Hillary Clinton fell and broke her arm. What is that, good luck or bad luck? To break a leg is good luck but to break an arm whose bad luck will it be? Politicians should learn to break a leg when they fall. To break an arm when there is so much arm-twisting involved in your job is some pretty twisted 'luck'. No more walking and talking at the same time :)
http://www.thinkaloo.com
Showing posts with label hillary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hillary. Show all posts
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Saturday, March 29, 2008
US Presidential Elections, who can use who?
This thought was posted on Thinkaloo on 21 March 2008 by member monica
Visit www.thinkaloo.com, our new online community where you can share your thoughts and knowledge, discuss your ideas, ask questions and meet smart people
---
I am interested in your opinion on this. If Hillary wins, she could use Obama in her cabinet, possibly as Secretary of State or at the Department of Energy to oversee the transition to a green economy. If Obama wins, however, I don't think there is much room to use Hillary. Their positions on health care and foreign policy in Iraq are different. Which do you think is more likely to happen?
If it's true that Hillary and Obama are a dream ticket, would you vote for Hillary so that you can also get Obama's talent or would you go for Obama with less chances to use any of Hillary's experience?
Visit www.thinkaloo.com, our new online community where you can share your thoughts and knowledge, discuss your ideas, ask questions and meet smart people
---
I am interested in your opinion on this. If Hillary wins, she could use Obama in her cabinet, possibly as Secretary of State or at the Department of Energy to oversee the transition to a green economy. If Obama wins, however, I don't think there is much room to use Hillary. Their positions on health care and foreign policy in Iraq are different. Which do you think is more likely to happen?
If it's true that Hillary and Obama are a dream ticket, would you vote for Hillary so that you can also get Obama's talent or would you go for Obama with less chances to use any of Hillary's experience?
Monday, February 25, 2008
Public Healthcare
This thought was posted on Thinkaloo on 25 February 2008 by member smartypants
Visit www.thinkaloo.com, our new online community where you can share your thoughts and knowledge, discuss your ideas, ask questions and meet smart people
---
H. Clinton and Obama are advocating more requirements to own/provide health insurance. As a teacher, public healthcare seems very reasonable and humane. As an economist, I question if we are prepared for the changes in the supply and demand of doctors?
Just thinking ahead to the future. . . If more people own health insurance, I expect there will be an increase in doctor visits due to accessibility. There is already a shortage of doctors in the US. In 2010, doctors will be required to have computerized records of all patients. These new mandates will probably drive doctors (not ready for change) into early retirement.
We will need to prepare for these changes by 1) Increasing the supply of doctors 2)Decreasing the demand for doctors.
My ideas:
1)Provide incentives or money refunds to people who do not frequent the doctor's office.
2)Allow doctor's assistants (nurses) to prescribe antibiotics for more common illnesses (flu, cold, strep). I'm not sure how practical or safe this would be, but would be interested to hear a professional's response.
3)Shorten the length of medical school for doctors who specialize in more common illnesses.
4) Government funding for students in med school.
Visit www.thinkaloo.com, our new online community where you can share your thoughts and knowledge, discuss your ideas, ask questions and meet smart people
---
H. Clinton and Obama are advocating more requirements to own/provide health insurance. As a teacher, public healthcare seems very reasonable and humane. As an economist, I question if we are prepared for the changes in the supply and demand of doctors?
Just thinking ahead to the future. . . If more people own health insurance, I expect there will be an increase in doctor visits due to accessibility. There is already a shortage of doctors in the US. In 2010, doctors will be required to have computerized records of all patients. These new mandates will probably drive doctors (not ready for change) into early retirement.
We will need to prepare for these changes by 1) Increasing the supply of doctors 2)Decreasing the demand for doctors.
My ideas:
1)Provide incentives or money refunds to people who do not frequent the doctor's office.
2)Allow doctor's assistants (nurses) to prescribe antibiotics for more common illnesses (flu, cold, strep). I'm not sure how practical or safe this would be, but would be interested to hear a professional's response.
3)Shorten the length of medical school for doctors who specialize in more common illnesses.
4) Government funding for students in med school.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Why do we need superdelegates in an election?
This thought was posted on Thinkaloo on 18 February 2008 by member liz
Visit www.thinkaloo.com, our new online community where you can share your thoughts and knowledge, discuss your ideas, ask questions and meet smart people
------------------------
A democratic election is one based on people's votes. I don't understand why people who were not elected have power and authority to decide on an election outcome. I think we should remove super-delegates and electorates in US party and national elections. They complicate the vote and make the systems less democratic and transparent.
When Gore lost to Bush back in 2000 not on the basis of the majority of the national vote which he had won but on the basis of more electorates in Florida, that was a setback to the credibility of US democracy. We were criticized for that by people abroad.
I am worried that the tight race between Obama and Hillary might result to a similar situation. What do you think? Shouldn't we simply move away from this system, wouldn't it be an improvement to our democracy to get rid of delegates and electorates all together?
Visit www.thinkaloo.com, our new online community where you can share your thoughts and knowledge, discuss your ideas, ask questions and meet smart people
------------------------
A democratic election is one based on people's votes. I don't understand why people who were not elected have power and authority to decide on an election outcome. I think we should remove super-delegates and electorates in US party and national elections. They complicate the vote and make the systems less democratic and transparent.
When Gore lost to Bush back in 2000 not on the basis of the majority of the national vote which he had won but on the basis of more electorates in Florida, that was a setback to the credibility of US democracy. We were criticized for that by people abroad.
I am worried that the tight race between Obama and Hillary might result to a similar situation. What do you think? Shouldn't we simply move away from this system, wouldn't it be an improvement to our democracy to get rid of delegates and electorates all together?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
