• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Coming to a town near you "Obama's Main Street Comedy S

Tam

Well-known member
Want to hear a sample of the jokes he will be telling?

His Administration has implemented one of the strongest ethics policies in US history!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

And he can deliver it with a serious face. UNBELIEVEABLE :wink:

I guess being a liar and a Tax Cheat is ethical now. :roll:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Obama promises a transparent administration and an open book ... yep..

thankfully we have no more backroom deals and closed meetings... everything will be above board and on C-Span...

a new Washington..

Obama 2012... slogan "Change" some fools actually believed it?
 

Tam

Well-known member
One of his other jokes was about how the US is a place where hard work is rewarded. :lol: oops :roll:

Truth is under Obama the US is fast turning into a country where hard work is punished with a large tax bill to reward those wanting someone else to pay to fill their gas tank and pay their mortgage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8&feature=player_embedded
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
One of his other jokes was about how the US is a place where hard work is rewarded. :lol: oops :roll:

Truth is under Obama the US is fast turning into a country where hard work is punished with a large tax bill to reward those wanting someone else to pay to fill their gas tank and pay their mortgage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8&feature=player_embedded

Who are you going to tax to run the government the poor people and the ones out of work. It is either cut spending to the bone are tax someone that is fortunate enough to have made it. Come on back to the US and help us pay the taxes. You set up there in Canada and bitch about our government and taxes. At least you do not have to worry about health care, maybe you are so consertive that you turned it down. Is that the case.
 

Tam

Well-known member
hurleyjd said:
Tam said:
One of his other jokes was about how the US is a place where hard work is rewarded. :lol: oops :roll:

Truth is under Obama the US is fast turning into a country where hard work is punished with a large tax bill to reward those wanting someone else to pay to fill their gas tank and pay their mortgage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8&feature=player_embedded

Who are you going to tax to run the government the poor people and the ones out of work. It is either cut spending to the bone are tax someone that is fortunate enough to have made it. Come on back to the US and help us pay the taxes. You set up there in Canada and bitch about our government and taxes. At least you do not have to worry about health care, maybe you are so consertive that you turned it down. Is that the case.


:lol: :lol: :lol: I don't think you want to get into the debate about our so called health care in Canada. :wink: Let's start with cost and if that doesn't convince you we'll look at QUALITY

(The Canadian Pres; Nov. 13, 2008)
Canada’s health care spending expected to reach $171.9 billion, or $5,170 per person.
What did Obama say it was going to cost the US for a country with 10 times the population?
From ABC News
Health care reform, if it passes, will cost about $1 trillion over the next 10 years. Negotiators in the Senate and House are now saying they've winnowed the cost down to "only" $900 billion or so
Take our $171.9 Billion with a B PER YEAR and times it by 10 for the size of your population and again by 10 for the year timeframe they talk about and what do you get? I get proof of the Dems telling you a lie and you are believing them.

Government run health care is expensive far more expensive than your savior is telling to. But then has the government ever told the truth about a program when they are trying to stuff it down your throat. :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
hurleyjd said:
Tam said:
One of his other jokes was about how the US is a place where hard work is rewarded. :lol: oops :roll:

Truth is under Obama the US is fast turning into a country where hard work is punished with a large tax bill to reward those wanting someone else to pay to fill their gas tank and pay their mortgage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8&feature=player_embedded

Who are you going to tax to run the government the poor people and the ones out of work. It is either cut spending to the bone are tax someone that is fortunate enough to have made it. Come on back to the US and help us pay the taxes. You set up there in Canada and bitch about our government and taxes. At least you do not have to worry about health care, maybe you are so consertive that you turned it down. Is that the case.


:lol: :lol: :lol: I don't think you want to get into the debate about our so called health care in Canada. :wink: Let's start with cost and if that doesn't convince you we'll look at QUALITY

(The Canadian Pres; Nov. 13, 2008)
Canada’s health care spending expected to reach $171.9 billion, or $5,170 per person.
What did Obama say it was going to cost the US for a country with 10 times the population?
From ABC News
Health care reform, if it passes, will cost about $1 trillion over the next 10 years. Negotiators in the Senate and House are now saying they've winnowed the cost down to "only" $900 billion or so
Take our $171.9 Billion with a B PER YEAR and times it by 10 for the size of your population and again by 10 for the year timeframe they talk about and what do you get? I get proof of the Dems telling you a lie and you are believing them.

