President Reagan speaks about Socialized medicine.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

Are you aware that the private system has yet to experience a single death?

Maybe cuz they do mostly knee replacements?

Do you deny that the NHS loses patients every day? EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!!

The US system produces somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 preventable deaths each year. That's about 275 a day.

I don't see a denial in there.

Do you deny that NHS patients die every day?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

you can't use facts and logic such as the breakdown of the 45 - 47 million "uninsured" that was posted a couple pages back; it only confuses the Obamites.

What exactly elevates that particular article to fact?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

Are you aware that the private system has yet to experience a single death?

Maybe cuz they do mostly knee replacements?

Do you deny that the NHS loses patients every day? EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!!

The US system produces somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 preventable deaths each year. That's about 275 a day.

I don't see a denial in there.

Do you deny that NHS patients die every day?

The ones in line dont count.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Is this the same guy who is whining about how his office is going to close and he might be out of a job and wants help from VJ?

Wow is all I can summon up in response...

Thanks for making fun of me in this difficult situation. I'm sure my fiancee Ana and I really appreciate it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

Are you aware that the private system has yet to experience a single death?

Maybe cuz they do mostly knee replacements?

Do you deny that the NHS loses patients every day? EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!!

The US system produces somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 preventable deaths each year. That's about 275 a day.

I don't see a denial in there.

Do you deny that NHS patients die every day?

Why would I want to deny that? And why are we talking about the NHS - the one system within the OECD that nobody here actually promotes? The wing nuts like to fight this strawman, I don't.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

Are you aware that the private system has yet to experience a single death?

Maybe cuz they do mostly knee replacements?

Do you deny that the NHS loses patients every day? EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!!

The US system produces somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 preventable deaths each year. That's about 275 a day.

I don't see a denial in there.

Do you deny that NHS patients die every day?

Why would I want to deny that?

So you admit that NHS patients die every day.

Q.E.D.!

[luckytxn 2,265]

I'm not sure you can say that the NHS was established as a direct result of the US's largesse following the war. Large sections of Britain (and indeed much of Europe) was in shambles, but health care for all citizens was a major priority because it was seen as crucial to the nation's recovery.

To say this didnt help would be a lie, how significant this help was well that another debate. Lets not forget that this was all brought up because somebody eluded to that since Britian did it after world war II then theres no reason the USA cant do it. Bottom line its different countries, times and issues and this needs to be taken into consideration.

I agree that it's not relevant to this argument. I just wanted to point out that luckytxn's assertion that Britain's WWII debt was forgiven immediately following the war was incorrect.

Someone (I forget who) had a rambling post a few weeks back suggesting that the U.S. was effectively subsidizing Canada's health system because the U.S. military would be first on the scene if Canada was ever attacked. Canada, he asserted, knows this and (I guess) maintains a smaller military than it would otherwise. Now we've got people saying that the U.S. basically subsidized the creation of Britain's NHS. The U.S. always has to be the hero, it appears.

Perhaps these arguments would be more compelling if the U.S. couldn't afford a national system. We clearly can; just look at the numbers. The long and short of it is that too many powerful people are making too much money from the current system, and large numbers of Americans have been convinced that their (democratically elected) government is inefficient at best, corrupt and sinister at worst, and will screw up the entire enterprise if given the chance.

Actually the war debt was forgiven itself. The loan that was paid off was the post war loan at 2% interest and a line of credit we established for them. We also gave them all materials we had in there at the time at 10th of the production costs in effect actually giving them all that material. The UK at that time was broke essentially and we propped them up. They actually still us a lot from WW 1 loans we gave them and they suspended in the mid 30's.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Are people who criticize the British system even aware that there is a private system there as well?

Are you aware that the private system has yet to experience a single death?

Maybe cuz they do mostly knee replacements?

Do you deny that the NHS loses patients every day? EVERY SINGLE DAY!!!!

The US system produces somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 preventable deaths each year. That's about 275 a day.

I don't see a denial in there.

Do you deny that NHS patients die every day?

Why would I want to deny that?

So you admit that NHS patients die every day.

Q.E.D.!

You ought to change your screen name to Cpt. Obvious.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

People die under NHS every day. Not only do you accept this, you state it is obvious.

[mawilson 2,133]

I don't see a denial in there.

Do you deny that NHS patients die every day?

Ask Pike, he'll tell you it's impossible to answer without coloring your judgment with personal preconceptions.

[DIARD 1]

If there ever was a place and time for NHC do you honestly think that right now it that time to try and push this through, considering the economic state of this country

Great Britian began the NHS right after WWII, when their nation was on the verge of bankruptcy.

And after the U.S. had just forgiven them their huge debt to us.

What?

The UK made its final WWII-related payment to the US in December 2006. It was sort of a big story. It was seen as a loan w/ generous terms, but hardly debt forgiven. Where do you get your information?

From his usual source. That place you need a flashlight and mirror to see.

