It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The CIA World Factbook says how appalling the quality of U.S. healthcare is. Our infant mortality rate is around 6.3 deaths per 1000 live births, while the U.K. has a number of around 4.9 deaths per 1000 live births. Regarding life expectancy, Japan, Canada, France, Sweden, Italy, Germany, the U.K., Puerto Rico, and Denmark have a higher life expectancy than the U.S., with all of those countries having a universal healthcare system. In addition, according to the same World Factbook, Iraq has a better death rate for 2009, with a rate of 5.03 compared to 8.38 from the U.S. In other words, the country at “war” with us is quite literally living better. The reason is because the universal health coverage is provided by United States war funding. In laymen’s terms, we’ve provided universal healthcare… but just not for us.
Fresh from a two-day weekend visit to Iraq, the Bush administration's top health-care official defended the $950 million that will be spent to help Iraq establish universal health care.
Congressional Democrats have criticized the administration for helping Iraq to establish universal health care without doing the same for U.S. citizens.
Originally posted by Trams
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
It's a lot easier to give universal health care to a country that just had its previous government taken down. The populations there don't really have much choice. (Talking about Iraq and Afghanistan) I'm sure you see what I mean.
Originally posted by mikerussellus
I'll type this louder this time, maybe because the don't have insurance companies.
Maybe because they don't have a stable currency.
Maybe they don't have a stable infrastructure yet?