Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Steve Jobs Had a Liver Transplant Two Months Ago

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the need-it-to-live-hence-the-name dept.

Medicine 436

evw writes "The Wall Street Journal reports that Steve Jobs had a liver transplant two months ago (subscription required, alternative coverage is available based on the WSJ's report). He is on track to return to work at the end of June. 'William Hawkins, a doctor specializing in pancreatic and gastrointestinal surgery at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., said that the type of slow-growing pancreatic tumor Mr. Jobs had will commonly metastasize in another organ during a patient's lifetime, and that the organ is usually the liver. ... Having the procedure done in Tennessee makes sense because its list of patients waiting for transplants is shorter than in many other states.' There are no residency requirements for transplants."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

How much (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400935)

did he pay to jump to the head of the line? Rich bastard.

Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Reports (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400945)

(Note: We are not a GOP-sters, Republicans or affiliated with any parties, and as George Washington warned against parties We do not believe in parties and, unlike most people, We evaluate every issue on a case by case basis and do not defer to the judgments of politicians who are corrupted and untrustworthy as a group.)

Obama is controlled by the same people as Bush see The Obama Deception documentary [youtube.com]

Yuan Forwards Show China May Buy Fewer Treasuries, UBS Says [bloomberg.com]
Anemic Treasury auction effects felt beyond bonds [reuters.com]
The Sherminator Kicks Some Wall Street Ass [dailybail.com]
China Angry That Fed Is Deliberately Destroying The Dollar [bloomberg.com]
China suggests switch from dollar as reserve currency [bbc.co.uk]
What are the reserve currencies? [wsj.net]
Anatomy of a taxpayer giveaway to investors [ml-implode.com]
Geithner rescue package 'robbery of the American people' [telegraph.co.uk]
Geithner just put only the rich in Titanics lifeboats [examiner.com]
Geithner Plan Will Rob US Taxpayers [cnbc.com]
A False Choice [viewfromsi...valley.com]
Bargain-hunting house buyers wearing on sellers ajc.com [ajc.com]
Time to Take the Steering Wheel out of Geithner's Hands [alternet.org]
Socialising and Privatising [freeradical.co.nz]
Fannie, Freddie to pay out bonuses [politico.com]
Fitch Raises Prime Jumbo Loan Loss Estimates Sharply [researchrecap.com]

Chinas central bank on Monday proposed replacing the US dollar as the international reserve currency with a new global system controlled by the International Monetary Fund [ft.com]

- Russia on an new world reserve currency: It is necessary to work out and adopt internationally recognized standards for macroeconomic and budget policy, which are binding for the leading world economies, including the countries issuing reserve currencies - the Kremlin proposals read. [en.rian.ru]

- President Barack "The Teleprompter" Obama is deeply connected to corruption. Rahm Emanuel, his Chief of Staff, is radical authoritarian statist whose father was part of the murderous civilian-killing Israeli terrorist organization known as IRGUN who is obsessed with gun control and compulsory service to the country in a capacity which he has yet to define. (Think brown-shirts.) Barack is intimately connected to disgraced Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (Rahm inherited Rod's federal-congress seat). Barack Obama is also connected to William Ayers (who ghost-wrote his books); Ayers is a man who promotes the concept that civilian collateral damage is ok in a war against freedom. Saul Alinsky, a man who made the quote as follows, "From all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom - Lucifer," is a man who had much influence on the young Barack Obama. A man who admired Lucifer for gaining his own kingdom in an act of rebellion. Barack also subscribed to Preacher Jeremiah Wright, who is himself a Afro-elitist who wants all the people who largely "pay the freight" to suffer at the hands of angry African-American mobs. There are over 30 million Americans on food stamps, and more blacks are in prison and on food-stamps per capita than anyone else. The problem with Wright is simply this: the facts are "racist." There is no conspiracy against African Americans here by citizens.
- Obama - AIPAC-bootlicker, corrupted to the bone Chicago-style and a traitor to the US Constitution and a liar whose real "legal" name could very well be Barry Sotero and an Indonesian citizen (The US does not allow plural citizenship) (If you care, not that it matters anymore under a lawless authoritarian totalitarian regime such as Barack Obama's, you can see more here at an aggregator; obamacrimes.info [obamacrimes.info] )
- Raytheon lobbyist in Pentagon, many lobbyists getting exemptions even though Obama promised not to have them. This is one of many things Obama has lied about.
- Goldman Sachs insider second in command at Treasury. Bumbling tax cheat idiot Timothy Geithner in "command" of Treasury, with 17 positions unfilled as of late March 2009.
- Obama's cabinet has had several nominees and appointees with multiple tax fraud issues.
- Obama lied about having a new degree of accountability and a "sunshine" period for new laws; Obama has signed bills with little or no time for public review at whitehouse.gov as promised. In fact, one of the largest spending bills in US history was passed into law with several members of the House and Senate telling the public there was no time to review the bill, let alone the public.
- Pork Spendulus Bill (The Stimulus Bill) contained language that came directly from Tom Daschle (who published a book detailing his machinations to slip healthcare under the radar in some back portion of a budgeting bill). This language included the funding and authority to set up a central database of all medical treatments rendered, and the Stimulus bill also contains language that alters the Medicare-style instructions to doctors: The most economic treatments should now be used, no longer use the treatments with the most efficacy. Rationed health care, courtesy of a disgraced tax cheat, Tom Daschle. When you relatives are dying in a state hospital because their quota was reached, see how you feel.
- Obama appointed a Second-Amendment violating-denying Rich-pardoning treasonist Eric Holder as AG, a man who helped a fugitive evade justice and thinks of Americans and cowardly racists.
- Obama has put no money at all in for a single new nuclear power plant but wants to help bridges and roads - apparently to promote more driving.
- Obama, Blagojevich and Rahm Emanuel have a lot to hide. They literally lived very close to each other, Rahm had (until being Obama's Chief of staff) Blagojevich's old federal congressional seat. Blagojevich helped "The Teleprompter" Obama cheat his way to the Illinois senate by getting other candidates thrown off the ballot in Illinois. Why do you think Blagojevich was so mad? Obama did owe him, big time. Rahm and Obama are preemptively using Blagojevich and trying to publically malign and discredit him because he has information that can bring Obama and Rahm Emanuel down. This is the true face of Obama, ruthless, calculating conniving cheat that will stop at nothing to gain and retain power at any cost breaking any rule.
- Tony Rezko, Iraqi Arms Dealer Nahdmi Auchi, and of course Aiham Alsammarae. Barack "The Teleprompter" Obama is so corrupted it's a joke. He is connected to international arms dealers, shady property dealings and people of ill repute to gain what he needs from them: financial bootstrapping of his campaign to rule America.
- Fools and "useful idiots" twist the US Federal Budget pie charts by leaving welfare, workfare, interest on debt, social security, Medicare and Medicaid out and focusing only on non-whole "discretionary" pie charts.
2007 high level pie chart, Federal Budget, USA [wikimedia.org]
2009 Pie chart, detailed, Federal Budget, USA [wikimedia.org]
Now Obama wants to drastically expand the areas of the budget which are getting the most funding by far. There is simply not enough money to fund the obligations made to the public thus far (Unfunded debt obligations which are to pay for the guarantees of social security), let alone Medicare, Medicaid, welfare and other social spending which seeks to guarantee a standard of living to people which is lower what they could gain for themselves. This is an attempt to break the middle class' back so they now need government aid to survive.
- Barack Obama is drastically increasing spending and creating more entitlements that will make the US less competitive (especially against China, India, East Europe/Russia). This will be a huge disaster and "change you can believe in" will strap you, your children and your grandchildren with more debt. "No taxation without representation!" Obama is spending money for the next two-three generations and they can't even vote yet, or even have been born. This is co-opting those who cannot vote to pay for this man's reckless and illegal endeavor to make everyone a feudal serf of the federal government.
- An alternative to the dollar and a forex and a reserve currency came up at the last G20 meeting. The world will not take faith in Obama's liar-socialist spending and welfare state, why should the taxpayers (plebian citizen-slaves of a police state)?
- The spending going on now vastly eclipses all previous spending. In fact, the massive trillion plus debts is a thing of the 80's onwards. Congress signs the checks, remember that year after year, as egregious as the pentagon spending is, that the social spending is completely a waste of money and it is unfunded over the long term. Eisenhower built the interstate highway system, the USA could build a new power infrastructure with this money but instead this money is being pissed into creating more of an entitlement system that is still unfunded, and without massive head-taxes and far more aggressive progressive taxes, could never be funded.
- The budgeting being done today were recently reported by a non-partisan auditing commission will lead to about 10 TRILLION in new debt over the next 10 years. Obama is going to double the national debt while doing nothing to address the unfunded debt obligations of Social Security, or address any of the out of control egregious spending going on today via the budgets, the federal reserve and its taxation via inflation, or by bailouts and stimulus bills. This is the worst, most unintelligent and most hated congress in the history of the United States, and we have a seriously incompetent and potentially dangerous-to-the-free-constitutional-republic Barack Obama rubber stamping this bloody mess.
- Clinton appointed David Walker of the GAO, he recently quit; the unfunded debt obligations have rendered the USA insolvent according to accounting standards. The USA is already broke and cannot conceivably pay its obligations today.
Taxpayers on the hook for $59 trillion [usatoday.com]
US Public Debt Unfunded Debt Obligations [wikipedia.org]
- Most of the world population gets nothing from their governments, or a very bare minimum or services that benefit only the upper echelons of society. However, the liar Barack Obama says the USA needs his universal "state-hospital" rationed health care to be competitive. This is pure folderol and a lie. China and India give nothing, and they are the biggest threat to the American worker. By forcing healthcare and higher taxes, Americans will be less competitive.