Government run health care is expensive far more expensive than your savior is telling to. But then has the government ever told the truth about a program when they are trying to stuff it down your throat. :wink:
Non government run medical is expensive also.
Do you think we can go on with cost increases as shown with the attached article:
American Health Care Since 1994: The Unacceptable Status Quo
SOURCE: AP/Mel Evans

Since the failure of health care reform in 1994, costs have increased, quality has been inconsistent, and more Americans have joined the ranks of the uninsured.

By Ben Furnas | January 8, 2009

* print iconPrint
* email iconEmail
* Text-size: A A A
* Share: del.icio.us icon Digg icon Facebook icon Google icon Reddit icon Stumbleupon icon

Download this report to see detailed graphs and charts (pdf)
Introduction

2009 presents a rare opportunity for health care reformers to achieve their goals of affordable, accessible, and effective health care for all. American families and businesses are ready for sweeping changes after years of skyrocketing costs, increasing numbers of uninsured, and inconsistent quality of care. President-elect Barack Obama has promised to make health care a top priority, and congressional majorities are eager to pass reform.

Fifteen years ago, the United States had a similar opportunity to reform health care. But conservatives and insurance industry lobbyists defeated Bill Clinton's efforts by claiming the plan would "socialize medicine," and arguing that there was "no health care crisis." Today, their successors are making the very same arguments against Barack Obama's plan.

If opponents of reform succeed, the next 15 years are likely to resemble the last 15. The result is predictable: higher and higher costs for a health care system that leaves out more and more people. Like today, businesses will be burdened with spiraling costs, states will spend more for safety nets for high-risk populations and the uninsured, and the whole system will encourage excessive and unnecessary spending while leaving millions behind.

Looking back at the last 15 years, we can assess the quality of the American health care system and how we got here. Examining the consequences of the 1994 failure to reform health care should be a stark warning for those who would once again choose to continue our deeply flawed health care system.
Rising costs

Since 1994, the cost per person of American health care has more than doubled, with an annual growth rate regularly more than twice that of inflation. Fueled by rising costs of prescription drugs, inefficient outpatient care, expensive and unnecessary medical procedures, and ballooning insurance premiums, these costs are a burden on state and federal governments, businesses, and families.

Per-person health care expenditures in the United States have risen 6.5 percent per year since 2000, and 5.5 percent per year on average since 1994. In contrast, consumer inflation has averaged just 2.6 percent per year.

Health care costs burden American employers, who are forced to cut back on providing coverage and benefits or suffer a competitive disadvantage against international companies who don't bear health costs. Premiums for employer-provided health care have doubled since 2000 (the earliest year the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey has on record). That year the average family premium was $6,800. By 2008, it had risen to $12,700. This premium growth eats away at wages and pressures firms to reduce coverage.

The share of American firms offering health benefits shrank to 60 percent today, from 66 percent in 1999. And the percentage of Americans covered through their employers, where coverage is of a much higher quality than in the individual market, was 59 percent in 2007, down from 64 percent in 1999. Without workplace health insurance, Americans must struggle to find coverage in the unregulated private market (where people with pre-existing conditions find it difficult or impossible to secure coverage), go on public assistance, or become uninsured.

Our productive capacity is suffering, too. The United States spent approximately 16 percent of its 2006 gross domestic product on health care, up from 8 percent in 1975. Without reform, the Congressional Budget Office projects that health expenditures will rise to 25 percent of GDP by 2025. Health care spending among other rich, developed countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development averaged just 9 percent of GDP in 2006.

