what you want, you might be better off in africa.

I've been accused of that repeatedly. Typically its a socialist minded individual who cannot grasp the concept that not everyone is the same. By that I mean that some people work A LOT harder than others to achieve more in life and I believe they should be rewarded for their efforts. I never advocate for society to abandon people, in fact I have said on many occasions that I feel that locally based charities do a much better job than a centralized government. I believe the power to help people is much greater on the local level dealing with individuals rather than doling out money to a 'numbered individual' from a burracracy.

>It saddens me that people think that backward and want to put the US back into the nineteenth century.

We're moving forward, with or without Europe. The dream of European Union domination over the US is proving to be quite uninspiring. I'm afraid you have your thoughts backwards...free market capitalism is leading the world out of the dark ages, socialism is trying to hold it back.

>There is a whole world outside of the US. Take a look at it. It is there to learn.

There are a great many things outside this country I like. It just so happens that I prefer the US. If I didn't I would move.