- If you think 60% tax rates end to end (income, accounts receivable tax, building permit tax, CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog license tax, federal income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting license tax, fishing license tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax, liquor tax, luxury tax, Medicare tax, city, school and county property tax (up 33 percent last 4 years), real estate tax, social security tax, road usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational vehicle tax, excise tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility tax, vehicle license registration tax, capital gains tax, lease severance tax, oil and gas assessment tax, airport and FAA taxes and fees, estate tax, misc internet sales tax and many more taxes that I can't recall at the moment) will make the US competitive, along with compulsory programs to provide everyone with health care is going to make the US competitive in the age of India and China, you are incapable of understanding what it takes to build and maintain a successful industrialized republic.

- As the US nationalizes/rations healthcare to the least common denominator of affordability without regard to efficacy, people with money will simply look into medical tourism so those with money can go to medical parks in India and get real health care. Those who have lived in Canada or in the UK can tell you "free" healthcare is not a panacea. If you think this, you are again, a useful idiot. The NHS in the UK has given bad blood and Hepatitis and AIDS infected blood to people, and Jade Goody who just died was misdiagnosed twice resulting in her death (She was "all cleared" twice of the cervical cancer which she just died of). The NHS in the UK is not able to be sued or held accountable. Neither will Obama's rationed health care service for America.
- Sorry to bust the socialist bubble, but support of these types of policies will simply lower the standard of living in the USA, particularly for the middle class. At least at the end of the Eisenhower projects the USA got roads to show for the spending, and with this new spending, the USA could have built power plants that get the USA out of funding the middle east via constant demand for middle-eastern oil, but the age of government for the sake of government is upon us, and the useful idiots line up and believe empty promises.
- The pentagon along with Bechtel, Kroll, Bluewater, Halliburton, etc, could get less than half of what they get today, but that will fix nothing fundamental in terms of government spending. It is simply not enough to make a difference when compared to the Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security entitlements.
See: YouTube - US Government Immorality Will Lead to Bankruptcy [youtube.com]
- If Obama thinks its ok to lie to 300 million people about being able to "take care of them" without even being honest about what that care would look like, then being an idiot and believing in Obama is for you.
- The head of the IRS and the head of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, is a Tax Cheat
- Lied about no lobbyists - their numbers are growing within Obama's ranks as he issues exemptions.
- The US Government already has over 50% of the budget spent on Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security. Socialists: Good job on that one, its working great. Solution to the current near-collapse-due-to-over-spending: add more unfunded entitlements! And this is still a "George Bush" budget. Over half is being spend on Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security.
- This man is such a propagandist that he invented "The Office of the President Elect," the seals, the flags, the podium and that forum was all props and the media never once questioned any of it. It was an invention. This is the power of Obama, technicalities and rules do not apply.
- The Socialist-liars can break my spirit and my financial back to force me to "need" a federal government that is turning this country into a police state and is turning it into a quasi-socialist lie, but I will, I must put up a fight. I have kids to educate and feed, and the stuff the pseudo-socialist authoritarian Obama sells (which is failing to various degrees everywhere else as implemented) is simply forcing a culture of failure on a once great, libertarian free country.
- I will not be complacent with your "change," and there will be a point where civil war will become an option. See how hard you can push before you get it. How much more than half can the truly productive workers in this country afford to pay. Keep pushing to find out how to start a civil war. The scariest thing about Obamabots is the amount of pleasure they derive from completely defying the US Constitution and giving the government non-enumerated non-extant powers to rule over everyone's quality of life.
- The socialist-lie of a plan will not work, its not fundable, it will destroy the currency to fund it, and its really as simple as this: if this insanity is funded by borrowing from the US's economic and military adversaries then Obama and his socialist cabal is not fit to administrate society. Rome fell. Kings who mis-manged their treasuries all fell. Every example of unhinged spending leads to the same result: systemic collapse.
- Obama and his sycophantic lunatics would want to have a civil war to get Obama's way and force the socialist-lie system on my already tax paying law abiding ass. And as far as "no new taxes" for those under 250k, its a lie, the tax is called inflation, which is set to begin just about now that the Chinese wont want the USA's worthless treasuries to fund the socialist-lie fantasy (one that COMMUNIST China doesn't even try and sell to its people!) Also, what Obama fails to mention is the states are now compelled to implement his new rules, and to follow the rules the states must raise taxes. Obama may not tax those under 250k, but every last one of the 50 states will.
- Barack Obama's numbers don't add up. There is a $59 trillion dollar hole (UFDO) in social security alone. AIG $150 billion here, TARP $350 billion there. $800 billion for a highly dubious pork laden stimulus package. Another one on the way. $59 trillion hole in the balance sheet IGNORED. China saying they aren't going to buy treasuries, calling for new reserve currencies, Clinton clamoring to find buyers now. $3.6 trillion dollar budget, potential military action on Mexico, Iran still a "terrorist state" at the behest of the AIPAC, spending up, dollar about to fall, inflation over time since Breton Woods extremely easy to document, yet, the socialist-liars question when the numbers (the Federal Government numbers) simply don't add up to the point where if the US-GOV was a company it would be insolvent.
-How dare the taxpayers question what Barack Obama's drastic spending increases are going to do to the purchasing power of our savings because Barack Obama wants to recklessly spend and try to maintain and American empire AND guarantee a standard of living, and Obama doesn't even want to build a single nuclear power plant to do it? Barack Obama must be a complete and total lunatic moron at best. He is a man child, akin to Michael Jackson, who does not live in the real world. This guy has turned the White House into a Neverland Ranch.
- Obama is either a negligent idiot or an unhinged maniac with delusional fantasies. Meanwhile, Obama's tax dodging Treasury Secretary has 17 unfilled positions, the Treasury Dept. isn't even functioning at this point while the rest of the world steadily loses faith in one of the two things that makes the USA relevant in the world at all: the dollar as a "hard" or reserve currency and the US military.
- "General welfare" in the constitution was, according to the man who wrote it, Madison, meant to be extremely limited in scope. The federal government per the constitution doesn't even have the enumerated POWER to deal with economic messes. A lot of these "POWERS" were created while there is a crisis to dupe the public into accepting an un-constitutional authoritarian regime as the government and to usurp authority over the people.
- The USA is a constitutional republic. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting to eat a sheep. Also a constitutional republic isn't about using a barely-majority or a plurality to stuff your (un-fundable disastrous) crap down the disenfranchised other-half's throat.
- With Obama's authoritarian corrupted criminal (aiding and abetting a criminal in flight of prosecution, Rich case) Eric Holder in charge, we won't have our inalienable and enumerated rights to firearms much longer. For a constitutional law expert, Obama must have never read the federalist papers or he would simply hand himself as a traitor. Already there is talk of banning firearms to help Mexico's fight against the cartels. What they fail to mention is the firearms that are being used there are Mexican Military firearms being used by those who defected from the Mexican Army into the cartels directly! The firearms in question were sold to the Mexican military, over 170,000 soldiers are gone with the guns. And now the US citizens have to give up inalienable and enumerated rights? This is insanity.
- The arbitrary expansion of "general welfare" is not only unconstitutional, it may very well lead to a serious conflict on the issue.
- Here is a debate on general welfare and how stuff like this came to pass, but was clearly no intended by the authors of the document of root law.
In Federalist No. 41, James Madison asked rhetorically: "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power?" (In reference to the general welfare clause)
So strongly did the founders believe that "general welfare" wouldn't be expanded as written:
In Federalist No. 84, Alexander Hamilton indirectly confirmed Madison's point. (That the "general welfare" clause was "clearly" not a free pass for government)
Hamilton argued that a bill of rights, which many were clamoring for, would be not only unnecessary, but dangerous. Since the federal government was given only a few specific powers, there was no need to add prohibitions: it was implicitly prohibited by the listed powers. If a proposed law a relief act, for instance wasn't covered by any of these powers, it was unconstitutional.
"why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?"
Hamilton goes on to argue that making Amendments (e.g., enumerating Free speech, press and assembly) and enumerating the 'right' would have the following effect:
(A bill of rights) "would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretence for claiming that power that is, a power to regulate the press, short of actually shutting it down. "
"With respect to the words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers (enumerated in the Constitution) connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison [The US Supreme Court has found the meaning of "general welfare" in the Constitution to be much more elastic than did Mr. Madison. But as the "author of the Constitution," what does he know?]
James Madison, when asked if the "general welfare" clause was a grant of power, replied in 1792, in a letter to Henry Lee,

