Friday, July 17, 2009

Health Care Inaccurate E-mail

This post comes from "God's politics a blog by Jim Wallis & friends" a blog on Sojourners magazine web site.

Stop this Malicious E-mail

by LaVonne Neff 07-15-2009

An e-mail is circulating that, like most scary e-mails, is entirely false. According to this e-mail, people over 59 can't get heart surgery in England (actually, they can and they do). The e-mail implies that Natasha Richardson's death was due to failures in Canada's health care system (actually, they responded very quickly once the family allowed them to). It says that President Obama wants our system to be based on Canada's and England's (actually, he doesn't). It likens the president's health care plans to signing "senior death warrants."

And that's only for starters. It is hard to find a single fact in the e-mail. Even quotations are attributed to the wrong people. You can read the e-mail and a thoroughly researched response at the FactCheck Web site, and I hope you will.

Please, whether you love or hate the health care proposals now being discussed, check out the facts before ever passing on an e-mail. Any e-mail. Especially if it, like this one, says, "Please use the power of the internet to get this message out." E-mails that beg to be passed on are always annoying, usually false, and often malicious. This one is all three.

LaVonne Neff is an editor, writer, and publishing consultant in Wheaton, Illinois, who blogs on book, bodies, and faith at livelydust.blogspot.com

Categories: Health

Tags: Canada, chain, death, e-mail, email, england, fact, fear, forward, Health, health care proposals, health care system, Internet, lie, natasha richardson, President Obama, system

Thursday, July 16, 2009

U.S. MILITARY SPENDING





This post is copied from an E-mail sent by The General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church. It was written by Mark Harrison the Director of Peace and Justice Programs. The opinions expressed in this E-mail, and most ideas that originate from the "national" church, are much more progressive than ideas and opinions that eminate from local UM churches; at least in my experience.

To get a graphic indication of how much more the United States spends on the military than the rest of the world be sure to look at "Ben's BB Demostration" on the side bar of this blog and "The Oreo Cartoon" posted on February 23, 2009. Then go to the bottom of the blog and find out how your tax dollars could be spent in more constructive ways that actually improve the lives of people.





U.S. military spending leads the world





Military expenditures worldwide set new record.

The U.S. seems to be in an arms race again — but this time it seems to be with itself!

The United States accounted for 42% of global military spending last year, according to the Stockholm (Sweden) International Peace Research Institute's (SIPRI) annual report. Worldwide, governments spent a record $1.46 trillion on their armed forces in 2008.

SIPRI is an independent research institute focusing on international security, arms control and disarmament. The annual SIPRI Yearbook on Armaments, Disarmament & International Security reports on several security-related fields: from trends in armed conflicts to world nuclear forces; from military spending to the ban on cluster munitions; from peacekeeping to non-proliferation.

Worldwide military expenditure increases in 2008 represent an increase of 4% in real terms compared to 2007, and an increase of 45% since 1999. The United States accounted for 58% of the global increase between 1999 and 2008, with its military spending growing by $219 billion in constant 2005 prices over the period.

China and Russia, with absolute increases of $42 billion and $24 billion, respectively, both nearly tripled their military expenditure over the decade. Other regional powers, particularly India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, Brazil, South Korea, Algeria and the United Kingdom, also made substantial contributions to the total increase.

The United States spent seven times more than the second-biggest spender, China. In fact, the United States spent more on its armed forces than the next 14 countries combined.

The top 10 spenders in SIPRI's annual yearbook, released in June, on armaments, disarmament and international security (in billions of dollars):

1.United States (607.0)

2.China (84.9)

3.France (65.7)

4.United Kingdom (65.3)

5.Russia (58.6)

6.Germany (46.8)

7.Japan (46.3)

8.Italy (40.6)

9.Saudi Arabia (38.2)

10.India (30.0)

Incidentally, SIPRI researcher Dr. Sam Perlo-Freeman pointed out that ranking second in spending doesn't make China the second-strongest military, not by a long shot. He said that's because "a lot of other countries have been at this game for a lot longer than China."

U.S. arms spending increased by 71% during the presidency of George W. Bush, according to SIPRI. As a result, global military spending is 45% greater than it was a decade ago. From 2007 to 2008, U.S. military spending increased by 10%, which helped make global military spending 4% higher in 2008 than 2007.

Another record was set last year with the total of international peace operation personnel reaching 187,586, a jump of 11% since 2007, the previous record year. Despite this, some of the ambitious missions being deployed in trouble spots like Darfur and the Democratic Republic of the Congo remain far short of their envisioned strengths. This means hard choices and continuing challenges in manning and sustaining these important missions.

U.S.-based Boeing remained the top arms producer in 2007, the most recent year for which reliable data are available. Boeing had arms sales worth $30.5 billion.

All the top 20 companies in the 'SIPRI Top 100' for 2007 are United States or European.

SIPRI estimates that in total there were around 8,400 operational nuclear warheads in the world, of which almost 2,000 were kept on high alert, capable of being launched in minutes. Counting spare warheads, those in storage and those due for dismantling, some 23,300 nuclear weapons were in the arsenals of eight states: the United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, France, India, Pakistan and Israel.

The yearbook also includes analysis of pressing issues and key events in the fields of international security, peace and conflicts, armaments and disarmament. Highlights in SIPRI Yearbook 2009 include a chapter by Francis Deng and Roberta Cohen, architects of the U.N. policy on internally displaced populations, which points to the linked problems of population displacement and "one-sided" violence committed by armed forces against civilians.

Other chapters examine the prospects for the war in Afghanistan and developments in the control of conventional, chemical, biological and nuclear arms. For the first time, the SIPRI Yearbook includes the Institute for Economics & Peace's Global Peace Index, which ranks 144 countries according to their relative peacefulness.

More information about the yearbook is available at SIPRI.

I pray for the day that such reports will show a downward trend.

Mark Harrison
Director of Peace with Justice Program

United Methodist Church