These costs are increasingly painful for American families, who face higher premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer expenditure data, the share of household income spent on medical expenses has crept up since 1994. A recent study by the Commonwealth Fund found that, "accelerated growth in health care spending has translated into increased burdens on family budgets." According to the most recent data, an average of 13 million families (11 percent of American families) spent 10 percent or more on out-of-pocket health care expenses in 2000-01. That's up from 8 percent in 1996-97.

American spending on health care is wildly out of sync with other large developed economies. A recent McKinsey study found that the United States spent $650 billion more on health care than peer OECD countries even after adjusting for wealth.

Americans spend well over twice as much as the OECD median in annual per-person health care expenditures, and around 150 percent of the next highest-spending country. In 2006 (the most recent data available), the United States spent $6,700 per capita on health care, over double the OECD median expenditure of $3,100. Norway, the second biggest spender, spent $4,500 per person.

Higher medical costs are also taking a toll on America's fiscal health. As the CBO has warned, "the rate at which health care spending grows relative to the economy is the most important determinant of the country's long-term fiscal balance." Federal health care expenditures, including Medicare and Medicaid, have risen to over $800 billion, or $2,650 per person, in 2008, from $300 billion, or $1,600 per person, in 1994 (in constant 2008 dollars). The burden on states has increased as well, to $300 billion in health care costs in 2008, from $190 billion in 1994 (including each state's share of the Medicaid program). These trends are projected to speed up, with per-person federal expenditure nearing $6,000 by 2017 and state and local expenditures projected to increase to $2,000 per-person (in 2008 dollars) over the same period.

While some of this increase is attributable to population growth, an aging population, and changes to the policy structures of Medicare and Medicaid (including an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program), much of it comes from the underlying inefficiencies and excess costs of the American health care system.
Vanishing coverage

Despite surging expenditures, the number of Americans going without insurance has risen to 46 million, or 15 percent of the population in 2007, up from 38 million, or 14 percent, in 1999. Among people aged 18-65, the uninsurance rate increased to almost 20 percent in 2007, up from 17 percent in 1999. If the 1999 rate had stayed constant, 4.5 million more American adults would have health insurance today.

In 36 states, the percentage of adults aged 18-65 going without health insurance has increased since 1999. Millions more are living with subpar or insufficient coverage. The Commonwealth Fund found that in 2007 there were "an estimated 25 million underinsured adults in the United States, up 60 percent from 2003." Underinsured adults "have health coverage that does not adequately protect them from high medical expenses," and they regularly go without needed care, leading to higher medical costs down the road.

The uninsured typically get care in the most expensive way: through hospitals and last-minute emergency care. These additional costs drive up premiums for those with health insurance. A 2005 Families USA study found that, by 2010, $1,500 of the cost of a family insurance premium will be due to costs associated with uncompensated care for the uninsured.
Declining quality

It would be one thing if America's massive health care expenditures since 1994 were yielding first-rate results in health outcomes and the quality of care. Unfortunately, this isn't the case. In practically every international comparative measure of health quality, the United States lags behind other developed nations who spend just a fraction of what America does on health care.

A recent Commonwealth Fund study found that across 37 indicators covering quality, access, efficiency, and equity, the United States achieves "an overall score of 65 out of a possible 100 when comparing national averages with benchmarks of best performance achieved internationally and within the United States." In other words, the United States as a whole is performing well below the standards of health, efficiency, and care that are realistic and have been achieved in the most successful U.S. states and other developed nations. And the trends are pointing in the wrong direction: "On those indicators for which trend data exist, performance compared with benchmarks more often worsened than improved… between the 2006 and 2008 Scorecards."

One indicator of America's declining health care quality is infant mortality. In 1994, America's infant mortality rate (measured as infant deaths per 1000 births) was 0.8 deaths below the OECD average of 8.8. By 2004, it was more than 1 death above the OECD average. Despite enormous per-person health expenditures, the United States ranks 26th in the world in infant mortality, behind the Slovak Republic and just ahead of Poland

Life expectancy at birth shows the same pattern. In 2004 (the most recent data available), the United States ranked 23rd in the world in life expectancy, and it has been falling relative to the OECD average since 1994. In 2003, the United States fell to last place among 19 industrialized nations in mortality from cases that "might have been prevented with timely and effective care," according to a 2008 wide-reaching study from the Commonwealth Fund. The study found that "101,000 fewer people would die prematurely each year from causes amenable to health care if the U.S. achieved the lower mortality rates of leading countries."