        If not only the means but the objects are unlimited, the parchment [the Constitution] should be thrown into the fire at once.

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government , and to provide new Guards for their future security. ...--The Declaration of Independence
- Monetizing failures causes more. Japan showed us this for decades. But hey, Barack Obama is actually dumb enough to think you can fix a problem DECADES in the making with a quick fixer-upper. He is screwed in the head or, more likely, lying to the American public to quickly get done the things he wants to get done before he gets thrown out on his ass.
- The complaints are with the Federal government (in general) since Breton Woods. The Federal Government and Obama's minions STILL didn't listen to David Walker, a Clinton appointee and former head of the GAO. This isn't about political parties anymore- its about spending the future to the point where today collapses. History is replete with examples of fiat currencies and deficit spending leading to collapse.
- Show me a single federal budget that was less than the previous. If this $3.6T budget goes, it is never coming back barring systemic collapse. The only President to ever see the US Public Debt at $0 dollars is Andrew Jackson.
- The United States Federal Government, The United States Federal Reserve, and the banks which were enabled to continue down reckless paths by a quasi government agency known as the Federal Reserve whose actions are not subject to congress and whose members are unelected. This situation is untenable and unconstitutional.
- Every inflationary road taken in history ends in collapse. Keynesian policies are widely regarded as no longer workable. And while Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, David Walker, Nouriel Roubini, Warren Buffet and Jim Rodgers warn about or predict all the failures, people still refuse to listen to the possibility that the US economy may contract for many years, and spending at these levels is something that can give way to a collapse.
- Inflation is a tax: What ignorant tax and spenders don't take into account here is the relative percentages of people's wealth (both net and gross) and the costs of owning and maintaining houses, cars, standards of living.
- Inflation via deficit spending is going to make it such that you will be paying a lot more by percentage of your income to maintain a given standard of living. Obama's arguments are so poorly thought out and seek to blame "Republicans" for the mess, its really simply laughable - this unhinged budgeting and currency management crisis needs cleanup now, not worsening.
- You can't spend your way out of a hole if the creditors (e.g. China) start telling the USA they won't buy. It is that simple. Now America starts to have to collateralize the debt with assets. The USA will be selling off chunks of American assets to back the new debt. One day, it may even be necessary to sell Alaska back to Russia because no one will take greenbacks to prop up a failing version of a modern Rome.
- Ah, here we go with the Matthew Lesko arguments. [lesko.com]
Interest rates were on the rise before the government stepped in with free money for everyone (the fine print of course indicate massive strings attached).
Other economies, for example, India, have the central rates set to far more reasonable/realistic rates (at the moment ~ 8+%), which is still tends to be too low, but shows that if you need someone else capital you need to pay a premium for it, and given that capital is in short supply, it would stand to reason that a premium must be charged for it.
The problem is the unrealistic growth rates of mature economies don't allow for profiting via growth projections (rather than simply earning money). So the government steps in, turns on the free money spigot, gets the interest rates for savings down in the 1-2% range while diluting the value of the whole currency in order to prop up dying companies that ran the business like a Madhoff Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes need new money or they cease to exist. This is why the Federal Reserve is trying to issue more Reserve Notes. Without this fresh input of printed money, the Ponzi scheme will collapse.
- The Republicans aren't solely responsible for the crisis as Obama's minions would have you believe, congress is (no particular congress), the Executive of the US government (no particular one) and the US Federal Reserve System are all at fault.
- Fundamentally, the government is trying to fix the prices of various things to "make it all work." This pulling on the invisible hand is a fools venture. It was predicted long ago the housing collapse (and those, such as myself, in the know, wished while realizing the housing collapse coming that we were wrong for everyone's sake - but the truth is the truth) . It may be that the Austrian (von Mises) economists will ultimately be proven right.
- We are a nation of partially educated whiney grabby idiots, and we got the government that represents this. The Chinese, India and other up and coming nations will show no mercy for this arrogant abuse of our status as the world's forex reserves.
- War and asset sales will continue to be the only option for this scheme until it is corrected at the core. And to say that the government has already averted a depression by doing what they did (most of the monies injected wont be "felt" for some time), is just arrogance and stupidity. Price fixing prolonged the Great Depression. Price-fixing (or attempting to) houses will do the same, but probably worse.
- Obama's minions simply don't care if the US is bankrupted and rendered insolvent, they just want a say in how its done, presumably to "feel safe." Rather selfish.

        "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." AND "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (Possibly Richard Jackson)

- Everyone better realize that inflation will pay a major role in funding un-fundable fantasies, wiping the savers and the middle class out. The problem is, that other countries are growing tired of making our Federal Reserve notes worth something by buying our debt as treasuries. Obama's minions talk about spending, but in order to "get what YOU want" you will sell debt to potential economic and military adversaries? Real bright. What's really sad is that despite David Walker being an authority on these issues, people refuse to even watch him and listen to what he is saying. Instead of seeing the truth and the bottom line of the unfunded debt obligations, they want HOPE and CHANGE, which are simply concepts which the foolish change into their own personal hopes and changes, but Obama never bothered to outline what to hope for exactly or what he will be changing.
- We have a fraud, a huckster, an empty suit for a President, a Community Organizer. This man does not have the ability to formulate an original thought, or to command action. He is a know nothing that lives in a pretend world just like Michael Jackson ensconced himself in Neverland ranch, he will hide behind those who surround him, which happen to be incompetent people who have no compunction about spending the country into oblivion to achieve personal agendas.
- On the success of Canada and its form of Socialism: A huge country like Canada with massive amounts of uranium and tar sands and natural resources and a huge land mass with a scant 30 million people is an order of magnitude less of a problem to manage than a country with 10x its population, a serious leaky southern border, backfiring aggressive foreign policy, particularly with Iran, and the US is competing with countries like India and China whose middle classes are larger than the US's entire population. The top 5 students in every Indian and Chinese primary school out numbers all the kids in primary school in the US. Canada is a idyllic island, the USA is front and center in an all out economic and political clash of ideologies.
- Cap and trade (and pollution control for solving global problems) will never work unless the top 10 countries in the world (in terms of GDP, manufacturing capacity and population) are on board. Period. end. If the world doesn't quickly move to nuclear now and fusion shortly, it is over. Possibly not if every home on the planet gets a wind vane, but that seems unlikely to happen (since its possible now).
- Keynes calls it "the paradox of thrift" and suggested that policies forcing people not to save is a "good idea." The guy wanted people spending all the time, or if he didn't, he never conveyed that to his protégés well enough for them to not do what they are doing. Right now the plebeians in the US are actually stashing cash, and everyone from Obama to the media is trying to get people to spend spend spend. The best thing for the long term is for people to prepare for the coming hell, not set out with no reserves.
- I have seen Keynes invoked to justify nearly every bad move in the past decade, and its warming up to be a potential currency collapse, the collapse of the US Treasury and Federal Reserve notes, and a collapse of the NYSE. And then they invoke Keynes to suggest the best way out of the mess is to spend out of an already near-critically debt massed black hole.
- A house is run like a town is run like a country or business is run like a state is run like a government. If there are things the government is doing that would either force your home into bankruptcy or into jail via fraud charges, then the government and banks shouldn't be operating in that fashion. A certain degree of stretchy liquidity is in order, but in terms of percent of GDP, there is no way of justifying what they US has now.
- Iceland failed at 850 percent debt to GDP. The US is at 350 and rising. It is not a good thing at all.
- What is happening to the dollar as a forex standard. [youtube.com]
- March 19, 2009 C-SPAN - "Let's Quit Destroying Our Dollar!" [youtube.com]
- HR 1207 (A bill to make the Fed more accountable and to answer questions regarding the dollar policy) [loc.gov]

Title: Obama sidetracked by fiscal mess, but presses on [yahoo.com]
"Being heard above the din may prove difficult. Lawmakers are wrangling over taxing people who got big bonuses and worrying the president's budget could generate $9.3 trillion in red ink over the next decade."
- Kremlin to pitch new global currency [infowars.com]
Russia proposes creation of global super-reserve currency.

        In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

- Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400991)

Mmm, delicious copypasta.

Oddly enough? The captcha is "congress".

Re:Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Report (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401113)

i couldn't be arsed to rebuild all the links.

perhaps you'd care to direct me to the properly formatted version for some more yummy copypasta?

Re:How much (5, Funny)

ionix5891 (1228718) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400951)

theres was probably a line of apple fanboys queuing to give their livers to steve

Re:How much (0, Troll)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401001)

theres was probably a line of apple fanboys queuing to give their livers to steve

Unfortunately, he only needs one. And he needs no other organs.

Story was covered by Timecop THREE DAYS AGO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401459)

Jurily, please quit trolling. We don't appreciate it.

This story was posted days ago. And here's the kicker:

The specifics of Mr. Jobs's surgery couldn't be established, but according to the United Network for Organ Sharing, which manages the transplant network in the U.S., there are no residency requirements for transplants. Having the procedure done in Tennessee makes sense because its list of patients waiting for transplants is shorter than in many other states. According to data provided by UNOS, in 2006, the median number of days from joining the liver waiting list to transplant was 306 nationally. In Tennessee, it was 18 days.

A little bit of a priority issue, eh? Story found here [nimp.org]

Re:How much (4, Funny)

Jarik_Tentsu (1065748) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401227)

"Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like you to give your focus to my newest creation - the iLiver. The iLiver can work with our other iProducts, such as the iFood or iDrink..."

"Mr Jobs, I heard that it only handles DRM-content...I enjoy buying my food and drink at this bar down the road..."

"Only DRM-enabled goods purchased at the Apple Store can be accepted by the iLiver. But this is not a problem, with the Apple Store now hosting thousands of digestible products available to buy."

Re:How much (2, Interesting)

B00KER (1359329) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400969)

Tennessee makes sense because.... Steve's Rich?

Re:How much (5, Funny)

curmudgeous (710771) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401021)

He's just practicing that ol' "Buy American!" bit instead of running off to China like the rest of the rich and abusive.

2 Months is very fast (5, Informative)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400953)

for a recovery. My Dad's liver transplant had him out for almost 6 months. In fact, right after his surgery, he was in isolation for 30 days, then in ICU for another 30. I'd be real suprised if he actually was able to "return to work" this month. Even "part time," physical therapy and all the tweaking they need to do with the medications (anti rejection, etc.) to get his chemical balances back is a big thing.

I wish him well... my Dad was able to go to Oshkosh (AirVenture) with me 1 year after his surgery. A trip I will never forget.


Re:2 Months is very fast (5, Insightful)

WarwickRyan (780794) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400987)

It's hard to compare to 'normal' people, because someone like Steve Jobs would have had an team of the very best surgeons working on him, and generally the best medical care that money could buy..

Re:2 Months is very fast (4, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401049)

It's hard to compare to 'normal' people, because someone like Steve Jobs would have had an team of the very best surgeons working on him, and generally the best medical care that money could buy..

This being Slashdot, that raises interesting questions. Steve's not rich because he was born into a banker family, in fact, he was adopted. He's rich because people bought his products.

So, is it bad if he uses that money to get the kind of treatment you and I can't afford?

Re:2 Months is very fast (5, Insightful)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401129)

"So, is it bad if he uses that money to get the kind of treatment you and I can't afford?"

Always an interesting question. I would say yes, it is a bad thing. Not for Steve of course, but for what it represents.

Steve Jobs has large wads of cash as that is what we give people who prove themselves to be great assets to the economic system. No doubt, Steve Jobs is exactly that, but should your value to the economic system be the primary factor behind the level of medical care you receive? I would say no. Steve Jobs has no more right to the best standard of care than does somebody who has been in the police force, or a teacher (for example) their entire lives. In fact, I would say that anybody who has lived a moral, decent life should receive the same level of medical care, and that should be the highest available at the time. The only people that I would say might not deserve this are serious/career criminals.

It is easy to get confused in this matter because we are talking about Steve Jobs, who seems a pretty smart and decent guy anyway. How about if we replace Steve with Ken Lay, should 'Kenny Boy' receive a much higher level of medical care than somebody who choose to be a librarian rather than a 'business tycoon'?

You can probably guess I one of those evil socialist types ;o), but I come from a country where we have socialised medicine. It is certainly not perfect, but I don't believe that is a fault with the system, but a fault with the people running it.

Re:2 Months is very fast (2, Insightful)

Timosch (1212482) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401207)

I tend to go even further: Even criminals, who in your opinion don't deserve that, should enjoy equal medical treatment. We send them in jail for what they've done, but when everyone else would get the same medical treatment, denying it to them would be a cruel and excessive punishment.

Re:2 Months is very fast (2, Insightful)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401575)

So if any of these [dekalbmugs.com] people or these people [gwinnettmugs.com] need a liver transplant, they should be front and center in line to get a brand new liver, well ahead of a supportive member of society that regularly pays his contribution to society? That's 2 counties out of 3140 in the US and those are people arrested on a Friday night.

Socialized medicine in the US will never work as it's intended because the gap between the haves and the have nots and the gap between the dos and the do nots will widen contributing to an apathetic society. The do nots will get the care ahead of the dos and drain the system and the haves will get the better care that the have nots will complain about. The people that will end up getting screwed will be the average Joe wanting this "everyone's covered" plan that does his contribution to society. What's the point of being a 'do' if the 'do nots' get all the same benefits? If you want to be a doctor to treat the 'haves' but the law states that you have to treat the 'have nots', what's the point of becoming a doctor? Doctors will not get paid competitively in a monopolized payment structure.

If you're going to grow a vegetable garden for yourself, you need to prepare a method for dealing with rabbits. (If I have to explain that, you will never get it)

Now, in the same vein, the current 3rd party payment system needs to be radically overhauled but that is a beast that is "too large to fail."

Re:2 Months is very fast (4, Funny)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401213)

Any medical care that Ken Lay gets would have to be the very best since he's been dead for 3 years. But I get your point ;-)

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

Teppy (105859) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401251)

Assume that a perfect matched liver was available: Suppose *you* were the top liver transplant surgeon, and someone offered $50k to give up your day off, and instead perform a liver transplant on them. Would it be immoral for you to accept?

Re:2 Months is very fast (3, Insightful)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401481)

I wouldn't be immoral for me to accept the work, but it would be immoral of me to demand access to the liver so that I could use that during my 'overtime'

Re:2 Months is very fast (4, Insightful)

drsmack1 (698392) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401261)

>> but I come from a country where we have socialised medicine. It is certainly not perfect

If your country has socialized medicine; then I'm guessing that people go OUTSIDE the system (or even the country) to get the best care possible.

This Churchill quote seems appropriate right now: The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.

yea (3, Insightful)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401421)

you are GUESSING that, just like you said.

just like how americans run away to canada.

and therefore churchill quote is totally inappropriate.

Re:2 Months is very fast (5, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401389)

Living in Canada (where are you located), I disagree. The system does not provide best care and there should be a legal way to get extra care above what they normally provide if you pay the money.

Think about this: if a public hospital allows a person to stay only for a few days after a surgery, why shouldn't a person with means be able to leave that place and go to a private hospital that does not depend on the public resources and stay there for any amount of time that it takes this person to recover fully or until he even simply feels like it as long as he pays? In Ontario this is generally illegal, however what would be the difference between that and simply hiring a bunch of nurses/doctors to take care of you personally in your house even (except that doing it would be so expensive that only the richest people, someone exactly like Jobs could afford it?)

How is it even legal to prevent a professional to provide his/her services for the best payment if he wants that extra money? I am a software developer working on contracts, generally speaking I always search for the best deal I can get. Why should a doctor be denied opportunity to get the most money his abilities would allow him?

So the only argument against a fully private system would be this: if the government subsidizes education of some doctors, then it could demand that those, who were subsidized give back at least some of their time to the public system (say 30% minimum of their time would go to public system) Of-course there is a larger problem with government subsidizing any education system - it drives the education costs up, because universities know that government is there to provide loans, so whatever the costs of education are, anyone can just get this 'mortgage' to pay for it, so there is no incentive to make education any cheaper.

If the government stayed away from subsidizing education, the prices for it would go down and more people would be able to afford it in the first place. More doctors would graduate and that would drive their prices down so even a private health system could be affordable.

You can probably guess I one of those evil socialist types

- and I am not, as you can probably guess, I believe on economy my position is logical and yours is not. You would have a system that would be regulated, taxed and subsidized and would eventually collapse under its own bureaucratic cost.

Medical privileges (1, Insightful)

AlpineR (32307) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401489)

In fact, I would say that anybody who has lived a moral, decent life should receive the same level of medical care, and that should be the highest available at the time.

What if the best medical care possible is very, very expensive? Like, for a sci-fi example, a drug made from atoms of antimatter trapped inside buckyballs. The buckyballs are tagged with proteins to stick to cancer cells, then an electromagnetic pulse cracks them open, releases the antimatter, and POOF - no more cancer.

Suppose that making the antimatter requires a $5 billion dollar facility that needs $100 million dollars of energy to make enough for one patient. There's not enough money, energy, or scientists on Earth to make enough to treat everybody with cancer.

Should we deny a billionaire cancer patient the freedom to buy his own dose from a multibillion pharmaceutical company that invested in such a facility for the small but profitable segment of the population that can afford such a drug?

Before we get socialized medicine in the states... (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401497)

can we get socialized justice?

because while I have no problem with people buying the best medical care they can I do have one where they can buy innocence or buy off the sentence they deserve.

Regardless, I still am against having other people being forced to pay for my routine medical care. Paying for catastrophic should first be my concern as well but I can see where a medical system setup where catastrophic could be public funded provided it doesn't excuse the person receiving it from making a best effort.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401499)

I'm not sure one thing excludes the other.

Yes, we can have socialized medicine. Wouldn't the wealthiest always have the option of going elsewhere to get the best treatment they can afford? Shouldn't they have that right?

Re:2 Months is very fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401517)

It is easy to get confused in this matter because we are talking about Steve Jobs, who seems a pretty smart and decent guy anyway. How about if we replace Steve with Ken Lay, should 'Kenny Boy' receive a much higher level of medical care than somebody who choose to be a librarian rather than a 'business tycoon'?

LMAO. Word in silicon valley is that Steve Jobs is considered one of the biggest assholes around. On the other hand, while Steve Ballmer has a roid rage reputation of throwing chairs, rumor has it that he is actually a really nice guy in day-to-day non-business interactions (just wear a helmet if you are leaving Microsoft for Google).

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

rastilin (752802) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401587)

Steve Jobs has large wads of cash as that is what we give people who prove themselves to be great assets to the economic system. No doubt, Steve Jobs is exactly that, but should your value to the economic system be the primary factor behind the level of medical care you receive? I would say no. Steve Jobs has no more right to the best standard of care than does somebody who has been in the police force, or a teacher (for example) their entire lives. In fact, I would say that anybody who has lived a moral, decent life should receive the same level of medical care, and that should be the highest available at the time. The only people that I would say might not deserve this are serious/career criminals.

I'm all for socialized medicine, but when his ass is on the line I support Jobs's desire to go the distance to survive. I wouldn't condemn him to death just to prove a point.

You can probably guess I one of those evil socialist types ;o), but I come from a country where we have socialised medicine. It is certainly not perfect, but I don't believe that is a fault with the system, but a fault with the people running it.

There we disagree, those people are "The System". If your system works perfectly with 1000 honest men, but you can't get your hands on those; then your plan is flawed. Regardless of how it would work in theory.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

coaxial (28297) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401233)

So, is it bad if he uses that money to get the kind of treatment you and I can't afford?

Yes. Is it his fault? No, it's United States' lack of universal care like every other country in the world has.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

frieko (855745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401263)

I find it hard to believe I'm putting these words together in the same sentence, but there was an interesting episode of Star Trek Voyager [wikipedia.org] on the subject.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401373)

2 very good points for debate.