It was the end of 2006 when the UK transferred $84 million to the US Treasury for the final payment on debt used to finance WWII. Back in 1945 the US extended $4+ billion to the UK to prevent the UK from going into bankruptcy. It took 50years (6 of which a payment was skipped) for the UK to settle the debt. I think the loan was double the size of the UK economy at the time (maybe someone can confirm). There also appears to be debts owed to the US for WWI as well. There have been no repayments received since 1934 (due to an moratorium during the depression)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6215847.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm

more ...

"Britain received about $30 billion of goods — just over £7 billion atthe prevailing exchange rate — during the war years, in effect giftsfrom America. But in September 1945 the US abruptly announced an end tothe Lend-Lease programme, despite the need for large-scalereconstruction and with Britain on its knees economically."

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle1264220.ece

I can keep digging and find more information about the nature of debts between the UK and US at the end of the WWII. Can we agree the UK decided to rebuild and also institute NHC due to a generous loan/agreements with the US that gave them access to spendable funds? I don't know if this helped finance NHC or not ... I'll let others weigh in on this .

Meanwhile ... I shamelessly digressed. Back to Topic...

If I am not mistaken, the US owes quite a bit more than this China at the moment and that debt didnt come about because of World War.

That has nothing to do with what were talking about, now you want to player hate on the states but can we but that aside for a moment and discuss this?

How is this "player hate"?? Do we NOT owe China billions of dollars? Did this debt not come about AFTER both world wars? What I stated was a fact . You might not care for it, I know I certainly am uncomfortable owing the Chinese that kind of cash but it is the truth.

Now this comment was in relation to the discussion that the UK owed a debt to the US and managed to pay if off in 2006. If they used the money to rebuild after the war or institute NHS does this matter?? What have we used the Chinese money for?? The War in Iraq?

Thats what you dont get, it was not about that, go back and read... from the beginning. This happens alot here at VJ, very frustrating. I really wish if people wanted to put in there two cents they would come equipped

I have read since the beginning. But I will go over it one more time just for you.

Summary:

I believe you were inferring that because the state of our country at the moment, now was not the time for a NHC. Then it was stated that Britian started NHS after WWII when they were in a dire financial state. Lkytxn inferred that yea but the US forgave the debt to which was pointed out that actually Britian has repaid the debt in 2006. Natty then comes in with this long post about what was paid back and what wasn't and that he thinks that the loans from US paid for NHS. So I posted so what, we owe china billions and haven't paid them back (in reference to the WWI loans that Uk stopped paying on in 1934 stated by natty). Then you said I was a hater for stating facts. To which I responded it wasn't hating it is the truth. Also said who cares what the loans were used for at least they had a reason to be in debt. What reason to we have? (Certainly not NHC)

So you see it was in reference to what was posted by Natty. Perhaps you are having a hard time following along, maybe trip to the doctor to use that wonderful insurance of yours would be of some benefit?

[natty bumppo 297]

Calm down homeboy. That was someone else's tangent. Get on their case about it.

hey ... you own me a beer for this !!! why?

cause it was a fun digression for a moment ... got to refresh my memory on history.

now as for the beer ... you get the first I'll get the second. fair?

What are you talking about, you were on topic with what we were discussing.

all this work ... gotta take a few moments for refreshments

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

People die under NHS every day. Not only do you accept this, you state it is obvious.

Well, because it is. People die each and every day regardless of the health care system. It's an obvious fact and quite irrelevant to the discussion. You know this. But keep stirring the pot.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

People die under NHS every day. Not only do you accept this, you state it is obvious.

Well, because it is. People die each and every day regardless of the health care system. It's an obvious fact and quite irrelevant to the discussion. You know this. But keep stirring the pot.

No one has ever died in Great Britain's private health care system.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Since everyone seems to love the BBC so much here is an article on the last payment from post war loan we made the UJ after the war. The original war debt was forgiven.

What's a little debt between friends?

By Finlo Rohrer

BBC News Magazine

The UK is about to pay off the last of its World War II loans from the US. But it hasn't always been so fastidious.

On 31 December, the UK will make a payment of about $83m (£45.5m) to the US and so discharge the last of its loans from World War II from its transatlantic ally.

It is hard from a modern viewpoint to appreciate the astronomical costs and economic damage caused by this conflict. In 1945, Britain badly needed money to pay for reconstruction and also to import food for a nation worn down after years of rationing.

"In a nutshell, everything we got from America in World War II was free," says economic historian Professor Mark Harrison, of Warwick University.

"The loan was really to help Britain through the consequences of post-war adjustment, rather than the war itself. This position was different from World War I, where money was lent for the war effort itself."

Britain needed to rebuild

Britain had spent a great deal of money at the beginning of the war, under the US cash-and-carry scheme, which saw straight payments for materiel. There was also trading of territory for equipment on terms that have attracted much criticism in the years since. By 1941, Britain was in a parlous financial state and Lend-Lease was eventually introduced.