Obesity rates, a key indicator of chronic conditions like heart disease and diabetes, have risen steadily since 1994, too. The percentage of Americans considered obese rose to 26.3 percent in 2007, from 16 percent in 1995. Effective chronic disease management and preventive care have been woefully neglected as a national priority and should be a key piece of any comprehensive and effective reforms.

Life expectancy varies wildly within the United States, from region to region, and across racial and class lines. A report by the Harvard School of Public Health found that "the gap between the highest and lowest life expectancies for race-county combinations in the United States is over 35 years." Working to reduce these disparities would go a long way toward raising overall performance and improving cost-effectiveness and health outcomes.

Furthermore, within the United States, standards of care vary widely. Correcting these internal inequities would save the United States billions of dollars and improve the health of millions of Americans. To give just one example, in the typical U.S. state, 40 percent of people over 50 receive the recommended screenings and preventive care. In the top five states, that rate is 50 percent, and in the lowest performing states, that rate is 30 percent. Making the worst states perform as well as the best states in this and the other benchmarks Commonwealth identifies (by improving access to primary care and expanding investment in prevention) would help 70 million more adults get the preventive care they need, which will both save money and improve health.
Conclusion

The status quo of American health care is spending more money to cover fewer people, yielding disappointing outcomes. Effective reforms, which would invest in measures to improve the quality and delivery of care, reform payment to reward outcomes, and provide affordable, accessible, comprehensive health insurance for all Americans, are long overdue. The best time to fix American health care was over a decade ago. The second best time is now.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam do you know this person she sounds as if she had pretty good results and turnaround with the Canadian healthcare system.
http://www.cattletoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62175&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
 

Steve

Well-known member
2009 presents a rare opportunity for health care reformers to achieve their goals of affordable, accessible, and effective health care for all.

yes it was an opportunity. and the democrats blew it... now a year later nothing has changed.. (except health care cost more then last year and more folk are unemployed and no longer have health care) :mad:
 

Steve

Well-known member
The status quo of American health care is spending more money to cover fewer people, yielding disappointing outcomes.

Welcome to the Obama/pislosi/Reid reality.. not quite what they promised, but exactly what they delivered... disappointing outcomes.. higher costs, and fewer covered...
 

Tam

Well-known member
hurleyjd said:
Tam do you know this person she sounds as if she had pretty good results and turnaround with the Canadian healthcare system.
http://www.cattletoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62175&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I'm sure you can find a alot of stories that have a good turn out but that does not change the fact that hundreds of thousands are sitting on waiting lists to get treatment. Treatment that, if they were in the US, they could get within days. In some cases LIFE SAVING TREATMENT.
It also doesn't change the fact hundreds of thousands more are sitting on lists to just get a family doctor. One Province even has a lottery on whether you get to be the lucky one to get to see a doctor. How would you like to have buracrat tell you that, sorry sir but you are not the one we picked out of a hat to see a doctor this month? It happens in Canada don't fool yourself.

accessible, health care for all
You might be surprised to know that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care". So be careful what you are asking for you might be the one sitting on a list waiting to see a doctor or heaven forbid waiting on a list to get life saving treatment.

And there is alot that can be done to stop the rise in health care cost in the US but tell me why the only way to control cost is for the Government to take it over? How is the government at holding down costs in Medicare and Medicaid? Are they not saying they are going to pay for the new system by cutting billions out of Medicare? If there is billions to be cut out of Medicare then why haven't they done it already? :?

BTW Why should the Union members of the SEIU get a pass for the Tax on Health Care policies when the non union workers have to pay? Could it be because the SEIU paid to get Obama into office?

Why should 49 states have to pay for Nebraska's share of the Health Care bill? Could it be because Reid wanted Nelson's vote so bad to get this crap bill passed he didn't care what it cost?

Are you ready to give up your health care system, one of the best in the World, for one that has failed or is failing in every other country it has been tried in? Do you want to live in a country that provides care based on the cost and not on what is going to save your life?

Remember the Oregon woman that was refused cancer treatment because of cost and then the State run Health care system offered her a death pill instead? Do you want a bureaucrat deciding your treatment or a DOCTOR with your best interest at heart? :???:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
hurleyjd said:
Tam do you know this person she sounds as if she had pretty good results and turnaround with the Canadian healthcare system.
http://www.cattletoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62175&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I'm sure you can find a alot of stories that have a good turn out but that does not change the fact that hundreds of thousands are sitting on waiting lists to get treatment. Treatment that, if they were in the US, they could get within days. In some cases LIFE SAVING TREATMENT.
It also doesn't change the fact hundreds of thousands more are sitting on lists to just get a family doctor. One Province even has a lottery on whether you get to be the lucky one to get to see a doctor. How would you like to have buracrat tell you that, sorry sir but you are not the one we picked out of a hat to see a doctor this month? It happens in Canada don't fool yourself.

accessible, health care for all
You might be surprised to know that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care". So be careful what you are asking for you might be the one sitting on a list waiting to see a doctor or heaven forbid waiting on a list to get life saving treatment.

And there is alot that can be done to stop the rise in health care cost in the US but tell me why the only way to control cost is for the Government to take it over? How is the government at holding down costs in Medicare and Medicaid? Are they not saying they are going to pay for the new system by cutting billions out of Medicare? If there is billions to be cut out of Medicare then why haven't they done it already? :?

BTW Why should the Union members of the SEIU get a pass for the Tax on Health Care policies when the non union workers have to pay? Could it be because the SEIU paid to get Obama into office?

Why should 49 states have to pay for Nebraska's share of the Health Care bill? Could it be because Reid wanted Nelson's vote so bad to get this crap bill passed he didn't care what it cost?

Are you ready to give up your health care system, one of the best in the World, for one that has failed or is failing in every other country it has been tried in? Do you want to live in a country that provides care based on the cost and not on what is going to save your life?

Remember the Oregon woman that was refused cancer treatment because of cost and then the State run Health care system offered her a death pill instead? Do you want a bureaucrat deciding your treatment or a DOCTOR with your best interest at heart? :???:

Have you had to wait for care there in Canada?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
My name is in the local draw for a family doctor. Not sure if you call that waiting, but I'd rather just be able to go and pay for it, vs. paying for it through taxes and not have access to the service.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
The status quo of American health care is spending more money to cover fewer people, yielding disappointing outcomes.

Welcome to the Obama/pislosi/Reid reality.. not quite what they promised, but exactly what they delivered... disappointing outcomes.. higher costs, and fewer covered...
Steve I think somewhere you mentioned you were covered by Tricare. Is it government run does it work well, would it be a good example to pattern our health care after. I think that Medicare for all would work. Been very happy with mine, I am aware a lot of younger working are paying into medicare that keeps my preimums low. I would be willing to pay more.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
I have a friend in California who retired from Kaiser and she said if the
government wanted to pass health care reform all they need do is
pattern it after Kaiser's plan. It is proven and it works!! We have friends in Washington who have Kaisers plan and they are extremely happy.

Health care has never been about health care, it's been about CONTROL and the American people are wise to it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
I have a friend in California who retired from Kaiser and she said if the
government wanted to pass health care reform all they need do is
pattern it after Kaiser's plan. It is proven and it works!! We have friends in Washington who have Kaisers plan and they are extremely happy.

Health care has never been about health care, it's been about CONTROL and the American people are wise to it.

I looked Kaiser up on the internet and it does look good, and NBC did an interview and said this would be a good pattern. So why did not the Republicans take this to the people and offer it as a solution? I guess that the same reason the Democrats did not. It would mean getting along. Our politics now are about the same as a football game, the meaner the players the more we like them. Do you think that any of the Pols listen to the people they represent.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Well Kaiser originated in California if I'm not mistaken and we all
know who represents California. So maybe we need to make our
representatives aware of Kaiser's plan. It can't hurt. I think I will do that.
You try it too, okay? And maybe everyone reading this...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
Well Kaiser originated in California if I'm not mistaken and we all
know who represents California. So maybe we need to make our
representatives aware of Kaiser's plan. It can't hurt. I think I will do that.
You try it too, okay? And maybe everyone reading this...

Have you looked at Kaisers website. Looks like they contract for doctors to work for them and aslo have the medical facilitys. All of these are HMO's they contract with medicare on furnish the adiminstrative and health care. We were under HMO'S where I worked, they contracted with a lot of doctors in Dallas for us. We were over a hundred miles from Dallas. If we used our doctor we would have to pay out of network which meant a higher co-pay. Kaiser lets you choose your own doctor as long as he is in their employ. About like someone telling you who to use not much different than a government buerocrat and a private company buerocrat.
 

Tam

Well-known member
hurleyjd said:
Tam said:
hurleyjd said:
Tam do you know this person she sounds as if she had pretty good results and turnaround with the Canadian healthcare system.
http://www.cattletoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62175&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I'm sure you can find a alot of stories that have a good turn out but that does not change the fact that hundreds of thousands are sitting on waiting lists to get treatment. Treatment that, if they were in the US, they could get within days. In some cases LIFE SAVING TREATMENT.
It also doesn't change the fact hundreds of thousands more are sitting on lists to just get a family doctor. One Province even has a lottery on whether you get to be the lucky one to get to see a doctor. How would you like to have buracrat tell you that, sorry sir but you are not the one we picked out of a hat to see a doctor this month? It happens in Canada don't fool yourself.

accessible, health care for all
You might be surprised to know that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care". So be careful what you are asking for you might be the one sitting on a list waiting to see a doctor or heaven forbid waiting on a list to get life saving treatment.

And there is alot that can be done to stop the rise in health care cost in the US but tell me why the only way to control cost is for the Government to take it over? How is the government at holding down costs in Medicare and Medicaid? Are they not saying they are going to pay for the new system by cutting billions out of Medicare? If there is billions to be cut out of Medicare then why haven't they done it already? :?

BTW Why should the Union members of the SEIU get a pass for the Tax on Health Care policies when the non union workers have to pay? Could it be because the SEIU paid to get Obama into office?

Why should 49 states have to pay for Nebraska's share of the Health Care bill? Could it be because Reid wanted Nelson's vote so bad to get this crap bill passed he didn't care what it cost?

Are you ready to give up your health care system, one of the best in the World, for one that has failed or is failing in every other country it has been tried in? Do you want to live in a country that provides care based on the cost and not on what is going to save your life?

Remember the Oregon woman that was refused cancer treatment because of cost and then the State run Health care system offered her a death pill instead? Do you want a bureaucrat deciding your treatment or a DOCTOR with your best interest at heart? :???:

Have you had to wait for care there in Canada?

Yes more than once I might add and so have my family and friends.

Now you answer me why does it take a government take over of health care to lower cost?
Has a government bureaucracy ever done something that didn't cost more than the private sector?
And why hasn't the US government cut billions of waste out of Medicare if it is actually there to be cut?
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Private vs governement? I'll take private any day.

I knew you had to be a certain distance from Kaiser to be under
their plan. But that plan can be modified to include other hospitals/doctors/etc...does not have to be KAISER, but modeled
after Kaiser.
 

Tam

Well-known member
BTW hurleyjd I asked a few more questions of you and I would like your answers.

1.Why should members of the SEIU get a pass for the Tax on Health Care policies when others don't?

2.Why should 49 states pay for Nebraska's share of the Health Care bill?

3. Are you ready to give up your health care system for one that has failed or is failing in every other country it has been tried in?

4. Do you want to live in a country that provides/limits care based on the cost?

5. Do you want a bureaucrat deciding your treatment?

6. What would you say to a bureaucrat that says, sorry sir but you are not the one we picked out of a hat to see a doctor this month?
 
Top