1) Should it matter HOW he made his money, as long as it was legal? Is it okay becuase he's Steve, and he made cool products, -vs- someone who had, say, rich parents? On the flip side, if I was a billionaire, should I not be able to purchase the best medical care for my son, even if he is lazy and not good for much?
2) This is the crux of the public healthcare debate. I'm Canadian - we don't worry about rich people getting better care. We worry about everyone getting better care. We worry about people who need liver transplants getting them, and about having the best, well trained doctors specialists seeing the right poeple at the right time. We are absolutely not fully successful at this - yet we still believe in the concept.

Re:2 Months is very fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401479)

Is it bad if he uses his money to buy to buy a better house then you or I can... is it bad if he buys better food? What about cloths?

If it IS bad that he can get better medical treatment, then who should pay for yours and mine? Should Steve? Universal health care sounds great until you notice that you are paying for the smoker who needs a new lung and the guy who got drunk then slammed his car into a minivan filled with a troop of boy scouts.

No matter what the talking heads say, everything costs something. If the government is covering it, then YOU are paying for it.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1, Insightful)

platypussrex (594064) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401553)

This is the crux of the issue. a) that somehow medical treatment is totally different than any other service/commodity (it's not) and b) that we should be force at gunpoint to pay for every unhealthy
  clown on the planet because of their bad choices.

If i want a better house, I earn more money so I can buy it. Ditto with a car. Want a better education? Pay for it. That's how the world works.

As for the second point, all you need to do is work at the ER in a major hospital for a while to see what happen when you give people free medical care. All the welfare grabbing losers who are already sucking on the government teat like that was no tomorrow show up for the most trivial reasons you can imagine, just because it won't cost them anything. Things that any normal person would either self treat of see their doctor in the morning. I'm not kidding, I saw a guy arrive once in an ambulance because he ate something that gave him gas. Think of how many thousand dollars that cost the taxpayers.

Re:2 Months is very fast (4, Funny)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401073)

Exactly! Add to that the fact that the surgeons simply needed to rotate Steve by 90 degrees to have all his internal organs shift to 'landscape mode' for easy access and I am sure the surgery was a breeze.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

ijakings (982830) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401143)

All they did was flash him with the 3.0 firmware, then cut and pasted that liver right in there.

Re:2 Months is very fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401289)

Recovery time has a lot more to do with the patient's ability to recover than with money. Particularly the patient's ability to handle all the meds.

People just want to believe that a top transplant surgeon can somehow transplant a liver better than the average transplant surgeon. Instead, a specialty surgeon can likely deal with special, difficult cases more readily than the average surgeon.

Believe it or not, liver transplants are quite common. Go down to your local hospital's transplant unit and you'll be amazed by the streams of people coming in and out with transplants. The real problem is finding matching organs. That's why I'm signed up to be an organ donor - to improve the odds of a few people who could use my "parts" in the case of my traumatic death.

Yes, I've known several people who have had transplants, some in my immediate family. You might know someone too... it isn't obvious to the casual observer.

Re:2 Months is very fast (2, Funny)

sqldr (838964) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401435)

Steve Jobs would have had an team of the very best surgeons working on him

Nah.. they probably just downloaded the "iSurgery" app for their iPhone.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401591)

I'm sure Steve will get better faster, so long as he follows that old saying about having an apple a day :) .

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401593)

He only makes $1 a year, though. Can he really afford the best doctors on a salary like that?

Re:2 Months is very fast (2, Funny)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401013)

2 Months is very fast for a recovery.

Never underestimate the awesome power of reality distortion fields.

Re:2 Months is very fast (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401097)

Yes but unfortunately for your Dad he didn't have hoardes of Apple fanboys sacrificing infidel Zunes and worshipping the god of iPods and DRM to speed up his recovery.

Re:2 Months is very fast (2, Informative)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401205)

Recovery time is going to depend a lot on the patient's condition before the transplant, including why they needed it, so comparing one person's to another's requires taking that into account.

Re:2 Months is very fast (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401225)

Steve Jobs probably has more money than your father and is willing to spend loads of it to stay alive. When you have the means to pay for it, you get great medical care.

Just look at Magic Johnson. He has HIV yet has gone on for ages with a relatively normal life and it's because he's able to afford to down a bucket of the best AIDS preventative medicine.

Re:2 Months is very fast (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401453)

You clearly aren't very aware of the state of HIV treatment.

I'm not either, to be honest, but a friend of my mom has been HIV+ for quite a long time and is doing fine. With the current set of drugs he's taking, it apparently isn't even detectable in his blood.

Re:2 Months is very fast (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401607)

I don't know what kind of shape your dad was in before his transplant, but that's got to be a factor in recovery time. Aside from these specific health issues, Steve is probably in good physical condition.

Be glad your dad got one. I hope he's continuing to do well.

My dad died in '92 in a surgery designed to reroute blood flow around his ruined liver. We were told there was no way he was getting a transplant as a long-time alcoholic.

A few year later, in 1995, Mickey Mantle got a new liver. He too was an alcoholic, characterized as "recovering," and also had hepatitis C, but was a famous and beloved public figure. "Although the average wait time on the list to receive a liver in 1995 was three to four months, Mantle received his in a day."* Everyone involved claimed there was no favoritism, and still does. I don't believe it.

(The liver did Mantle no long-term good; he died of cancer two months later.)

So don't anyone think the rules apply to everyone equally. They don't. Money and fame talk.

(* - from http://www.miracosta.edu/home/lmoon/allocate.html [miracosta.edu] , which frankly doesn't look like the best citation in the world, but I do remember it from news reports at the time. Wikipedia agrees about the alcoholism and hepatitis.)

I still don't believe it (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400963)

I stand by the AIDS infection theory since allegedly Job was caught kissing a man in public. Maybe they were demonstrating the new mouth docking system to charge up the new upcoming iPhone and iPod.

Re:I still don't believe it (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401095)

Well what I heard was that Stevie boy was giving some dude head in the toilet of a San Francisco nightclub. I don't know if they went to the anal sex afterwards, but it seems likely.

It would explain Steve's fascination with fruity colours and music styles that are mostly associated with gay society.

Re:I still don't believe it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401165)

Christ, chump, I don't like Apple, but if you can't be original at least make it funny. Chump.

I likes chicken I loves liver (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400973)

meow mix meow mix please deliver

Apple (1)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 5 years ago | (#28400977)

While I dislike their general philospohy towards their users and products but I think they provide an important counterpoint to Microsoft. Steve Jobs for better or worse is the guiding light for Apple. I'm sure more than just Apple's investors and employees are hoping he comes back strong and sticks around for a good long time.

All the best Steve and good luck beating that thing you've got.

Re:Apple (1)

qmaqdk (522323) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401527)

While I dislike their general philospohy towards their users and products...

Let me get this straight. You were referring to Apple here, not Microsoft?!

Why are we giving Steve Jobs livers? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400981)

Livers belong to the PEOPLE and one person should not be allowed to hoard them even if he is a wealthy fashion executive like Steve Gates. Is this a Democracy or a theocracy,???!?!?!!

Who the hell cares? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28400999)

Aren't we supposed to care about the technical side of things and his ideas, but by no means about his private life?

livery in TN (1)

cellurl (906920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401007)

I guess we in Tennessee don't ruin our liver as often as other folk!

Re:livery in TN (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401105)

Far from it. TN has a serious drinking problem (IIRC, it is actually one of the higher ones). OTH, you would have a higher mortality rate amongst younger folks, typically from accidents. This has a double advantage in that a younger person is less likely to have viruses. Getting a liver from somebody older and you are likely to pick up a variety of virus. As it is, our increased cancer rate can most likely be tied to blood transfusions as well as transplants.

Re:livery in TN (1)

OakDragon (885217) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401345)

TH, you would have a higher mortality rate amongst younger folks, typically from accidents.

That's right, you want to go to the states where they like their 4-wheeler off-road vehicles!

Proof / Evidence (4, Insightful)

HaloZero (610207) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401009)

Unless Jobsy himself has told you this, I'm pretty sure that running this article either violates HIPPA, or is simply full of lies...

Where did the information about a transplant come from? I hope the source was verified, and re-verified, and then re-verified again. Remember when CNN posted that Jobs had had a heart attack, but it simply turned out to be "citizen journalism" gone horribly, horribly wrong? Gotta be careful with this crap.

Either way, all the best to The Steve.

Re:Proof / Evidence (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401051)

Stock and options traders start these rumors to make money on their short stock or long put positions. The upside for AAPL is pretty much bought out so there's just the down side to strike it rich.

I, for one, am monitoring Jobs' health and reading everything I can about Jobs' health. When the time comes, I'm loading up on out of the money puts and PRESTO - I'm rich. Then, I'll be able to afford that Mac Book Pro I've always wanted!

Re:Proof / Evidence (2, Insightful)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401125)

Welcome to Slashdot. Enjoy your stay.

Re:Proof / Evidence (5, Informative)

bkaul (1235970) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401283)

Running the article doesn't violate anything. It's the doctors/hospital who are restricted by HIPPA, not the press.

Obamaication (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401023)

I guess he did it two months ago cause in a few months, there will be line ups, no money and little interest for most Doctors (Excluding Dr. Nick) to perform the transplant in the US, after Obamaication.

Dr. Nick is the poster child for the Health Care Obama wants to bring in to the US.

After Obamaication there might only be cartoon Doctors like Dr. Nick who wants to perform any medical service in the US.


How much did it cost? (1, Interesting)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401039)

I know nobody has exact numbers but wish Mr. Jobs well. I wonder how much it cost though. Is the cost of such a procedure high to the extent that it would force an average family into bankruptcy? If bankruptcy is indeed a realistic possibility then I support some sort of government involvement in health care.

Why a liver transplant? (4, Interesting)

kamatsu (969795) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401045)

Last I read, the cancer hadn't metastatized and was removed without chemo etc. Okay, fair enough, that's pretty unusual but I guess they caught it early. Can someone explain to me why they would give him a liver transplant now? I mean, having a liver transplant introduces a whole lot of health risks, and as far as I know unless his previous liver had already developed the metastatic cancer, they shouldn't replace it - wouldn't that just be throwing away a perfectly good liver, and then putting another one in, only to have it develop tumours in a few years? The only thing I can think of is that perhaps the cancer is worse than they're letting on.

Re:Why a liver transplant? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401239)

The obvious conclusion is that the cancer had metastasized and appeared in his liver. Whenever a doctor says they got the cancer, there's always a chance that they didn't get it all. Apparently that's the case here. Hopefully they caught it early enough and got the last of it. Time will tell.

Re:Why a liver transplant? (1)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401401)

From my understanding of cancer is if they find it metastasized in one organ it's almost certainly metastasized in other organs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastized#Treatments_for_metastatic_cancer [wikipedia.org] If that's the case it sounds like Jobs' options are pretty much treating it as a chronic condition and curing it is probably not likely.

Re:Why a liver transplant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401565)

Indeed, metastatic cancer is a death sentence

Re:Why a liver transplant? (2, Funny)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401243)

Can someone explain to me why they would give him a liver transplant now?

Yeah; his old liver was last year's model, and a new version in a range of smart-looking colours had just come out. Jobs didn't want to risk being seen as unfashionable or behind the times.

Also, he wants a kidney transplant as well, but the new kidneys don't work with the older model livers.

Re:Why a liver transplant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401255)

Can someone explain to me why they would give him a liver transplant now?

His contract was up and he was eligible for a $99 upgrade?

This comes as quite a surprise. (4, Funny)

davidbrit2 (775091) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401053)

I mean, usually you can't upgrade the components in Apple stuff very easily.

In all seriousness, though, I wish him well. Sounds like an unpleasant ordeal.

Re:This comes as quite a surprise. (2, Funny)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401111)

I mean, usually you can't upgrade the components in Apple stuff very easily.

Ah, but you see, Jobs is an older model and comes with the superbly designed and easily upgradeable outrigger body. [wikipedia.org]

Re:This comes as quite a surprise. (1)

confused one (671304) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401265)

Nah, he predates even that. Think all the way back to the do-it-yourself Apple I and the designed by a hacker, for hackers, Apple ][.

nice to see (2, Insightful)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401057)

that the liver transplant wait times are not that long...

can Americans tell me.. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401071)

..what happens there if you aren't insured for this treatment / not very rich? Are you just left to die?

Re:can Americans tell me.. (4, Informative)

sjf (3790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401107)

No, most hospitals are required by state law to treat folks without insurance for emergency care. So, by the point you are actually dying you'll get treatment. And, by that point it's only palliative.

But, hey, at least the US doesn't have socialist health care! Those socialist fire fighters do such a terrible job putting out our houses when they're on fire, and don't get me started on those socialist training camps called public (US sense) schools.

Re:can Americans tell me.. (2, Informative)

Hubbell (850646) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401147)

Yea, waiting 6 months to get an MRI after a 90kph motorcycle accident in Canada is oh so good (friend of mine) Or lets try Britain:
That is why the Orwellian named NICE, National Institute for Clinical Effectiveness, in Britain recently ruled that it would not pay for treatment for macular degeneration for seniors until the patient went blind in one eye. Seniors have been denied treatments for cancer on the same grounds. [spectator.org]

Socialized medicine means healthcare rationing just as it does in every country that has it.

Re:can Americans tell me.. (5, Insightful)

sjf (3790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401253)

Show me an HMO that doesn't ration health care.

Re:can Americans tell me.. (2, Funny)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401429)

Most of these sorts of horror stories turn out to by myths when they are investigated.

Lets see what you have common in there. (0, Flamebait)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401469)

Canada. Biggest trade partner of canada is u.s. u.s. senators try to push ALL laws they pass in usa to canada. like acta etc.

britain. another country which has u.s. as one of its biggest trade partners, not only that, but also adopts many political lines of u.s. internationally, leave aside a lot of domestic stuff.

BOTH fail in regard to socialized healthcare.

yet france, denmark, scandinavia etc A LOT OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES manage to pull it off VERY well.

so its not the failure of the system then. maybe its a failure of dickheads who are yelling 'socialism boooo ! it will suck our souls dry'.

there are NO systems on the face of earth that just delivers what is expected by itself. for anything to succeed, YOU NEED TO PROPERLY RUN IT. that includes your water closet and even your butt, leave aside social mechanisms.

Re:can Americans tell me.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401123)

Yup. That's pretty much the case. As an added bonus after you die the hospital gets to take your estate to pay for your $20,000 per day hospital bill.

Re:can Americans tell me.. (2, Informative)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401141)

Well, it depends. Do you have insurance that covers it. If you do not, then there is gov. insurance in medicare/medicaid. In general you get on a waiting lists. Of course, it has to match your histochemistry and size (the liver from a 10 y.o. is not going to go into a person of say 300-400 lb). BTW, my mother-in-law just had a kidney put in (here in colorado). It took 2 years. Chance are that Jobs waited 2-3 years for one.

What is impressive is that he did not go to India. Many of the wealthy like to go to India to buy them. LITERALLY. There are operations there that run out and steal the organs from a number of live ppl, or will take them from ppl dying of aids and other diseases (but claim otherwise). In spite of this, westerners run out there, pay the 20K and get the operations. That is because India has their money tied to the dollar, so from our POV, it is cheap.

Re:can Americans tell me.. (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401371)

Are you just left to die?

No, you begin a new career as an "Organ Donor."

Where do you think all those livers come from?

Re:can Americans tell me.. (1)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401417)

In theory there are state hospitals and charity hospitals that will help you. In reality it is not uncommon for people without insurance to die in these situations. I had a roommate once who lost a leg when his insurance company dropped him after he got sick.

Still old news (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401077)

But it's nice to see Slashdot becoming honest about it.

What about this Stem Cell Stuff??? (1)

1mck (861167) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401079)

Why didn't he try that stem cell therapy, or any newer technology where they grow your organ using your own cells??? Seriously, he's that rich that he could literally invest a huge chunk of change into it, and their 1st customer would be him! Apple...think different?

Re:What about this Stem Cell Stuff??? (1)

dimeglio (456244) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401167)

If it is found out that his liver came from a PC user will he then say that "I'm also a PC?"

Good luck Steve.

Re:What about this Stem Cell Stuff??? (3, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401331)

Stem cell therapy? On cancer? Please tell me you're joking. That'd be like putting out a fire with gasoline.

And no matter how much money you have, you can't just "buy" a new medical technology in a matter of a few months.

Re:What about this Stem Cell Stuff??? (1)

arb phd slp (1144717) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401411)

Stem cell therapy? On cancer? Please tell me you're joking. That'd be like putting out a fire with gasoline.

And no matter how much money you have, you can't just "buy" a new medical technology in a matter of a few months.

Tony Stark can build new medical technologies out of junk lying about his cell. Doesn't every billionaire keep a crack team of doctors in their secret base under the volcano?

Well I know of one stem cell treatment. (1)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401525)

Well if you want to be technical a bone morrow transplant is a form of stem cell therapy and is used to treat cancers like leukemia and renal cell carcinoma. Unfortunately it's one of the most dangerous procedures a doctor can do to you. (To give some context my dad was dying from RCC a couple years back and I saw that an experimental bone marrow transplant might cure him. Probability of cure was about 20%. Probability of it just killing him in 2 weeks was also about 20%.)Yes I realize those percentages might be a bit higher since people getting them are literally deathly ill but double digit death rates are really damn high.

Subscription Required (4, Funny)

erroneus (253617) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401127)

When I read the summary, it came across as having a transplant requires a subscription.

Questionable standards for reporting by WSJ (5, Interesting)

Apocalyptic Grouch (1294812) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401151)

The Wall Street Journal articles have problems with lack of attribution and stated lack of verification of this info. If the story true (and I think it probably is), the authors of the articles need to elaborate.

Immediately after the article was posted on their site, I wrote the writers and editors the following email:

Date: Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 01:23
Subject: Questionable standards for reporting by Wall Street Journal journalists Kane, Lublin, and Meckler
To: Yukari Iwatani Kane , "Joann S. Lublin" , Laura Meckler
Cc: "Robert J. Thomson" , New York Times News Department

Dear Journalists of The Wall Street Journal,

The two articles referred to below, published June 20, 2009 on the website of The Wall Street Journal, state controversially without attribution that Apple Inc. CEO Steve Jobs received a liver transplant in Tennessee approximately two months ago:

Reported June 20, 2009 by Yukari Iwatani Kane and Joann S. Lublin, "Jobs Had Liver Transplant",
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124546193182433491.html [wsj.com]

Reported June 20, 2009 by Laura Meckler, "Jobs's Transplant Highlights Differing Wait Times",
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124546226305633529.html [wsj.com]

As journalists you are expected to seek reliable sources and to accompany reports of controversial facts with attribution. However, as Yukari Iwatani Kane and Joann S. Lublin state in the first article, "The specifics of Mr. Jobs's surgery couldn't be established." They further state explicit lack of verification of Job's putative surgery by spokespeople for each of the three hospitals in Tennessee designated as liver-transplant centers.

As of ten minutes ago I could find only the following two other online articles reporting on this topic. As their sources these articles cite only The Wall Street Journal, and at that as a secondary source:

Reported June 19, 2009 by MG Siegler, "Not Only Was Steve Jobs Sick. He Had A Liver Transplant",
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/19/not-only-was-steve-jobs-sick-he-had-a-liver-transplant/ [techcrunch.com]

Reported June 19, 2009 by Peter Kavka, "Report: Steve Jobs Is Recovering From Liver Transplant, Still Coming Back to Apple",
http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090619/report-steve-jobs-is-recovering-from-liver-transplant-still-coming-back-to-apple/ [allthingsd.com]

Do you have primary sources of this information? Have you checked and cross checked this information? If you have evidence, have you validated its authenticity? Do you have corroboration?

If so, please elaborate in your articles.

Re:Questionable standards for reporting by WSJ (2, Interesting)

MeatBag PussRocket (1475317) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401275)

MOD PARENT UP!! this is very insightful and i appreciate your objectivity here. as of late main stream media has been _very_ lax in handling the information they receive. there is a huge lack of fact checking in a desperate attempt to compete with the internet and "news" sites. the profession of journalism needs to realise that by shirking thier responsibility to be accurate so they can break the news they are in effect breaking the prefession. if i find something on the internet i am smart enough to know it is of dubious certainty, when i go to a professional news outlet (Reuters, AP, BBC, NPR, CNN, hell even FOX news) i should be able to expect honest well verified journalism. lets not even get into yellow journalism, in the US the news is so slanted its a joke.

Re:Questionable standards for reporting by WSJ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401583)

The journalist in question has a reputation for being a conduit for strategic Apple leaks - probably got it from Jobs himself, or from Apple PR at Jobs' direction, but on deep background. The specifics of the surgery couldn't be established because Jobs/PR person likely told the journalist that they would answer no questions. Look at the timing - late Friday. That's definitely a strategic leak.

Big news (3, Insightful)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401191)

In today's news world, the big news is that we hear about it only now and not two months ago.

Re:Big news (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401557)

Why should we hear about it at all?

Are nerds supposed to have some kind of vested interest in his liver?

Hostile liver (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401199)

Would be ironic if the donor was a Visual Studio coder.

I am beginning to see the metaphor here whereby Steve Jobs is the modern day Prometheus who climbs the roof of the Apple Campus every night and the Eagle of Usability descends from the sky to feast on chunks of his liver.

We need a cancer expert here, since... (2, Interesting)

drunkenoafoffofb3ta (1262668) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401201)

Your immune system keeps cancer at bay -- not always -- but often. Your immune system also causes transplant rejection.

Surely suppressing the immune system for stopping transplant rejection = massive increase in cancer aggressiveness!

If this is true, then either steve's doctors are crazy, or the WSJ are telling porkies!

Re:We need a cancer expert here, since... (2, Interesting)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401329)

I hope Jobs is gonna be OK. Hepatitis C is one of the major causes of liver cancer.

Just a reminder to all Apple users: don't forget to use protection when you go to the bathhouses.

Zombie Steve Jobs has system upgrade (5, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401291)

Steve Jobs, visionary leader of Apple Computer, has died -- and come back, better and stronger [today.com] .

"They don't call it the Jesus Phone for nothing," Jobs laughed with reporters, before eating their tasty, tasty brains.

Jobs' new cyborg arsenal includes wifi, 3G, laser cannons, a flame thrower and a can opener, all running on Mac OS X Robosteve. Bundled applications include an enhanced hypnotic force field based on the one he uses at MacWorld keynotes. "I can't wait to try it on Bill," he said.

Disney, in which Jobs is the single largest shareholder, remained unaffected. "Steve's just working with the way we do things here," said the disembodied computer-hosted soul of Walt Disney, who was decanted to a computer in 1966 to avoid being declared legally dead, so that copyright in his works would never, ever run out.

refurbished (3, Funny)

Verunks (1000826) | more than 5 years ago | (#28401337)

now they'll sell his old liver at half the price on the apple store

The hardest part of the proceedure........ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28401545)

.....was finding a viable liver in Tennessee.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?