The post-war loan was part-driven by the Americans' termination of the scheme. Under the programme, the US had effectively donated equipment for the war effort, but anything left over in Britain at the end of hostilities and still needed would have to be paid for.

But the price would please a bargain hunter - the US only wanted one-tenth of the production cost of the equipment and would lend the money to pay for it.

As a result, the UK took a loan for $586m (about £145m at 1945 exchange rates), and a further $3,750m line of credit (about £930m at 1945 exchange rates). The loan was to be paid off in 50 annual repayments starting in 1950, although there were six years when payment was deferred because of economic or political crises.

Generous terms

It's easy to cough and splutter at the thought of our closest ally suddenly demanding payment for equipment rather than sparing a billion or two as a gift.

But the terms of the loan were extremely generous, with a fixed interest rate of 2% making it considerably less terrifying than a typical mortgage.

Still there were British officials, like economist JM Keynes, who detected a note of churlishness in the general demeanour of the Americans after the war.

Nobody pays off their student loan early, unless they are a nutter

Dr Tim Leunig

His biographer, Lord Skidelsky, says: "Keynes wanted either a gift to cover Britain's post-war balance of payments, or an interest-free loan. The most important condition was sterling being made convertible [to dollars]. Everyone simply changed their pounds for dollars. [Loans were] eaten up by a flight from sterling. They then had to suspend convertibility. The terms were impossible to fulfil."

Anne Moffat, the MP for East Lothian, asked the parliamentary question that revealed the end of the WWII loan after being pressed by an interested constituent. She is a little surprised that we are still paying the Americans off all these years later.

"It is certainly bad that no-one seems to have known about it. It seems to be a dark, well-kept secret."

Historic debts

Yet for Dr Tim Leunig, lecturer in economic history at the LSE, it's no surprise that the UK chose to keep this low-interest loan going rather than pay it off early.

"Nobody pays off their student loan early, unless they are a nutter. Even if you've got the money to pay it off early, you should just put it in a bank and pocket the interest."

And if it seems strange to the non-economist that WWII debts are still knocking around after 60 years, there are debts that predate the Napoleonic wars. Dr Leunig says the government is still paying out on these "consol" bonds, because it is better value for taxpayers to keep paying the 2.5% interest than to buy back the bonds.

In a 1945 state department survey on the US public's attitudes to its wartime allies, Britain was one of the least trusted countries

Dr Patricia Clavin

And while the UK dutifully pays off its World War II debts, those from World War I remain resolutely unpaid. And are by no means trifling. In 1934, Britain owed the US $4.4bn of World War I debt (about £866m at 1934 exchange rates). Adjusted by the Retail Price Index, a typical measure of inflation, £866m would equate to £40bn now, and if adjusted by the growth of GDP, to about £225bn.

"We just sort of gave up around 1932 when the interwar economy was in turmoil, currencies were collapsing," says Prof Harrison.

Nor were we alone. In 1931, US President Herbert Hoover announced a one-year moratorium on war loan repayments from all nations so the international community could properly discuss what it was going to do.

British resentment

Many Britons felt that the US loans should be considered as part of its contribution to the World War I effort.

"The Americans lent Britain a lot. Britain resented making payments," says historian Dr Patricia Clavin, of Oxford University.

And although Britain was unable to pay its debts, it was also owed the whacking sum of £2.3bn.

OUTSTANDING WWI LOANS

Britain owed to US in 1934: £866m

Adjusted by RPI to 2006: £40bn

Other nations owed Britain: £2.3bn

Adjusted by RPI to 2006: £104bn

These loans remain in limbo. The UK Government's position is this: "Neither the debt owed to the United States by the UK nor the larger debts owed by other countries to the UK have been serviced since 1934, nor have they been written off."

So in a time when debt relief for Third World nations is recurrently in the news, the UK still has a slew of unresolved loans from a war that finished 88 years ago. HM Treasury's researchers descended into its archives and were unable to even establish which nations owe money. The bulk of the sum would probably have gone to allies such as nations of the Empire fighting alongside Britain, says Dr Clavin.

Nor is HM Treasury able to say why the UK never repaid its WWI debts - even though, at the time, many Americans took a dim view of repayments being suspended, for they had bought bonds which stood little chance of showing a return on their investment.

The Wall Street Crash helped plunge economies into chaos

Thus despite fighting on the same side in WWII, an air of financial distrust remained after hostilities ended.

"In a 1945 state department survey on the US public's attitudes to its wartime allies, Britain was one of the least trusted countries," says Dr Clavin.

During the crisis years of the 1930s, only one nation continued to pay in full - Finland. Perhaps a conscious effort to foster a good reputation with an increasingly influential power, Finland's actions generated thousands of positive stories in the American media at the time. Nor has it been forgotten; the Finns celebrated this achievement in an exhibition last year.

But for the UK, a reputation for reliability has taken longer to restore.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm