Problem is that not just the uninsured will be signing up, but the insured under their current employer based plans will be the ones signing up. You see the whole goal of the Obama plan is to create a single payer system, once all small business employers cancel their health insurance and send their employees to the employee paid exchanges in exchange for a $2000. penalty, fine (TAX) per employee (big savings to small business). The one advantage now is that this is considered a TAX and with all taxes it becomes very progressive in nature, which means the few will be paying for the masses. (Welcome to France)
The agenda is still in full swing despite the news that the majority of Americans still oppose it. In November, after we get a new President, the act will be repealed and there will be no need to establish all these Medicaid like exchanges. I agree that this act is the biggest tax increase in history and the idea behind it all was the single payor system within a few years. Employers cannot foot the bill and employees will have to go there to find coverage. I don’t think they will like their new coverage very well and it will all be out of their pocket. Maybe people will wake up and smell the coffee by November.
It is my understanding that only employers with over 50 eligible employees must set up a plan. The inaction by some states (I wonder which Political party…starts with an “R”) to set up exchanges to assist consumers in purchasing competitive insurance plans is another excellent of the “Screwed UP” insurance system we have in the USA.
At least the Federal exchanges WILL BE set-up by Jan. 2014 to assist insurance purchasers who are entitled to quality coverage at a competitive premium.
Thinking, I don’t think you are thinking. Those employers with 50-1,000 employees will be dropping their group coverage due to cost and throwing their employees into the exchanges to fend for themselves. The big boys and unions with thousands of employees have already received waivers from compliance. Do you really think the exchanges will offer anything more than the approved Medicaid type plans for employees to go to? If you believe that, you are naive. If you have coverage right now in a plan with a lot of perks including office visit co-pay and drug plan, I think you will be disappointed in what is offered. It will not be either quality or competitive.
Dear “agent”~
It my understanding that ANY waivers granted end in 2014. The plans that will be offered have specific types of ESSENTIAL coverages required.
You seemed to be misinformed regarding the quality of coverage which must be offered. It will be guaranteed to cover pre-existing conditions as well.
Get the facts, Man…BEFORE you rant & rave.
You tag implies you are a producer. How is Health Insurance sales going? Group & Individual. Making as much money as you should / could be? Food on the table getting scarce? Rent getting paid late? Renewals hanging around?
FFA, I am glad I am 95% P&C. I have friends that have agencies heavily geared toward Group & Individual Health. They are having nightmares over what is coming down the pike and how they can retain customers who plan to drop their coverage by 2014 if this dastardly bill stands. Their commissions have been cut already and rate increases abound as carriers prepare to cover all PreX’s as mandated. The Affordable Care Act does not appear to be affordable for many. This promises to degenerate into the nightmare many of us predicted when it was passed.
This entire health care option is predicated on the fact that those with insurance pay for those that don’t have it when they run to the ER and this is terrible. BOcare is moving that expense to the govt by paying the premium of an estimated 16 million without insurance and their new medical bills that increase because now they have insurance and will go to the doctor for all ailments.
My question is who can afford to pay these bills: You and I that pay a little extra through insurance and doctor visits or a government that is already $16 trillion in debt? It seems BO believes the US Govt. That said, what happens when the US Govt can’t pay the interest on its loans? Or the US dollar is not the world currency? The impact is so much worse for all that it will not matter that less than 10% did not have insurance!
Thinking – as usual, be afraid. Be very afraid! The tactic should come of no surprise. Oh, and also, hate others. Xenophobia is key. Especially France. They are so screwed up over there, they consistently mark higher than the US in “quality of life”. Just one example here: http://thewondrous.com/list-of-top-20-countries-with-best-quality-of-life/
Quality of life – or Freedom of choice? Quality of life for whom? Those that do not work, yes much better in France. Those that are industrious and work, MUCH MUCH better in the US!
Captain, get out and sell something, make something of yourself. Then you too could possibly be a 5%er or higher. It really is not hard at all in the US, the land of opportunity. home of the brave! The highest quality of life for those that want it!
Sarah, I think Planet may be in the category of taking rather than producing, at least his philosophy follows that line. Those of us that have to sell our insurance products know that if we don’t sell, we don’t make a living for our families or have a business. That is why we are so upset at people who want our country to be an entitlement society of free loaders and failure to launch young people who think the world owes them a living, healthcare and flat screen TV’s, all on the working peoples back.
Planet, You should consider moving to France if you think it is so wonderful. You can retire at 50, but before then, you get to pay a tax up to 75% of your income since they just elected their Socialist President. They are just behind all the other European countries in going bust due to their entitlements. I am sure the big money Frenchmen are going to love that new tax put on them. Hey, just have some bread, cheese and wine and no worries. Let me know how it turned out in about a year.
Just went through the new Obamacare tax credit for my small business, that Obama and or someone else supposedly help create. . We are a subS corp, which also pays 100% of our employees healthcare coverage. I as a 50% shareholder recieved a credit for $3,000 off of my personal tax return. We pay in excess of $115,000. annually for our health coverage alone, we have 14 W2 employees that we provide coverage too. As soon as Florida establishes the exchanges under the Affordable Care Act, we have already decided that we will be dropping our coverage for benefits and will pay the $2,000 per employee TAX ($28,000 TAX per SCOTUS)and let everyone pay their own insurance cost under ACA Obamacare exchanges. If your poor, your neighbor gets to pay for your coverage, otherwise you are paying for his. Good luck with another Government intrusion into your personal life. lol… Have fun paying for your own health insurance and also your neighbors.
Sarah, Our agency is not as big as yours, having only 6 employees. We don’t provide Health Insurance for them and these ladies are covered under their husband’s group coverage. I can see a scenario that the husband’s employer will drop their coverage and they will have to fend for themselves in the exchanges to get coverage. The Medicaid like coverage they will get will not be as comprehensive as they have now and is likely to be more expensive. This is not a good situation to have this hanging over the head of small business owners and employees. The Progressives don’t see the problem, but we do.
SImple math – old school. I employ three. Good by $2100 a month bill. Hellow $6000 annual tax. I am sure they will have to create another tax as no way can $6K annually cover $25,200.
FFA, There will be no additional tax for the firm. The premium now will come from the employee. LOL… THIS IS NOT FREE INSURANCE! It will eventually become based on income like all other entitlement programs, but if you make any kind of a decent amount of money, you will eventually be paying a substantial amount in taxes.
We are going the way of a single payor system. Democrats are not allowed to complain about the cost or coverage they get! Period!
You socialist have gotten just what you deserve. GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF YOUR LIFE!
Sarah, I think the Progressives want to have everything in their life controlled by the government. Big brother can tell them when to wake up, when to have breakfast and what they can eat, when to go to the bathroom, when their entitlement checks will arrive etc. ad nauseum. Nanny state here we come unless this turns around in November. Bloomberg wants to take baby formula away in NY. Why is he still mayor there?
I find it REFRESHING that 80% of 85% of every premium dollar needs to be used for medical benefits. Imagine…Insurance that really helps the insured.
I just saw a refund letter in PA making the policyholder aware that her carrier(Aetna) only paid out 67% of premiums as benefits and she would be getting a refund check.
Tell me Thinking, what good will it really do to receive a one time check from Aetna for $187 for a family when their premiums have gone up to $1,000 per month? It is a drop in the bucket and you know it. Carriers are going to continue to pass rate increases on customers because they know they have to cover all Pre X’s and the failure to launch crowd up to age 26. By the way, I hope you enjoy all those new taxes that will be coming your way for the middle class.
Thinking do you understand what a combined ratio is for an insurance company. That takes into consideration commissions, claims adjustment expenses, marketing, salaries for company employees and power, rent, benefits for their employees. etc. Get a grip dude, These carriers will not be able to do the 85% and Congress knew it when they enacted the legislation, just like medicare can not live up to these same standards with internal cost and rampant fraud in their case.
THE CARRIERS WILL LEAVE THIS MARKET AND THE SINGLE PAYOR SYSTEM WILL BE ESTABLISHED AS THE LAW IS WRITTEN. THAT IS THE TRIGGER THAT THEY KEPT TALKING ABOUT! THIS IS AWFUL LEGISLATION!
Thank you Sarah for attempting to explain reality to Thinking although he won’t get it. He thinks it is refreshing that 85% of every premium dollar has to go to claims and also thinks companies will stay in business. The only way companies will stay in business is to get in bed with Kathleen Sebelius and be her shill on the exchanges for subsidies she will hand out. They will be a shell of their former selves and have a room full of geeks to process online applications. No underwriting, take everybody and put everyone into Medicaid type coverage. The only thing I disagree with you on is your label of calling it awful legislation. That is too mild. It is the worst legislation ever passed by Congress and signed into law. I think that sums it up.
I’ve not yet seen it mentioned so here goes nothing; For some, the idea of a govt. run healthcare system is great. Finally, a system for ALL. Keep in mind while you are bragging about this great new system that there WILL be a panel deciding what you can and cannot have in terms of surgeries and life saving procedures. Do you really believe a 70 year old patient will be allowed a heart transplant or some other surgery to extend their life by a decade or so? Groups were warning in the 1980’s this would be coming down the pike sooner or later. They were labeled conspiracy theorists. Well, the day is here and your health will no longer be yours. Someone else is going to decide what you can and cannot have in terms of healthcare. Oh, and the person deciding? They will be a govt. official that is exempt from Obamacare. They lose nothing by saying your mother/father cannot have the transplant they need or certain medications will not be covered after a specific age.
Go ahead and label this a Republican rant or another conspiracy theory by us crazy folks. Please keep in mind though we are the same people who told you 20+ years ago Socialist Healthcare was coming to America. Don’t believe the Obama lie. Today it is your healthcare. Tomorrow you will be told what you can and cannot say in say in public, where you can and cannot congregate and soon enough you will be told where to turn in your guns. If you don’t vote Obama out, your future will resemble the Soviet Union circa 1985. Healthcare should be the least of your worries.
Good comment UCT. I am sure Planet will label you as a right wing nut for opposing socialized medicine, death panels, rationed care and higher prices for health care. The Progressive movement is all about control of every aspect of our lives. A big goal of theirs is to confiscate guns from the citizens so they will have no opposition to impose Big Brother control. They may have a tough time with that since there are over 40 million gun owners in this country and there would be a civil war if it is tried. The good news is that people are waking up and Conservatives are winning key races in Governors, Legislatures, the House and Senate and we will soon have the majority after November. I am from Texas and we just had Ted Cruz win a big primary over David Dewhurst, the RINO candidate. He was backed by the Tea Party and those that say the Tea Party is fading away is totally wrong. They came out in force in July for a run-off race. They will be back in November.
Dear Agent~
Knowing you live and work in Texas makes me better able to understand how YOU think !
Texas…greatest percentage of uninsured in the country. Your Governor is against expansion of Medicaid in Obamacare (PPACA)
(I’m OK…you are on your own TYPE of thinking)
Don’t worry I’ll never live in Texas…. EVER !!
Don’t want to control your life. I don’t want your guns. But, if the government did want the guns and you’re saying civil war, I have my money on the goverment. They have more weapons, better weapons, and if they want them, they’ll have no problem getting them. Funny how some gun owners want their guns to fend off the government. Good luck! I personally have no issues with people wanting to own guns.
No such thing as “death panels”. Yes, I do want single payer. It’s a matter of time.
Don’t care to control what you do, though. Eat what you want, drink what you want, go where you want, etc. I also don’t think there is anything wrong with being informed so you can make your decisions, though. No one is saying, for example, you can’t pour a mound of salt on your 72 ounce steak before eating it. They are saying, that’s not a healthy choice and if you want to take care of your health, doing so is ill-advised.
Don’t waste your breath Captain. These hard-headed, cold-hearted, right-wing bloggers will never give in. They say we are indoctrinated and don’t think, but that is a perfect description of those that get all their “news” from Fox News and the internet! They are not free thinkers. They just rant, rave, and spread fear and hate they pick up from buffoons like Rush Limbaugh. Just parroting what they hear and being bullies to those that have a different opinion.
You are right about one thing Googlegal. Us so called right wingers will not give in and let the Progressive movement take over and continue to ruin this great country. There has been a lot of damage done by Progressives in the past 25 years on both sides of the aisle and it has gotten much worse in the past 3 1/2 years. Enough is enough. I know you echo your President when you say the private sector is doing “fine”, but the truth is that it isn’t and your President has made it much worse. That is why he and his minions will be swept out of office in November.
August 3, 2012 at 11:26 am
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You don’t know what I say. You don’t know me. You make assumptions about me, without knowing a thing. That makes you a fool. And it’s “We so called right-wingers”, not Us.
August 3, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Coldhearted? List one thing any of us has said that is cold hearted toward the American population.
Further, the fact that you insult sources and not facts is completely paramount to your flaw.
When in doubt, go after the source, not the fact eh? Many of the facts I quote you can get from wikipedia, msnbc’s non-opinion pieces, etc. I never get my news solely from Fox. Though as a side comment and I know you won’t like it but I have to type it in all caps so it gets through your thick head:
FOX REPORTS ON ISSUES WHICH NO OTHER SITE MAKES A DIRECT POST ABOUT. THEREFORE THEY ARE THE SOURCE TO FIND A CONCEPT, AND THEN YOU GO TO LIBERAL SITES TO VERIFY THE FACTS AND THEN YOU PIECE TOGETHER THE METHODOLOGY YOURSELF.
This is called doing research. And like it or not FOX NEWS IS AN ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY PART OF DOING A BALANCED RESEARCH.
If you disinclude them and make fun of them, you are a second grade class fool. Thank you and good night.
August 3, 2012 at 12:52 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob – my post was directed to Agent, who said he got his news from Fox News and the Internet. Try to keep up with the thread, would you?
August 3, 2012 at 11:01 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Planet, No one is saying you want our guns or oontrol our lives. It is the Progressive government that is doing everything they can to control our lives. Obamacare has proven that in spades. Everytime there is a shooting anywhere, the Tea Party is blamed in error and it turns out to be a nut, not a regular gun owning citizen. You are absolutely incorrect with your statement that if the government wanted to get the guns, they would have no problem. They would have a problem of historic proportions. I am inclined to believe the Military and Police Departments in most of the country would not follow that order. Democrats are now busy trying to get the Military vote disenfranchised because it seems to be too hard to get the ballots to them. They scream and jump up and down about States requiring ID’s to be able to vote and they want illegals to be able to vote, but let’s not let the military vote. I think they know how the military will vote and it is not for them.
Bob, can you imagine what kind of shape we would be in for information if we relied on the main stream media, MSNBC and the like? Fox at least changed the culture and at least attempts to show both sides of a story. I don’t agree with some of their pundits and Alan Colmbs is a complete imbecile. I would much rather see and hear Dr. Monica Crowley to analyze an issue and give the straight scoop. I don’t watch much of O’Reilly anymore because he gives way too much airtime to Progressives spouting their ideology. Hannity has the other viewpoint on his show, but he shoots them down effectively. The internet is also a valuable tool to get real news and viewpoints.
August 3, 2012 at 4:21 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The military and the police are the government. If they want your guns, they will get them. You can’t out-shoot the military and police. But, don’t worry, you will have your guns. No one is coming to take them away from you. Total hogwash at its best. Just like somehow same sex marriage is an assault on “traditional” marriage. Or, somehow giving rich people more money and taking more of the middle classes money is going to create jobs. Or, retroactively retiring. The list goes on but it’s the end of the week so I’m going to get ready to get out of here and drink a beer. Have a good weekend, all.
August 1, 2012 at 11:38 am
Thinking Producer says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Dear UCT~
It seems YOU feel that a profit making Insurance Company has LESS incentive to limit your coverage decisions than a government run -not for profit health insurance program. Some people might disagree with that logic.
Obamacare uses PRIVATE carriers and STILL we still hear plenty of complaining.
I just read where the Democracy of Israel has health care for everyone. Insureds pay 40% of the premium; govt pays 60% of the premium cost. Imagine, A democracy not acting like the USA, but THEIR health system is labeled SUPER.
Actually Thinking, the majority disagree with your logic. It is apparent to us that the goal of Obamacare is to put the private carriers out of business or to make them shills for the government with the exchanges in return for subsidies doled out by HHS. You are comparing a country smaller than South Carolina with a population of a few million to this country of 320 million. Their system of government is different than ours and they stay on a war footing 24/7 and they have to be geared for health emergencies if they are attacked. Your comparison holds no water with me. Why didn’t you compare Great Britain to the US? Probably because their system is broke, they are laying off health workers right and left and doing legalized euthanasia with their version of Death Panels. They take healthcare rationing to a new level.
PPACA(Omamacare) ojective was and IS to insure millions of more Americans who are uninsured. The notion that walking into an Emergency room for care is NOT the answer for thinking Americans.
The objective has never been to ruin insurance carriers. Getting our citizens QUALITY health care at an affordable price is essential. Too many PRODUCERS only focus on how much commission THEY can make. Health care is essential to our citizens.
Obamacare uses Private carriers….80-85% pay out in claims is not an unreasonable plan IF you look at more than your wallet.
Thinking, you take Naivety to a new level. Your conclusion on the objectives of Obamacare is totally wrong. The ultimate objective was to create a single payor government run operation with several hundred thousand new Federal bureaucrats to make the life and death decisions on Americans. They couldn’t get that through so we ended up with the 2,700 page monstrocity passed in the middle of the night with no one reading it before voting on it. The ultimate goal was to make the industry die by 1,000 cuts. How do you think carriers can pay their overhead expenses and still pay a commission to producers who do the heavy lifting for 15% of the premium? Try using some common sense for a change.
August 1, 2012 at 3:44 pm
UCT says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Dear Thinking Producer –
It seems YOU believe there will be enough taxes collected to make Obamacare viable. How will so few workers pay for so many unemployed? Oh wait, YOUR guy created the mess, so you will have an answer that suits YOU. :)
The for profit company when paid for by choice at a higher premium from someone who can afford it, will pay for more coverage than a forced per tax system. It is not an opinion, it is a fact.
You want to “cover the uninsured” who basically are that way by choice, to take away the choice of those who actually work hard to be able to pay for better coverage. Why not make everyone’s coverage worse so you can give some coverage to a bunch of people who made their choice eh?
Oh how I love people who rely on entitlements.
Put even more simple: You get what you pay for. You can choose to pay for more coverage in a private plan. Heck it may cost more but then you get that lung transplant or high cost serivce. If only the government handles it, when they run out, you run out. You don’t have another option. This harms the middle class more than benefits it. The average middle class person can afford more insurance coverage through paying premiums than they can receive insurance coverage from the government from taxes. That’s not an opinion, that’s a fact.
Therefore your comment of for profit is pointless. That path is a method to get the coverage you want and need. You get as much as you’re willing to pay, rather than as much as they are able to take.
Planet, I think you need a beer after that parting shot. You tend to completely ignore my comment that if the government does decide to take the guns, there will be big trouble. 40 million hunters will not go quietly, I assure you. Perhaps you didn’t see the article about Kennesaw, Ga. They require the head of each household to have a weapon for self defense unless they have mental problems or otherwise infirm. They have the lowest crime rate in the country for a city their size because the thugs know they may be shot if they try to rob a resident. On the other hand, the City of Chicago has strict gun laws and they have had over 200 murders in recent months and gangs are roaming the streets killing innocent adults and children and your wonderful Dead Fish Emanuel won’t send the SWAT team out because it might be profiling. I feel sorry for FFA and Always Amazed because they live in Chicago. This city is the armpit of America. I think they have BO from there.
Of the c.15% of GDP the US spends on healthcare annually (that’s about $2.2 trillion*), around 50% is spent by the government (around $1.1 trillion). By contrast, the UK spends around 8% of its GDP on healthcare, with the Department of Health’s budget for the NHS (England**) in 2008/9 around £94 billion (about $155 billion).
The English NHS cares for 49 million people (100% of the population of England); US public healthcare currently covers about 83 million (around 28% of the US population).
For a direct comparison, that means that in England the government spends around $3,200 per capita on healthcare and covers the entire population whereas in the US the federal government spends around $3,700 per capita and yet covers less than a third of the population.
Take away those 80 million covered by the US’s state healthcare (which doesn’t cover all uninsured Americans, so this is being generous) from the States’ 300 million population, we’re left with 220 million Americans to account for the other $1.1 trillion spent in the US each year on private healthcare.
That works out as $5000 for every American in the private system – almost $2,000 a year more than the NHS costs.
Yep, that’s right capitalism fans – the US free market system for healthcare provision is significantly less efficient than a “socialised” one.
This no doubt explains the Republican fear of universal US healthcare – if providing government healthcare funding for less than a third of the population costs $1.1 trillion, they no doubt imagine it would involve a bit more than a threefold increase in public healthcare spending to cover the entire population. (If they’re being really cynical, they’d no doubt point out that the US government’s $1.1 trillion healthcare spend divided by 83 million works out as a cost of $13,250 per person per annum – and therefore the annual cost to cover all Americans at that rate could be as high as $4 trillion a year.)
Of course, what they’re failing to do is take into account the ability a public healthcare system would have to drive down costs, and in their attacks on the NHS are choosing to ignore the simple fact that the NHS (even with all its problems and wastage) works out as far, far better value for money than even the current US system.
Were you to be more of a lefty than me, you might be tempted at this point to suggest that it is precisely this ability of a national health service to drive down costs that the Republicans are opposed to, as it’d leave the rich pharmaceutical companies out of pocket.
But this in turn would ignore the fact that the US’s over-spending on medicine thanks to its piss-poor health system helps to subsidise the cheaper medicine available in other parts of the world by offsetting pharmaceutical R&D costs, etc. – in other words, a US version of the NHS would almost certainly decrease the cost of US healthcare, but may well end up raising it elsewhere…
Googlegal, Your summary and defense of Great Britains system is nonsensical as are all Progressives logic. I have seen no reports from any source that says their system works in favor of their citizens. It is broke, they are cutting it way back, people have to wait forever for surgery and often die before it is granted, they have their new program called “Pathway to Death” where they provide no treatment to seriously ill seniors and basically let the patients die. 130,000 in just the last year. I will not argue that healthcare is expensive in this country. However, we didn’t need a $2.6 Trillion one size fits all 2,700 page boondoggle to solve it. We didn’t need all the new taxes to fund it. The bill could have been reduced to a hundred pages and used common sense solutions starting with Tort Reform which is the major driver of health costs.
There is nothing “nonsensical” about my post. It came from a very credible source. Yours, on the other hand, is downright propaganda. There is no such thing as a “Pathway to Death”, anymore than placing a seriously ill patient in hospice is a “Pathway to Death”. Sometimes that IS the only path. In fact England has a lower infant mortality rate and higher life expectancy than the U.S. They are doing something right and at almost 1/2 the cost. What is the big deal about universal healthcare? I’m all for it!
I can’t help it if you don’t stay up with the news Googlegal. This story has been all over the internet and Fox has had extensive coverage with actual interviews with people in Britain. That is not propoganda. In the interviews, they actually called it that. Your brain needs re-training so you can absorb the truth about what is going on. I would imagine you are only watching NBC or CBS or ABC which refrains from reporting the real news.
Agent – if you get your “news” from the internet and Fox News, then no wonder you are so ignorant of the real world. Go ahead and spread your lies and fear-mongering. Most real Americans are way too smart to fall for it. Thank God! GoBama in 2012!
My world is the real world. Your world is of Bill Maher, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, Media Matters, Moveon.org and any other leftist site you run across. These sites and networks are all in the tank for the Progressive Socialist agenda and they are steadily losing viewership and readership. CNN’s president had to resign because of the huge decline in viewership. Gee, I wonder what brought that on.
There is actually quite a bit which is “nonsensical”.
You assume the lower costs are without quality reduction, despite evidence of the “pathway” to death. A 70 year old man with psemonia was put on that path I might add. They cut costs.
More importantly, you somehow state that it’s the free market system causing the government’s costs to go up when they offer payment directly to doctors? I would love your explanation on this one and to know how the costs will be driven down by a payment delivery system. Payment delivery systems do not bring down costs. If your goal is to say that our costs are high, and we need to pause actual health care price containment protocols (which are not linked to method of payment whether insurance or government related) then your comment makes logical sense.
If you are trying to state that the payment method system will somehow impact the cost, you are a severe fool.
Us having insurance companies around is not driving up the cost of healthcare.
I also feel the need to point out that infant mortality rate is largely linked with Obesity. Obesity in England is half that of the U.S. Also worth noting is what is defined as infant mortality in each of the countries who keep track of it. You are aware that stillbirths as well as babies who die within 48 hours of their birth are not counted in the infant mortality rate of European nations correct? But it’s not like that would affect an infant mortality rate right Googlegal?
Their costs are not linked with the method of payment. Universal Healthcare coverage is not the source. They actually eat much better than us as well and still manage to have an average life expectancy nearly the same as ours. Note the following: People who eat well in the U.S. have a dramatically higher than average life expectancy. When removing those with poor diets, those who die as a result (heart attacks and cancer are linked to obesity) you can see that it makes a huge difference. You have not done the math on this at all. They have people with literally lower costs to live as they have less costs literally. If they don’t need a quadruple by pass surgery, then that cost doesn’t exist. If they don’t need hips replaced as a result of obsesity (common here) they don’t have those costs. You fail to see that if we averagae all the good care we are getting here, that’s why the cost is so high overall. Our fat unhealthy americans are getting coverage. And amen to that. They would for certain die in Europe. Of that there is no doubt.
Bob – your argument does not make any sense. Direct pay will drive down costs due to more negotiating power. Any good broker knows the bigger the account, the better the pricing. Also, the reason many Americans eat so poorly is because good, healthy food is expensive! They can buy the pre-packaged processed crap for much less. And if Brits have “less costs literally”, there goes your argument that universal healthcare is too expensive. You really sound like an ass.
They have less cost literally because they get less coverage.
It makes perfect sense, but in fact you are an ass. My comment saying that someone costs less if they don’t have heart surgery makes perfect sense. The delivery system does not lower the cost.
If you are so naive to believe that the purchasing power changes per the volume and not also the dollar value you are a fool.
So then I imagine that the cost of the 28% of the government’s costs should basically be more proportionately than the 72% remaining from the insurance companies correct? If your math is correct than the 72% should have more purchasing power which lowers the costs, and should give them an edge. But wait! They are equally as expensive, as the underlying costs for the both is the same. In fact, medicare if anything has less costs than private insurance.
There goes your argument.
I noticed you didn’t direct my still birth and infant mortality arguement. So you spoke without knowing. Remind me…Assuming makes a? Complete the statement, ass.
I haven’t done my research on the difference in infant mortality definitions between coutries. You are right. But I will. I do not believe care will go down for the many people that have no coverage now. Those are the people targeted by universal healthcare. No-one has said they will abolish private insurance and you are free to purchase the coverage you desire, if the federally/state exchange coverage does not meet your standards. What is more American than that? But the exchanges will be able to negotiate fee structures and that will lower costs. I don’t believe this is a silver bullet answer to the problems, but I do think it’s a step in the right direction. And I’m sorry for calling you an ass. My emotions got the better of me.
August 2, 2012 at 4:27 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Googlegal: When we were talking here we were talking about Universal coverage and the effects of it.
I do not mind exchanges. I have not debated about the exchanges.
J. Clive Matthews – He a contributor to the Times Literary Supplement, the Press Gazette, the Guardian and openDemocracy among others, devised the University Association of Contemporary European Studies’ academic group blog Ideas on Europe, and is the co-author (with Jim Smith) of two books in the Virgin Film series, one on director Tim Burton, the other on The Lord of the Rings.
Bob, Following is a truism a friend sent and it is appropriate for this forum judging from some of the comments we see from Googlegal and Thinking Producer.
Arguing with Liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good you are at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock down the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it is victorious.
Dear Agent…
Discussing issues with Right-wing extremists who seem to ONLY worry about THEIR welfare, reaffirms my ‘Progressive” thinking.
Texas will go “R” for 2012, that’s for sure…I prefer to look at California, NY, New Jersey, PA when I think of 2012.
The President will be re-elected in 2012. Changes in Health Care system need & will occur.
And when those modifications are made it will do more harm than good.
You may have taken my comment above about people who are choosing to not get health care to mean that I don’t care about people, and I want those people to die.
That is absolutely not the case. If you read in between the lines you will see that I as other republicans see that in attempting to give free coverage to them, we will take away the ability for the average american to buy essential coverage. If the government is the only option they are the only option. They will restrict coverage more than a for profit pool. Buying into a pool will get you more coverage. More people will lose out from not being able to buy with a pool than people will lose out from not being able to get government coverage.
Your plan and Obama’s will result in more deaths. Not less. Less coverage, not more. Less choices, not more.
We have a system which already mandates treatment for those who need it. The poor use that. They do not die. There are rare circumstances when one cannot receive treatment. EXTREMELY rare, just as rare as it is in the other nations.
Evidence of this: We have an obesity rate at over double that of other nations, and are average life expectancy is the same, despite obviously a hell of a lot more health issues which need treatment.
We get more treatment here than Europe. That is not an opinion, it’s a fact.
Here you go again. Opening your mouth without thinking. The “poor” do not get treatment through the system. Children of the “poor” are generally covered by state insurance, but the parents have to preventive care or coverage for routine exams. Go to a hospital for a tramatic injury or illness and they will treat you. They will also bill you. We DO NOT have better care in this country for the masses of people without insurance. Because right-wingers tend to be fat cats, they have good coverage and that’s the reason they don’t care about anyone else.
August 2, 2012 at 12:51 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, I don’t know if you saw the story on the net about the Medical Supplies Mfg company in Indiana that wanted to expand and hire more employees. Their plans have been cancelled because of the new tax under Obamacare on medical devices. This is one of the many taxes being imposed by Obamatax. This company would have hired several hundred new employees and expanded operations, but the new tax is a big job killer, just like the other taxes built into this bill. Progressive thinking at its finest.
August 2, 2012 at 1:04 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Googlegal, Who is opening their mouth without thinking? So all us right wingers are fat cats and we don’t care about the masses, huh. That is right out of the Communist Manifesto. By the way, poor people can go to any Doc in the Box free clinic in numerous cities to get their check ups and preventive care. This is much less expensive than your one size fits all government mandated program under Obamatax. County hospitals must treat anyone who comes in with problems. Usually, the ones who scream the loudest get treatment before the ones with insurance. I can speak from experience. Under yours and the President’s plan, freeloaders from all over will be subsidized for healthcare on our dime and the system will continue to break down because doctors will be leaving the profession per the latest polls and rationed care will be the norm just like it is in Britain and other countries who have tried Socialized medicine. Why do you think that is a better solution to our problem?
August 2, 2012 at 1:13 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Google gal: The point is they get treatement.
I don’t much care about the cost. If you are trying to tell me that your arguement for health care doesn’t involve the poor getting treatment then you are a lying jerk.
End of story. The guy above mentioned that we were heartless. I was telling him that we aren’t. Those people don’t die. People do die from not being able to get coverage though.
Fat cats? Are you dumb? The average american can pay for limitless coverage for let’s throw out a random number of say $6,000 a year that would cover far more than a government system. That is neither fat, nor a cat. It’s middle class you moron. With the money they pay to that for profit company they get more coverage than the government will provide. And they have no cut offs.
The poor are the only ones you can argue that would get hosed without something being passed, and I clearly told you THEY GET CARED FOR.
August 2, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent:
I find it interesting that we think so similar. I was born and raised in Washington, close to Seattle.
My father was a democrat for life until Clinton.
I was actually raised thinking that FDR was great, Washington State’s Worker’s Compensation system was excellent and for the people which made it better.
I’ve argued with the Liberal, I’ve argued as a Liberal.
What frustrates me is the level of indoctrination. Our schools up here are absurd. Our college graduates are so inept, they listen to Buffet talk about a 12.2% payroll tax that his employees pay and they don’t even realize Buffet pays half the tax the employee doesn’t pay the full.
These college graduates don’t even do the research to find out what the payroll tax is because they are so lead on a liberal path. My brother who is a physics post grad even got into a debate regarding solar panels and whether or not they would be able to power a building with a fellow physics major. My brother is top class, so was the person he debated with. Yet the other guy was so indoctrinated, he heard Obama and his team say we could power buildings that way, and he just believed it. My brother following that worked up the equations. It wouldn’t even power half of a building if the entire building was made of solar panels, and would cost a ridiculous sum of money.
And again, the liberal indoctrination is in. Kids like to believe they are giving to help someone else, that the business is the big bad enemy, and they so willingly listen to the lies on the left because hey, they sound like sugar.
Then I looked up FDR’s insanity. As I said in another forum he actually thought increasing the cost of food in the great depression and taxing the rich to pay for it was a good idea. My question is why not leave the cost low and tax the rich to pay for it? He literally was forcing a reliant system for people to need him. Then I looked at the food subsidies. The poor used to eat better than the rich. It costed more to make a ding dong than it did to make a vegetable. Now it costs more to sell a vegetable than to sell a processed food in a plant like a ding dong. Subsidies really help the poor eh?
Every program they’ve made us rely on screws us. And I’m quite frankly sick of it.
Bob – again you make my argument on the reason for obesity in this country. Thank you.
And the only reason Warren Buffet pays 1/2 the taxes his workers do is because of the screwed up tax structure in this country that helps the rich get richer and the middle class get poor. When Buffet made that point, he was actually giving a speech about restructuring the tax code because he felt it was wrong that he paid less tax than his workers! I am a born-again Democrat, as my parents (military family) were staunch Republicans and I followed in their footsteps. They are no longer. I guess reformed partisans are just as bad as reformed smokers.
My god, I don’t even know what to say to you google gal.
I make your argument for Obesity? You mean the food subsidies that FDR put in place? You might want to reconsider that democrat statement.
Furthermore: Buffet used a full 12.2% payroll tax assumption as if his secretary was paying that rate. She does not pay that rate. She paid 6.2% of a payroll tax. Buffet was misleading in his statement.
Further: His secretary very likely does not pay an effective rate less than him. My effective rate last year as a single male owning a house with $63,000 of income was under 15%. I believe it was 12%. This year with a kid with $75,000 of income as head of household it will be about 7%. I pay less than him. The average american’s effective rate is lower than Buffet’s. I’ve seen these studies. Those who avoid taxes at the richest of the rich amount to 1% of 1%. The amount of revenues you could get from them (rob from them) is nothing. You are not entitled to their money. And they are not screwing people by having it. They created your job. In taking their money though you are screwing people.
Grow up.
August 2, 2012 at 3:00 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, you were unfortunate for being born on the left coast, but also lucky you saw the light and are not lost in the wilderness of Progressive Socialism. Any state that would elect and retain Patty Murray has to be about as goofy as Minnesota which elected a pro wrestler as Governor and a left wing comedian as Senator. I was born in Oklahoma and now live in Texas. These two states are bastions of Conservatism. I have a degree in Economics and studied all the systems from Communism, Marxism, Socialism and Capitalism. Back in the day, the professors didn’t ram their liberal leanings down our throat like today’s professors do. It is no wonder college graduates now don’t know anything about real life or how to compete in our society. They want everything handed to them on a silver platter and because many are lazy, they are content to live on Mom & Dad and get their entitlements since they are unqualified to do a job. You are right about FDR. He just mimicked what Roosevelt and Wilson started and extended the Great Depression by 6 years with all his failed government hand out programs and high taxes on business. The only thing that saved him was WW11 when massively unemployed men volunteered to fight and women had to man the factories. Unemployment dropped drastically as a result. Of course, the national debt tripled in a few short years. FDR is the poster child for Progressive Socialism. They say that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it and this country is repeating it big time. It is too bad that real history is not taught at the secondary level or college or we wouldn’t have so many dunces running around like Googlegal.
Now I’m an insane, rambling, dunce? Nice, Agent. I sure am getting your blood boiling!
August 2, 2012 at 3:59 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Googlegal, I challenge you to show where I called you insane. Misguided, rambling, dunce perhaps. You have obviously been well indoctinated into the Progressive solution to this country’s problems. If you are interested in learning something, I would recommend you read Milton Friedman’s books on Capitlism and why it is so much better than Keynesian philosophy of Tax & Spend. Perhaps a light bulb above your head will light up and you may question what you believe. I won’t hold my breath that you will do that since you are entrenched in your beliefs.
August 2, 2012 at 4:33 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I was responding to Bob’s post asking why Romney was a bad candidate. He said that I was insane and you called me a dunce.
August 2, 2012 at 5:53 pm
Thinking Producer says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I guess your answer is ELECT Romney. The rich shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate; they can hire a tax expert who finds ways to avoid paying taxes. You’re being told that WE wouldn’t want a President who pays MORE taxes- it is unamerican for the wealthy to pay more…They are the “job creators”.
I’m not impressed with multi-million Dollar IRAS, Swiss Bank accounts and failure to disclose HOW he avoided paying his fair share.
If Romney is elected with his “Tell-Nothing” approach to governing and lack of disclosure…SOMEONE is nuts and it is NOT me !
Thinking, it is not wise to throw rocks if you live in a glass house. There are plenty of rich Democrats like Kerry, Pelosi, the witch Debbie Wasserman Schultz who have millions squirreled away in offshore accounts. They avoid paying taxes at all costs. Kerry wouldn’t even pay his yacht taxes in Massachusetts and moved his yacht to Rhode Island. The answer to the tax issue is to go to a fair or flat tax and get rid of the 2,000 page tax code and eliminate all the loopholes like your friend Jeffrey Immelt and Warren Buffet enjoy. I tell you what, when Obama releases all his school records, fake Social, and other records, we will ask Romney to release more tax records. He has released two years and that has been good enough in prior years for other candidates. All the rich Democrats should release theirs as well. I bet we would find Romney has paid a lot more taxes than they have on their fortunes.
August 2, 2012 at 11:30 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Thinking, us right wing extremists as you call us believe in a Constitutional Republic and aim to restore it in November. The Progressive Socialist agenda is dying due to failed tax and spend policy and government largesse. The very states you mention are in the biggest trouble. California leads the pack and is in dire trouble. Several cities have already filed bankruptcy and there answer for dealing with funding issues is to raise taxes again. Is it any wonder that businesses and citizens are fleeing the state in record numbers to escape excessive taxation and environmentalist wacko regulations? By the way, including the 2010 Mid Term shellacking, Conservatives have won victory after victory in a number of states with Governorships, House & Senate races and state legislatures. This tells me the citizens did wake up and they don’t care much for the failed Progressive agenda. We will see you in November.
No. But we care for Mitt Romney less. Too bad you couldn’t have chosen a better candidate. Oh wait! That’s the best you got! And The Golden State’s new official 2010 population of 37.3 million is a 10 percent increase over 2000. Nobody is leaving the state in droves.
Excuse me Googlegal for not replying to you right away. I was at lunch enjoying my Chick Fil A sandwich. I had a longer than usual wait to get it, but it sure was good. Reading your rants against Bob only solidifies my opinion of your misguided Progressive leanings. You maintain that the ideas you put forth have merit and disparage other peoples opinion. You just can’t win the argument. It is a fact that California has lost thousands of businesses and regular citizens. They have been replaced by non tax paying illegal aliens which only adds to their woes. I am sure these people will start up a lot of new businesses there, right?
August 2, 2012 at 4:13 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
googlegal: That was my original thought yes. But now I’m geniunely curious on the source of your anger against republicans. This is not simply partisan differences. This is anger. Your reasoning toward not liking Romney should be an interesting read. I’m curious if it will involve Bain Capital (which would signal a high amount of anger) or something more like an understanding regarding tax systems (something that would be a higher level of indoctrination in schools and a lower level of anger). I’m really curious to know which lie it is you followed to come to the conclusion that Romney was a bad candidate. You realize he eliminates capital gains taxes for anyone making under $250,000 a year correct? When you sell your house after you retire that includes you. 52% of americans rely on stocks to retire. 52% of Americans would benefit. Under Obama’s course of action the amount of capital gains taxes on the middle class would be insanely high by comparison. That does not help the middle class. At all. My father for example invested well with a lower income. Even though he had 7 kids and didn’t make much he managed to get about a million into his retirement account. And through Obama’s plan, my mother (since he died) will be paying ridiculously high taxes on that including the dividend stocks he had. We are estimated $200,000 in taxes. Does that sound fair?
August 2, 2012 at 4:51 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
My reasons for not endorsing Romney are the following:
1. He originally instituted a similar healthcare bill in the State of MA that he proclaimed would be a model for the nation. When the nation did use this model to develop a healthcare plan, he called it an “unconscionable abuse of power.” I have to believe this sudden change of heart is only because the bill was supported by Obama. That, in my mind, is not a strong indicator of his character.
2. He has flip-flopped from being pro-choice to pro-life. As a woman in this country, I find it highly offensive that any man has right to tell me what I can and can not do with my body.
3. He has also vacillated on same-sex marriage, seeming to blow with whatever political wind will benefit him at the time.
4. He is a practicing Mormon and I have great trepidation in anyone that follows and believes that Joseph Smith was the Messiah.
Other than those points, he appears to be a good man with strong moral values and dedication to helping others. But the above points are too important to me to get past.
Does that answer your question? You mistake my passion for the issues for anger.
August 2, 2012 at 5:16 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Googlegal:
I do not doubt your passion.
Let’s go through this:
1. State and Federal law are very different. Stating that it was a model to the rest of the country does not mean he forced it on everyone else. You can’t speak for what he would have done, because you interpret what he has said incorrectly. 50 states are 50 states so each can put in place their own attempts. Your point here is moot and if this is the most you have against Romney your credibility is lacking in real life issues.
Republicans only avidly attempt to get rid of partial birth abortions. Here is a baby at 12 weeks old. That baby is not your body. You are in dire need of a wake up call.
3. You mean like Obama who had a majority and never once attempted to pass any laws regarding this in his first 2 years of presidency and then stated that he was for it as per political winds? Also furthermore: Most republicans are against any law with wording which could in any way limit funding to churches which “disrciminate” against gays. If you were not aware, almost any law which Gays want passed want integrated discrimination wording (with good reason I would say, as a balanced Republican I understand not wanting to be discriminated against) however in most legal cases this translates to removing any public funding, religious tax credits, or similar aspects from for example Catholic needs providers such as psychologists who basically receive trauma clients who are getting government funding. I’m not sure you are aware, but the Catholic faith provides more of this service than any other organization in the world. It is tricky balancing the wording. And most democrats are for putting in wording which puts in control for religions. I’m sorry, but control is not ok over religions. You listen to the gays, you don’t listen to the religions, which is sad because the religious movement itself actually helps people. The gay movement (by that I mean the actual movement’s endeavors) only seeks to be gay. Yet you love the gay movement and hate the movement who seeks to give essentially low cost assistance to anyone who asks.
4. The Majority of practicing Mormons follow the family model. As I’m sure you may know, Mormons have among the lowest divorce rates in the world and sell themselves on a family model. I find things wrong with many religions. Mormons are not among the ones I dislike. Put your silly comments about religion against the man who Obama follows, who preaches about “god damn America” and is actually anti pretty much everything. You want to hear insanity listen to one of those sermans which Obama seems to prefer over normal Christian gatherins which I’m sure you have at least one point been to. Obama’s preacher is by no means normal. I can barely stomach to listen to him.
5. and most importantly, you are ignoring the economy in it’s entirety. You are ignoring real issues for passion issues. Drop it. They are playing you like a record googlegal.
August 3, 2012 at 9:01 am
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You actually think that is a real baby??? If that’s the best you got, stay home.
August 3, 2012 at 12:40 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
GOOGLEGAL:
LOOK THE DAMN IMAGES UP YOURSELF. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT A 12 YEAR OLD BABY LOOKS LIKE. IN FACT, IF ANYTHING YOU’RE CORRECT IT LOOKS FAKE. THEY LOOK MORE HUMAN.
And if the best you can say is “HAH! THAT’S NOT A BABY! BABIES DON’T EXIST AT 12 WEEKS!” Then you are a @%!%$ing idiot.
Pardon my passion, but LIFE f@%#!%#!ing is important.
So is medical care. And I am NOT heartless. The reason I am against 12 week old abortions if because they are LIFE not your @%!ing body. The reason I am against Universal Healthcare coverage is that it WILL limit care.
Agent is similar. There are no heartless people here.
No piss off. You’re arrogant hot headed childish crap is beginning to piss me off. You honestly believe the democrats have the “generous open minded” thing corenered? Just like every dumb @$$ washingtonian, you need to stop being a tool.
August 3, 2012 at 12:54 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Wow! Who’s angry now?? Calm yourself, Bob. If the 12 week old FETUS is in my body, it’s part of my body. You and nobody else, especially a man, has a right to tell me I HAVE TO GIVE BIRTH!
August 3, 2012 at 12:55 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And it’s not a BABY, because it can not survive without being attached to MY BODY.
August 3, 2012 at 1:20 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Really googlegal?
Which part of your body is that baby? Just because it needs you to survive does not make it a part of your body.
You called it a fetus. What part of the female body is a fetus? How does it operate to maintain the woman’s body? Does it have a specific role for the woman’s body? No. It’s not your body.
It inhabits it a short time. That fetus is a baby. Like it or not.
And no heartless woman is going to tell me she loves the world, but that a fetus is a part of her body she can kill at 12 weeks old.
Contraceptives, hey I’m all for it. But not a baby.
August 3, 2012 at 1:25 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Medically, it’s a fetus. It’s not a baby until it’s born. And if I choose to terminate a pregnancy, that’s my perogative. You and the world don’t need to be involved in that decision.
August 3, 2012 at 1:36 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Medically, it is a fetus, which is not a part of your body.
And if you want to kill a baby, or a baby who has autism as an example because they cannot survive on your own (the same thing) it is killing.
I’ll be sure to stay out of your way when it comes to killing, I mean seriously, if something makes you experience discomfort you’ll probably reduce to a caveman and kill over it.
August 3, 2012 at 1:47 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You found me out. I’m a Monster! I didn’t kill anyone. But if I supported a 14 year old girl having an abortion because the child would have not a chance in hell – then, yes, I kill babies. AND support sex education and contraception to avoid the above scenerio from happening in the first place. I will burn in hell.
August 2, 2012 at 2:01 pm
True Blooded American Capitalist says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The heck they aren’t leaving in droves!! You keep grasping googlegal, but you just can’t hold on!
I live in CT and in the past month alone I have noticed a surge of CA license plates around my state…they are moving EAST now..the funny thing is, the ones who are moving here are the ones who left here in the 80’s to strike it rich! Guess they aren’t getting the same bang for their buck out there in CA, eh?
“No such thing as too many liberals…” You poor, poor misguided thing.
August 2, 2012 at 1:20 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Health care at a “free” clinic is not free. There is a co-pay that is based on your income. A single mother of 2 making $9.55 per hour does not qualify within the federal poverty guidelines. However, that person (working full time, mind you, and not “leaching” off the system) would only bring home about $1,200 per month. Hardly enough to pay rent, feed and clothe her family, transportation costs, insurance, AND pay out-of-pocket for medical care. Who’s not doing the math or their homework?
I don’t agree with farm subsidies any more than you do. Just because I am left of center doesn’t mean I’m for every government program out there. In fact, the multilayered Department of Agriculture has no real mission, much less a methodology other than to provide cash to congressional pet constituencies. Its vital functions, such as crop reporting and forecasting, food inspection, and scientific research, are buried beneath politically driven cash transfers and could easily be farmed out to other agencies. In these days of record federal deficits and national debt, it is long past time to eliminate the department — or at least rename it “The Department of Food Subsidies.”
Free-market conservatives don’t dare touch the Department of Agriculture, given the senatorial clout of Midwest farm states and the mythology of the independent American yeoman farmer. Don’t expect left-wing Democrats to object either. In a brilliantly conceived devil’s bargain, the Department of Agriculture gives welfare to the wealthy on the one hand, while on the other sending more than $70 billion to the lower-income brackets in food stamps.
Now why do republicans not dare touch those areas which the democrats created?
Because they are threatened every year by people saying they are “against” the middle class. The democrats passed it. Hate them for it. The democrats scream at the republicans when they try to remove it. The barrier is the mindset of democrats. Until that hate war is removed the subsidies will not go. Blame the party at fault thank you very much.
You’re not gonna like this one, but I truly believe FDR was a closet Republican and was praised by both Reagan and other Republican leaders.
The subsidy system survives not because it worked well, but because farmers lobbied to keep it. Subsidies beat the whims of a free market. We need to drop the subsidies and let the farmers farm.
So any time a president does bad things they are a closet conservative? And you’re trying to make the claim that a closet conservative put in place social security? I’m sorry googlegal, FDR was the most liberal president of our time. Were it not for him, the country would not have moved toward liberalism. Anyone who studies history knows the country leaned republican before him and leaned democrat after. It was his programs which were liberal which did so.
Were it not for the switch that happened in the 60’s the democrats may have actually gone back toward a different route, the route you think they actually went but did not. John F Kennedy was more like Bush than you would probably care to admit. A simple review of history will reveal this. Liberalism did change, but FDR was by no means a closet conservative. Even by modern standards he was and is a liberal.
Obama comparatively is still less liberal than FDR, which shows something considering how much the times have changed. The country leans more right currently than it did back then.
I am a liberal and make no bones about it. I am, however, not insane or a dunce. I have my beliefs about universal healthcare, pro-choice, and birth control – you bet. And I am passionate about those subjects. I do not agree with every democratic move nor disagree with every Republican move. I judge based on my own beliefs and what I believe to be fair and right. In no way am I condemning an entire party, but the acts of some members. There have been plenty of times I did not agree with a Democrat and I would speak up on that too. I think I have said the current healthcare legislation is not the be-all and end-all, but I do think it’s a step in the right direction. Mitt Romney agreed with me in 2002. But that’s changed now that he’s running AGAINST Obama (and not FOR President).
August 2, 2012 at 5:27 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Nice smooth talking below, but I’m sorry no. You don’t disagree with democrats. If you justify it in your head by calling them closet republicans then you actually disagree with republicans in your mind. Psychology 101.
You can’t back petal the fact that you just called FDR a closet republican in order to state that subsidies are a republican issue. They aren’t. They were democrat implimented.
Because you have been mislead by democrats, I highly doubt you are pro choice.
Define it. If you are ok with partial birth abortion then you are suffering from a morality issue. If you are like most women who just mean they are ok with contraception and are not ok with killing a baby at 12 weeks congratulations. You are not a democrat in those beliefs.
Also: You are pro gay unions most likely. If you are pro force against religions (as democrats currently are) then you are seriously suffering in areas of morality.
The areas you have passion in, you are being lied to, mislead, and forced to believe that republicans are some anti people, anti gay, anti everything force.
Rather than believe that democrats want an enemy and are over exaggerating which is obviously what is happening. Any republican who hates gays is a jerk. Any democrat who advocates the current gay movement’s attempt to dominate religion is a jerk. I don’t care about which party it is. Jerkism is jerkism.
And right now your primary reasons for being a democrat seem to follow the typical Jerk-ist mindsets. At this point I’m actually just trying to be funny while educating you. Pardon the odd wording.
I’m really sick of you telling me what I do and do not believe. And twisting my words around at the same time. I said I thought FDR was a closet Republican, tongue in cheek. I, in no way, was saying subsidies are a Replublican issue. You need to stop being so jaded and putting words in people’s mouths. You do not know me. To make presumptions about my beliefs based on brief blog comments is arrogant AND ignorant. I did not make this conversation personal and I wouldn’t presume to “educate” someone – only share my thoughts. I am tired of being attacked and would like to just agree to disagree at this point.
August 2, 2012 at 6:00 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Googlegal, I hate to rain on your parade, but it is obvious that you didn’t study any true history in school or you would realize that the “New Deal” was the most Progressive Socialist program ever created up to that time and it was FDR all the way. Republicans had nothing to do with his Progressive vision. For the day, his entitlement programs would boggle your mind. His programs actually kept the country in Depression longer than it would have if he had incentivized business and lowered the oppressive taxes imposed on them. He didn’t create any jobs but government jobs which is exactly what your President is doing now. It is a huge drain on the economy and resulted in massive debt. As I stated in a prior post, the only thing that got us out of the Depression was WW11 because his imbecilic policies certainly didn’t.
Agent – Can you even read??? I said FDR was a closet Republican TONGUE IN CHEEK. Do you know what that means??? Lighten up you right wing GOPers. This is just a blog for an exchange of ideas. Not a forum to attack and insult others. Just stop.
August 3, 2012 at 12:44 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
READ MY COMMENT ABOVE YOU CRAZY %@#%!%.
“Yes. You’re right there googlegal.
Now why do republicans not dare touch those areas which the democrats created?
Because they are threatened every year by people saying they are “against” the middle class. The democrats passed it. Hate them for it. The democrats scream at the republicans when they try to remove it. The barrier is the mindset of democrats. Until that hate war is removed the subsidies will not go. Blame the party at fault thank you very much.”
THAT WAS ME SAYING SUBSIDIES WERE REPUBLICANS
YOUR REPLY
“You’re not gonna like this one, but I truly believe FDR was a closet Republican and was praised by both Reagan and other Republican leaders.
The subsidy system survives not because it worked well, but because farmers lobbied to keep it. Subsidies beat the whims of a free market. We need to drop the subsidies and let the farmers farm”
THAT WAS YOU SAYING THAT FDR WAS A CLOSET REPUBLICAN. IF YOU WERE NOT REPLYING TO MY COMMENT OF BLAME DEMOCRATS FOR SUBSIDIES THEN YOU ARE A DUMB @$$. YOU REPLIED STATING I WOULDN’T LIKE IT BUT FDR WAS A CLOSET REPUBLICAN. THEREFORE, YOU WERE STATING AGAINST MY COMMENT TO BLAME DEMOCRATS FOR SUBSIDIES.
FURTHER: DO NOT PUT THE DUMB @$$ ARGUMENT THAT I AM “PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH” AND “YOUR BELIEFS”. BULL %@#@!%!ING @%@.
I SAID POSSIBILITIES, AND SAID THAT IF YOU WERE NOT THAT WAY, YOU WERE LACKING IN MORALITY. WHICH YOU ARE.
THANK YOU FOR PROVING TO AGENT AND I WHAT LIBERALS ARE ALL ABOUT.
Shrew, maybe. But, who’s screaming? NOT ME. THAT WAS BOB.
August 3, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
AND LET ME REITERATE YOU @%#%!ING CHILD, READ THE POST.
I SAID WHAT YOU COULD BELIEVE. I SAID IF YOU BELIEVE THIS, YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT LACKING IN MORALITY. I SAID IF YOU DON’T, CONGRATULATIONS ON BEING A REPUBLICAN.
IN OTHER WORDS: I DID NOT STATE YOUR BELIEFS. YOU SOUND LIKE A %@#%@ING KID. AND NOW I’M GOING TO TREAT YOU LIKE ONE, I DO NOT TOLERATE WHINY LITTLE BRATS.
You and Agent sound so alike I get you both mixed up. Just keep up the rhetoric. I don’t care what you think. You’re a rude asshole.
August 3, 2012 at 1:16 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, from the above statements, I think you have succeeded in reducing Googlegal into a screaming shrew who is like a kid who doesn’t get their way and throws a tantrum. Progressives have nothing to convince the rest of us that their ideology is good since it is an abysmal failure in every way. They are like vultures waiting for America to die so they can pick at the carcass. They just can’t stand that Conservatism is on the rise and their whole reason for being is in jeopardy in November.
August 3, 2012 at 1:26 pm
googlegal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So I’m a child? I guess I should be thankful for your mature, misguided advice and “education”. No thank you.
August 3, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Name the misguided part of my comments to do with gay marriage, infant mortality rates, health care coverage, the reverend comparison of religions between Obama and Romney, etc.
Misguided is voting for another president who will harm the economy and ruin our healthcare system to protect your precious need to abort a baby at third trimester. That one IS MURDER and is the only one republicans tend to go after.
That is what I call misguided. You need to be able to have your third trimester abortion, and contracptives paid for, even if you have to destroy the economy, destroy the healthcare system, and anything else to get it.
So I am single-handedly responsible for “destroying the economy, destroying the healthcare system, and anything else to get it”? Not bad for a @%#%!ING CHILD DUMB @$$! Keep up the fear mongering. The whole country is DESTROYED!! Get a grip.
August 3, 2012 at 1:38 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Pretty sure you basically started a complete war with me.
I’m retaliating. And not to sound like a child, but you started it so I’m certainly going to finish it at this point. You’re going to learn when it’s not ok to whine and then point a finger crying “he’s telling me what I believe!” when I did no such thing.
The name of your source or credibility is irrelavent.
The methodology is relevant. The fact that you followed a source regarding infant mortality without understanding the methodology shows why your sources mean nothing to the republicans in this forum.
If you make an A+B=C statement we will however listen to you.
So, Googlegal, you are now mad that we called you on your closet Republican statement on FDR. When someone says they truly believed that FDR was a closet Republican, that doesn’t sound very “tongue in cheek” to most folks. You are typical of the far left crowd who can’t win an argument so we are right wing GOPers. For the record, I am not a GOPer and am now Independent since I don’t like a lot of the reach across the aisle RINO’s in office now. However, when it is between the choice of what we have now and anyone else including our local mayor, the choice is very easy.
Yup I’m rude for telling you that your bull is bull. I’m rude for telling you the truth, that like it or not you killed a baby for your body.
I’m rude for telling you the way the healthcare system works, and how it’s good for us not to have a universal healthcare system.
I didn’t crack at your BS until you had the gaul to state that I was stating your beliefs. I didn’t crack until you had the gaul to say that a 12 year old baby is your body. It isn’t. If you are for abortion have the balls to state that you are killing the kid because you don’t want it. Don’t take the coward’s route of stating it’s your body. It isn’t. It never will be your body.
You believe what you believe and I’ll believe what I believe. I am pro-choice. I am not pro making the choice for others. And you ARE rude, belittling, and arrogant. Even if I wanted to have an indepth conversation with you on the issues, it is impossible because you nitpick my every word while trying to shove your point of view down my throat. So just chill out, quit screaming, and leave me alone, OK?
I’m sorry no. I’m not letting that go. You came into this forum uneducated, making statements without research regarding the infant mortality rate, and then you’re upset I nitpicked your facts? That’s not arrogent, that’s being prepared.
I only acted like a dick to you because you have completely acted like a smart @$$ in this forum.
And belittling? I think not. I acted that way after you whined stating I was telling you what you believed. That is like it or not labeling me a caveman like you liberals tend to do. And guess what? Being called a heartless, uneducated, fox following, person is not the way to debate. I called you wrong. You don’t like that you’re wrong? Deal with it. Don’t throw out crap like that unless you expect me to point out how ridiculous you are.
Side comment: To do with anything we have debated it has not been opinion. This isn’t differing beliefs. This is some moron pulling a baby out of their belly and stating, hey, I didn’t kill that. Yes. You did. This is someone stating comments to do with gay unions which are totally misleading. Yes, republicans are against gay marriage, when it affects religion.
This is about someone stating Mormonism is more extreme than reverened Wright.
This is about someone stating that a payment delivery system will lower costs, using a reference point that was false.
You have been wrong in every one of your statements. And I’m tired of Americans like you ruining this country, and trying to force the whole country to do it at the same time. You want something your way? DO IT IN YOUR STATE WITH YOUR STATE LAW. Get out of Texas’s hair and life, get out of Oklahoma’s hair and life, and if you want to practice what you preach STFU about how they handle abortions or gay marriage. They don’t want it. Go do it somewhere else. You won’t rest though until everything is YOUR way and I won’t have that.
I admitted I didn’t research differences in infant mortality. What else do you want me to say about that?
AND I stated, TWICE, that I addressed the belief comment to you when I meant it for someone else. What else do you want me to say about that?
I NEVER stated “Mormonism is more extreme than reverened Wright”. Those words came from you.
I NEVER stated anything about comments to do with gay unions, unless you mean marriage. And I am for gay marriage. What is the problem with that?
I have not been “wrong in every one” of my statements. I know you think your intellect is far superior to mine. Maybe it is. But in putting forth your statements in such a rude and demeaning manner, I wouldn’t listen to thing you have to say. I guess I am being childish. So be it.
Here is a news flash. Our wonderful Labor Department is now admitting that the unemployment rate increased to 8.3% Of course, it is closer to 20% if we count all the ones who have given up looking for work. The article is stupidly written and says that manufacturing added 25,000 jobs, but manufacturing activity fell in the month. Hmm! Doesn’t make much sense, does it.
Problem is that not just the uninsured will be signing up, but the insured under their current employer based plans will be the ones signing up. You see the whole goal of the Obama plan is to create a single payer system, once all small business employers cancel their health insurance and send their employees to the employee paid exchanges in exchange for a $2000. penalty, fine (TAX) per employee (big savings to small business). The one advantage now is that this is considered a TAX and with all taxes it becomes very progressive in nature, which means the few will be paying for the masses. (Welcome to France)
The agenda is still in full swing despite the news that the majority of Americans still oppose it. In November, after we get a new President, the act will be repealed and there will be no need to establish all these Medicaid like exchanges. I agree that this act is the biggest tax increase in history and the idea behind it all was the single payor system within a few years. Employers cannot foot the bill and employees will have to go there to find coverage. I don’t think they will like their new coverage very well and it will all be out of their pocket. Maybe people will wake up and smell the coffee by November.
It is my understanding that only employers with over 50 eligible employees must set up a plan. The inaction by some states (I wonder which Political party…starts with an “R”) to set up exchanges to assist consumers in purchasing competitive insurance plans is another excellent of the “Screwed UP” insurance system we have in the USA.
At least the Federal exchanges WILL BE set-up by Jan. 2014 to assist insurance purchasers who are entitled to quality coverage at a competitive premium.
Thinking, I don’t think you are thinking. Those employers with 50-1,000 employees will be dropping their group coverage due to cost and throwing their employees into the exchanges to fend for themselves. The big boys and unions with thousands of employees have already received waivers from compliance. Do you really think the exchanges will offer anything more than the approved Medicaid type plans for employees to go to? If you believe that, you are naive. If you have coverage right now in a plan with a lot of perks including office visit co-pay and drug plan, I think you will be disappointed in what is offered. It will not be either quality or competitive.
Dear “agent”~
It my understanding that ANY waivers granted end in 2014. The plans that will be offered have specific types of ESSENTIAL coverages required.
You seemed to be misinformed regarding the quality of coverage which must be offered. It will be guaranteed to cover pre-existing conditions as well.
Get the facts, Man…BEFORE you rant & rave.
You tag implies you are a producer. How is Health Insurance sales going? Group & Individual. Making as much money as you should / could be? Food on the table getting scarce? Rent getting paid late? Renewals hanging around?
My neck of the oods, no point in even trying.
FFA, I am glad I am 95% P&C. I have friends that have agencies heavily geared toward Group & Individual Health. They are having nightmares over what is coming down the pike and how they can retain customers who plan to drop their coverage by 2014 if this dastardly bill stands. Their commissions have been cut already and rate increases abound as carriers prepare to cover all PreX’s as mandated. The Affordable Care Act does not appear to be affordable for many. This promises to degenerate into the nightmare many of us predicted when it was passed.
This entire health care option is predicated on the fact that those with insurance pay for those that don’t have it when they run to the ER and this is terrible. BOcare is moving that expense to the govt by paying the premium of an estimated 16 million without insurance and their new medical bills that increase because now they have insurance and will go to the doctor for all ailments.
My question is who can afford to pay these bills: You and I that pay a little extra through insurance and doctor visits or a government that is already $16 trillion in debt? It seems BO believes the US Govt. That said, what happens when the US Govt can’t pay the interest on its loans? Or the US dollar is not the world currency? The impact is so much worse for all that it will not matter that less than 10% did not have insurance!
Thinking – as usual, be afraid. Be very afraid! The tactic should come of no surprise. Oh, and also, hate others. Xenophobia is key. Especially France. They are so screwed up over there, they consistently mark higher than the US in “quality of life”. Just one example here:
http://thewondrous.com/list-of-top-20-countries-with-best-quality-of-life/
Quality of life – or Freedom of choice? Quality of life for whom? Those that do not work, yes much better in France. Those that are industrious and work, MUCH MUCH better in the US!
Captain, get out and sell something, make something of yourself. Then you too could possibly be a 5%er or higher. It really is not hard at all in the US, the land of opportunity. home of the brave! The highest quality of life for those that want it!
Sarah, I think Planet may be in the category of taking rather than producing, at least his philosophy follows that line. Those of us that have to sell our insurance products know that if we don’t sell, we don’t make a living for our families or have a business. That is why we are so upset at people who want our country to be an entitlement society of free loaders and failure to launch young people who think the world owes them a living, healthcare and flat screen TV’s, all on the working peoples back.
Planet, You should consider moving to France if you think it is so wonderful. You can retire at 50, but before then, you get to pay a tax up to 75% of your income since they just elected their Socialist President. They are just behind all the other European countries in going bust due to their entitlements. I am sure the big money Frenchmen are going to love that new tax put on them. Hey, just have some bread, cheese and wine and no worries. Let me know how it turned out in about a year.
Just went through the new Obamacare tax credit for my small business, that Obama and or someone else supposedly help create. . We are a subS corp, which also pays 100% of our employees healthcare coverage. I as a 50% shareholder recieved a credit for $3,000 off of my personal tax return. We pay in excess of $115,000. annually for our health coverage alone, we have 14 W2 employees that we provide coverage too. As soon as Florida establishes the exchanges under the Affordable Care Act, we have already decided that we will be dropping our coverage for benefits and will pay the $2,000 per employee TAX ($28,000 TAX per SCOTUS)and let everyone pay their own insurance cost under ACA Obamacare exchanges. If your poor, your neighbor gets to pay for your coverage, otherwise you are paying for his. Good luck with another Government intrusion into your personal life. lol… Have fun paying for your own health insurance and also your neighbors.
Sarah, Our agency is not as big as yours, having only 6 employees. We don’t provide Health Insurance for them and these ladies are covered under their husband’s group coverage. I can see a scenario that the husband’s employer will drop their coverage and they will have to fend for themselves in the exchanges to get coverage. The Medicaid like coverage they will get will not be as comprehensive as they have now and is likely to be more expensive. This is not a good situation to have this hanging over the head of small business owners and employees. The Progressives don’t see the problem, but we do.
SImple math – old school. I employ three. Good by $2100 a month bill. Hellow $6000 annual tax. I am sure they will have to create another tax as no way can $6K annually cover $25,200.
FFA, There will be no additional tax for the firm. The premium now will come from the employee. LOL… THIS IS NOT FREE INSURANCE! It will eventually become based on income like all other entitlement programs, but if you make any kind of a decent amount of money, you will eventually be paying a substantial amount in taxes.
We are going the way of a single payor system. Democrats are not allowed to complain about the cost or coverage they get! Period!
You socialist have gotten just what you deserve. GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF YOUR LIFE!
Sarah, I think the Progressives want to have everything in their life controlled by the government. Big brother can tell them when to wake up, when to have breakfast and what they can eat, when to go to the bathroom, when their entitlement checks will arrive etc. ad nauseum. Nanny state here we come unless this turns around in November. Bloomberg wants to take baby formula away in NY. Why is he still mayor there?
I find it REFRESHING that 80% of 85% of every premium dollar needs to be used for medical benefits. Imagine…Insurance that really helps the insured.
I just saw a refund letter in PA making the policyholder aware that her carrier(Aetna) only paid out 67% of premiums as benefits and she would be getting a refund check.
Tell me Thinking, what good will it really do to receive a one time check from Aetna for $187 for a family when their premiums have gone up to $1,000 per month? It is a drop in the bucket and you know it. Carriers are going to continue to pass rate increases on customers because they know they have to cover all Pre X’s and the failure to launch crowd up to age 26. By the way, I hope you enjoy all those new taxes that will be coming your way for the middle class.
Thinking do you understand what a combined ratio is for an insurance company. That takes into consideration commissions, claims adjustment expenses, marketing, salaries for company employees and power, rent, benefits for their employees. etc. Get a grip dude, These carriers will not be able to do the 85% and Congress knew it when they enacted the legislation, just like medicare can not live up to these same standards with internal cost and rampant fraud in their case.
THE CARRIERS WILL LEAVE THIS MARKET AND THE SINGLE PAYOR SYSTEM WILL BE ESTABLISHED AS THE LAW IS WRITTEN. THAT IS THE TRIGGER THAT THEY KEPT TALKING ABOUT! THIS IS AWFUL LEGISLATION!
Thank you Sarah for attempting to explain reality to Thinking although he won’t get it. He thinks it is refreshing that 85% of every premium dollar has to go to claims and also thinks companies will stay in business. The only way companies will stay in business is to get in bed with Kathleen Sebelius and be her shill on the exchanges for subsidies she will hand out. They will be a shell of their former selves and have a room full of geeks to process online applications. No underwriting, take everybody and put everyone into Medicaid type coverage. The only thing I disagree with you on is your label of calling it awful legislation. That is too mild. It is the worst legislation ever passed by Congress and signed into law. I think that sums it up.
HEADLINE-Obamacare and Health Insurance Exchanges to be eliminated after November election.
I’ve not yet seen it mentioned so here goes nothing; For some, the idea of a govt. run healthcare system is great. Finally, a system for ALL. Keep in mind while you are bragging about this great new system that there WILL be a panel deciding what you can and cannot have in terms of surgeries and life saving procedures. Do you really believe a 70 year old patient will be allowed a heart transplant or some other surgery to extend their life by a decade or so? Groups were warning in the 1980’s this would be coming down the pike sooner or later. They were labeled conspiracy theorists. Well, the day is here and your health will no longer be yours. Someone else is going to decide what you can and cannot have in terms of healthcare. Oh, and the person deciding? They will be a govt. official that is exempt from Obamacare. They lose nothing by saying your mother/father cannot have the transplant they need or certain medications will not be covered after a specific age.
Go ahead and label this a Republican rant or another conspiracy theory by us crazy folks. Please keep in mind though we are the same people who told you 20+ years ago Socialist Healthcare was coming to America. Don’t believe the Obama lie. Today it is your healthcare. Tomorrow you will be told what you can and cannot say in say in public, where you can and cannot congregate and soon enough you will be told where to turn in your guns. If you don’t vote Obama out, your future will resemble the Soviet Union circa 1985. Healthcare should be the least of your worries.
Good comment UCT. I am sure Planet will label you as a right wing nut for opposing socialized medicine, death panels, rationed care and higher prices for health care. The Progressive movement is all about control of every aspect of our lives. A big goal of theirs is to confiscate guns from the citizens so they will have no opposition to impose Big Brother control. They may have a tough time with that since there are over 40 million gun owners in this country and there would be a civil war if it is tried. The good news is that people are waking up and Conservatives are winning key races in Governors, Legislatures, the House and Senate and we will soon have the majority after November. I am from Texas and we just had Ted Cruz win a big primary over David Dewhurst, the RINO candidate. He was backed by the Tea Party and those that say the Tea Party is fading away is totally wrong. They came out in force in July for a run-off race. They will be back in November.
Dear Agent~
Knowing you live and work in Texas makes me better able to understand how YOU think !
Texas…greatest percentage of uninsured in the country. Your Governor is against expansion of Medicaid in Obamacare (PPACA)
(I’m OK…you are on your own TYPE of thinking)
Don’t worry I’ll never live in Texas…. EVER !!
Good, stay away from us. We have a saying here – Don’t Mess with Texas and we mean it.
Don’t want to control your life. I don’t want your guns. But, if the government did want the guns and you’re saying civil war, I have my money on the goverment. They have more weapons, better weapons, and if they want them, they’ll have no problem getting them. Funny how some gun owners want their guns to fend off the government. Good luck! I personally have no issues with people wanting to own guns.
No such thing as “death panels”. Yes, I do want single payer. It’s a matter of time.
Don’t care to control what you do, though. Eat what you want, drink what you want, go where you want, etc. I also don’t think there is anything wrong with being informed so you can make your decisions, though. No one is saying, for example, you can’t pour a mound of salt on your 72 ounce steak before eating it. They are saying, that’s not a healthy choice and if you want to take care of your health, doing so is ill-advised.
Don’t waste your breath Captain. These hard-headed, cold-hearted, right-wing bloggers will never give in. They say we are indoctrinated and don’t think, but that is a perfect description of those that get all their “news” from Fox News and the internet! They are not free thinkers. They just rant, rave, and spread fear and hate they pick up from buffoons like Rush Limbaugh. Just parroting what they hear and being bullies to those that have a different opinion.
You are right about one thing Googlegal. Us so called right wingers will not give in and let the Progressive movement take over and continue to ruin this great country. There has been a lot of damage done by Progressives in the past 25 years on both sides of the aisle and it has gotten much worse in the past 3 1/2 years. Enough is enough. I know you echo your President when you say the private sector is doing “fine”, but the truth is that it isn’t and your President has made it much worse. That is why he and his minions will be swept out of office in November.
You don’t know what I say. You don’t know me. You make assumptions about me, without knowing a thing. That makes you a fool. And it’s “We so called right-wingers”, not Us.
Coldhearted? List one thing any of us has said that is cold hearted toward the American population.
Further, the fact that you insult sources and not facts is completely paramount to your flaw.
When in doubt, go after the source, not the fact eh? Many of the facts I quote you can get from wikipedia, msnbc’s non-opinion pieces, etc. I never get my news solely from Fox. Though as a side comment and I know you won’t like it but I have to type it in all caps so it gets through your thick head:
FOX REPORTS ON ISSUES WHICH NO OTHER SITE MAKES A DIRECT POST ABOUT. THEREFORE THEY ARE THE SOURCE TO FIND A CONCEPT, AND THEN YOU GO TO LIBERAL SITES TO VERIFY THE FACTS AND THEN YOU PIECE TOGETHER THE METHODOLOGY YOURSELF.
This is called doing research. And like it or not FOX NEWS IS AN ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY PART OF DOING A BALANCED RESEARCH.
If you disinclude them and make fun of them, you are a second grade class fool. Thank you and good night.
Bob – my post was directed to Agent, who said he got his news from Fox News and the Internet. Try to keep up with the thread, would you?
Planet, No one is saying you want our guns or oontrol our lives. It is the Progressive government that is doing everything they can to control our lives. Obamacare has proven that in spades. Everytime there is a shooting anywhere, the Tea Party is blamed in error and it turns out to be a nut, not a regular gun owning citizen. You are absolutely incorrect with your statement that if the government wanted to get the guns, they would have no problem. They would have a problem of historic proportions. I am inclined to believe the Military and Police Departments in most of the country would not follow that order. Democrats are now busy trying to get the Military vote disenfranchised because it seems to be too hard to get the ballots to them. They scream and jump up and down about States requiring ID’s to be able to vote and they want illegals to be able to vote, but let’s not let the military vote. I think they know how the military will vote and it is not for them.
Bob, can you imagine what kind of shape we would be in for information if we relied on the main stream media, MSNBC and the like? Fox at least changed the culture and at least attempts to show both sides of a story. I don’t agree with some of their pundits and Alan Colmbs is a complete imbecile. I would much rather see and hear Dr. Monica Crowley to analyze an issue and give the straight scoop. I don’t watch much of O’Reilly anymore because he gives way too much airtime to Progressives spouting their ideology. Hannity has the other viewpoint on his show, but he shoots them down effectively. The internet is also a valuable tool to get real news and viewpoints.
The military and the police are the government. If they want your guns, they will get them. You can’t out-shoot the military and police. But, don’t worry, you will have your guns. No one is coming to take them away from you. Total hogwash at its best. Just like somehow same sex marriage is an assault on “traditional” marriage. Or, somehow giving rich people more money and taking more of the middle classes money is going to create jobs. Or, retroactively retiring. The list goes on but it’s the end of the week so I’m going to get ready to get out of here and drink a beer. Have a good weekend, all.
Dear UCT~
It seems YOU feel that a profit making Insurance Company has LESS incentive to limit your coverage decisions than a government run -not for profit health insurance program. Some people might disagree with that logic.
Obamacare uses PRIVATE carriers and STILL we still hear plenty of complaining.
I just read where the Democracy of Israel has health care for everyone. Insureds pay 40% of the premium; govt pays 60% of the premium cost. Imagine, A democracy not acting like the USA, but THEIR health system is labeled SUPER.
Actually Thinking, the majority disagree with your logic. It is apparent to us that the goal of Obamacare is to put the private carriers out of business or to make them shills for the government with the exchanges in return for subsidies doled out by HHS. You are comparing a country smaller than South Carolina with a population of a few million to this country of 320 million. Their system of government is different than ours and they stay on a war footing 24/7 and they have to be geared for health emergencies if they are attacked. Your comparison holds no water with me. Why didn’t you compare Great Britain to the US? Probably because their system is broke, they are laying off health workers right and left and doing legalized euthanasia with their version of Death Panels. They take healthcare rationing to a new level.
PPACA(Omamacare) ojective was and IS to insure millions of more Americans who are uninsured. The notion that walking into an Emergency room for care is NOT the answer for thinking Americans.
The objective has never been to ruin insurance carriers. Getting our citizens QUALITY health care at an affordable price is essential. Too many PRODUCERS only focus on how much commission THEY can make. Health care is essential to our citizens.
Obamacare uses Private carriers….80-85% pay out in claims is not an unreasonable plan IF you look at more than your wallet.
Thinking, you take Naivety to a new level. Your conclusion on the objectives of Obamacare is totally wrong. The ultimate objective was to create a single payor government run operation with several hundred thousand new Federal bureaucrats to make the life and death decisions on Americans. They couldn’t get that through so we ended up with the 2,700 page monstrocity passed in the middle of the night with no one reading it before voting on it. The ultimate goal was to make the industry die by 1,000 cuts. How do you think carriers can pay their overhead expenses and still pay a commission to producers who do the heavy lifting for 15% of the premium? Try using some common sense for a change.
Dear Thinking Producer –
It seems YOU believe there will be enough taxes collected to make Obamacare viable. How will so few workers pay for so many unemployed? Oh wait, YOUR guy created the mess, so you will have an answer that suits YOU. :)
Thinking –
Your logics forget some key importances:
The for profit company when paid for by choice at a higher premium from someone who can afford it, will pay for more coverage than a forced per tax system. It is not an opinion, it is a fact.
You want to “cover the uninsured” who basically are that way by choice, to take away the choice of those who actually work hard to be able to pay for better coverage. Why not make everyone’s coverage worse so you can give some coverage to a bunch of people who made their choice eh?
Oh how I love people who rely on entitlements.
Put even more simple: You get what you pay for. You can choose to pay for more coverage in a private plan. Heck it may cost more but then you get that lung transplant or high cost serivce. If only the government handles it, when they run out, you run out. You don’t have another option. This harms the middle class more than benefits it. The average middle class person can afford more insurance coverage through paying premiums than they can receive insurance coverage from the government from taxes. That’s not an opinion, that’s a fact.
Therefore your comment of for profit is pointless. That path is a method to get the coverage you want and need. You get as much as you’re willing to pay, rather than as much as they are able to take.
Planet, I think you need a beer after that parting shot. You tend to completely ignore my comment that if the government does decide to take the guns, there will be big trouble. 40 million hunters will not go quietly, I assure you. Perhaps you didn’t see the article about Kennesaw, Ga. They require the head of each household to have a weapon for self defense unless they have mental problems or otherwise infirm. They have the lowest crime rate in the country for a city their size because the thugs know they may be shot if they try to rob a resident. On the other hand, the City of Chicago has strict gun laws and they have had over 200 murders in recent months and gangs are roaming the streets killing innocent adults and children and your wonderful Dead Fish Emanuel won’t send the SWAT team out because it might be profiling. I feel sorry for FFA and Always Amazed because they live in Chicago. This city is the armpit of America. I think they have BO from there.
Of the c.15% of GDP the US spends on healthcare annually (that’s about $2.2 trillion*), around 50% is spent by the government (around $1.1 trillion). By contrast, the UK spends around 8% of its GDP on healthcare, with the Department of Health’s budget for the NHS (England**) in 2008/9 around £94 billion (about $155 billion).
The English NHS cares for 49 million people (100% of the population of England); US public healthcare currently covers about 83 million (around 28% of the US population).
For a direct comparison, that means that in England the government spends around $3,200 per capita on healthcare and covers the entire population whereas in the US the federal government spends around $3,700 per capita and yet covers less than a third of the population.
Take away those 80 million covered by the US’s state healthcare (which doesn’t cover all uninsured Americans, so this is being generous) from the States’ 300 million population, we’re left with 220 million Americans to account for the other $1.1 trillion spent in the US each year on private healthcare.
That works out as $5000 for every American in the private system – almost $2,000 a year more than the NHS costs.
Yep, that’s right capitalism fans – the US free market system for healthcare provision is significantly less efficient than a “socialised” one.
This no doubt explains the Republican fear of universal US healthcare – if providing government healthcare funding for less than a third of the population costs $1.1 trillion, they no doubt imagine it would involve a bit more than a threefold increase in public healthcare spending to cover the entire population. (If they’re being really cynical, they’d no doubt point out that the US government’s $1.1 trillion healthcare spend divided by 83 million works out as a cost of $13,250 per person per annum – and therefore the annual cost to cover all Americans at that rate could be as high as $4 trillion a year.)
Of course, what they’re failing to do is take into account the ability a public healthcare system would have to drive down costs, and in their attacks on the NHS are choosing to ignore the simple fact that the NHS (even with all its problems and wastage) works out as far, far better value for money than even the current US system.
Were you to be more of a lefty than me, you might be tempted at this point to suggest that it is precisely this ability of a national health service to drive down costs that the Republicans are opposed to, as it’d leave the rich pharmaceutical companies out of pocket.
But this in turn would ignore the fact that the US’s over-spending on medicine thanks to its piss-poor health system helps to subsidise the cheaper medicine available in other parts of the world by offsetting pharmaceutical R&D costs, etc. – in other words, a US version of the NHS would almost certainly decrease the cost of US healthcare, but may well end up raising it elsewhere…
And the Repeal is on track for 2012!!
Googlegal, Your summary and defense of Great Britains system is nonsensical as are all Progressives logic. I have seen no reports from any source that says their system works in favor of their citizens. It is broke, they are cutting it way back, people have to wait forever for surgery and often die before it is granted, they have their new program called “Pathway to Death” where they provide no treatment to seriously ill seniors and basically let the patients die. 130,000 in just the last year. I will not argue that healthcare is expensive in this country. However, we didn’t need a $2.6 Trillion one size fits all 2,700 page boondoggle to solve it. We didn’t need all the new taxes to fund it. The bill could have been reduced to a hundred pages and used common sense solutions starting with Tort Reform which is the major driver of health costs.
There is nothing “nonsensical” about my post. It came from a very credible source. Yours, on the other hand, is downright propaganda. There is no such thing as a “Pathway to Death”, anymore than placing a seriously ill patient in hospice is a “Pathway to Death”. Sometimes that IS the only path. In fact England has a lower infant mortality rate and higher life expectancy than the U.S. They are doing something right and at almost 1/2 the cost. What is the big deal about universal healthcare? I’m all for it!
I can’t help it if you don’t stay up with the news Googlegal. This story has been all over the internet and Fox has had extensive coverage with actual interviews with people in Britain. That is not propoganda. In the interviews, they actually called it that. Your brain needs re-training so you can absorb the truth about what is going on. I would imagine you are only watching NBC or CBS or ABC which refrains from reporting the real news.
Agent – if you get your “news” from the internet and Fox News, then no wonder you are so ignorant of the real world. Go ahead and spread your lies and fear-mongering. Most real Americans are way too smart to fall for it. Thank God! GoBama in 2012!
My world is the real world. Your world is of Bill Maher, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, Media Matters, Moveon.org and any other leftist site you run across. These sites and networks are all in the tank for the Progressive Socialist agenda and they are steadily losing viewership and readership. CNN’s president had to resign because of the huge decline in viewership. Gee, I wonder what brought that on.
There is actually quite a bit which is “nonsensical”.
You assume the lower costs are without quality reduction, despite evidence of the “pathway” to death. A 70 year old man with psemonia was put on that path I might add. They cut costs.
More importantly, you somehow state that it’s the free market system causing the government’s costs to go up when they offer payment directly to doctors? I would love your explanation on this one and to know how the costs will be driven down by a payment delivery system. Payment delivery systems do not bring down costs. If your goal is to say that our costs are high, and we need to pause actual health care price containment protocols (which are not linked to method of payment whether insurance or government related) then your comment makes logical sense.
If you are trying to state that the payment method system will somehow impact the cost, you are a severe fool.
Us having insurance companies around is not driving up the cost of healthcare.
googlegal:
I also feel the need to point out that infant mortality rate is largely linked with Obesity. Obesity in England is half that of the U.S. Also worth noting is what is defined as infant mortality in each of the countries who keep track of it. You are aware that stillbirths as well as babies who die within 48 hours of their birth are not counted in the infant mortality rate of European nations correct? But it’s not like that would affect an infant mortality rate right Googlegal?
Their costs are not linked with the method of payment. Universal Healthcare coverage is not the source. They actually eat much better than us as well and still manage to have an average life expectancy nearly the same as ours. Note the following: People who eat well in the U.S. have a dramatically higher than average life expectancy. When removing those with poor diets, those who die as a result (heart attacks and cancer are linked to obesity) you can see that it makes a huge difference. You have not done the math on this at all. They have people with literally lower costs to live as they have less costs literally. If they don’t need a quadruple by pass surgery, then that cost doesn’t exist. If they don’t need hips replaced as a result of obsesity (common here) they don’t have those costs. You fail to see that if we averagae all the good care we are getting here, that’s why the cost is so high overall. Our fat unhealthy americans are getting coverage. And amen to that. They would for certain die in Europe. Of that there is no doubt.
Well, 0-48 depending on what was considered the cause of death in the infant. So up to 48 hours of the birth.
Bob – your argument does not make any sense. Direct pay will drive down costs due to more negotiating power. Any good broker knows the bigger the account, the better the pricing. Also, the reason many Americans eat so poorly is because good, healthy food is expensive! They can buy the pre-packaged processed crap for much less. And if Brits have “less costs literally”, there goes your argument that universal healthcare is too expensive. You really sound like an ass.
Googlegal:
They have less cost literally because they get less coverage.
It makes perfect sense, but in fact you are an ass. My comment saying that someone costs less if they don’t have heart surgery makes perfect sense. The delivery system does not lower the cost.
If you are so naive to believe that the purchasing power changes per the volume and not also the dollar value you are a fool.
So then I imagine that the cost of the 28% of the government’s costs should basically be more proportionately than the 72% remaining from the insurance companies correct? If your math is correct than the 72% should have more purchasing power which lowers the costs, and should give them an edge. But wait! They are equally as expensive, as the underlying costs for the both is the same. In fact, medicare if anything has less costs than private insurance.
There goes your argument.
I noticed you didn’t direct my still birth and infant mortality arguement. So you spoke without knowing. Remind me…Assuming makes a? Complete the statement, ass.
I haven’t done my research on the difference in infant mortality definitions between coutries. You are right. But I will. I do not believe care will go down for the many people that have no coverage now. Those are the people targeted by universal healthcare. No-one has said they will abolish private insurance and you are free to purchase the coverage you desire, if the federally/state exchange coverage does not meet your standards. What is more American than that? But the exchanges will be able to negotiate fee structures and that will lower costs. I don’t believe this is a silver bullet answer to the problems, but I do think it’s a step in the right direction. And I’m sorry for calling you an ass. My emotions got the better of me.
Googlegal: When we were talking here we were talking about Universal coverage and the effects of it.
I do not mind exchanges. I have not debated about the exchanges.
Who’s your credible source? MSNBC? CNN? Real credible. I guess if you’re a liberal progressive they are.
J. Clive Matthews – He a contributor to the Times Literary Supplement, the Press Gazette, the Guardian and openDemocracy among others, devised the University Association of Contemporary European Studies’ academic group blog Ideas on Europe, and is the co-author (with Jim Smith) of two books in the Virgin Film series, one on director Tim Burton, the other on The Lord of the Rings.
Ohhh… His liberal rhetoric is so credible. Again, I guess it is if you are a liberal progressive.
What do you know of him?
I know he’s a liberal. That’s really all I need to know.
He’s English you twit.
pause = put in place. Phone modified my typing.
Bob, Following is a truism a friend sent and it is appropriate for this forum judging from some of the comments we see from Googlegal and Thinking Producer.
Arguing with Liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good you are at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock down the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it is victorious.
Dear Agent…
Discussing issues with Right-wing extremists who seem to ONLY worry about THEIR welfare, reaffirms my ‘Progressive” thinking.
Texas will go “R” for 2012, that’s for sure…I prefer to look at California, NY, New Jersey, PA when I think of 2012.
The President will be re-elected in 2012. Changes in Health Care system need & will occur.
And when those modifications are made it will do more harm than good.
You may have taken my comment above about people who are choosing to not get health care to mean that I don’t care about people, and I want those people to die.
That is absolutely not the case. If you read in between the lines you will see that I as other republicans see that in attempting to give free coverage to them, we will take away the ability for the average american to buy essential coverage. If the government is the only option they are the only option. They will restrict coverage more than a for profit pool. Buying into a pool will get you more coverage. More people will lose out from not being able to buy with a pool than people will lose out from not being able to get government coverage.
Your plan and Obama’s will result in more deaths. Not less. Less coverage, not more. Less choices, not more.
We have a system which already mandates treatment for those who need it. The poor use that. They do not die. There are rare circumstances when one cannot receive treatment. EXTREMELY rare, just as rare as it is in the other nations.
Evidence of this: We have an obesity rate at over double that of other nations, and are average life expectancy is the same, despite obviously a hell of a lot more health issues which need treatment.
We get more treatment here than Europe. That is not an opinion, it’s a fact.
Here you go again. Opening your mouth without thinking. The “poor” do not get treatment through the system. Children of the “poor” are generally covered by state insurance, but the parents have to preventive care or coverage for routine exams. Go to a hospital for a tramatic injury or illness and they will treat you. They will also bill you. We DO NOT have better care in this country for the masses of people without insurance. Because right-wingers tend to be fat cats, they have good coverage and that’s the reason they don’t care about anyone else.
Bob, I don’t know if you saw the story on the net about the Medical Supplies Mfg company in Indiana that wanted to expand and hire more employees. Their plans have been cancelled because of the new tax under Obamacare on medical devices. This is one of the many taxes being imposed by Obamatax. This company would have hired several hundred new employees and expanded operations, but the new tax is a big job killer, just like the other taxes built into this bill. Progressive thinking at its finest.
Googlegal, Who is opening their mouth without thinking? So all us right wingers are fat cats and we don’t care about the masses, huh. That is right out of the Communist Manifesto. By the way, poor people can go to any Doc in the Box free clinic in numerous cities to get their check ups and preventive care. This is much less expensive than your one size fits all government mandated program under Obamatax. County hospitals must treat anyone who comes in with problems. Usually, the ones who scream the loudest get treatment before the ones with insurance. I can speak from experience. Under yours and the President’s plan, freeloaders from all over will be subsidized for healthcare on our dime and the system will continue to break down because doctors will be leaving the profession per the latest polls and rationed care will be the norm just like it is in Britain and other countries who have tried Socialized medicine. Why do you think that is a better solution to our problem?
Google gal: The point is they get treatement.
I don’t much care about the cost. If you are trying to tell me that your arguement for health care doesn’t involve the poor getting treatment then you are a lying jerk.
End of story. The guy above mentioned that we were heartless. I was telling him that we aren’t. Those people don’t die. People do die from not being able to get coverage though.
Fat cats? Are you dumb? The average american can pay for limitless coverage for let’s throw out a random number of say $6,000 a year that would cover far more than a government system. That is neither fat, nor a cat. It’s middle class you moron. With the money they pay to that for profit company they get more coverage than the government will provide. And they have no cut offs.
The poor are the only ones you can argue that would get hosed without something being passed, and I clearly told you THEY GET CARED FOR.
Agent:
I find it interesting that we think so similar. I was born and raised in Washington, close to Seattle.
My father was a democrat for life until Clinton.
I was actually raised thinking that FDR was great, Washington State’s Worker’s Compensation system was excellent and for the people which made it better.
I’ve argued with the Liberal, I’ve argued as a Liberal.
What frustrates me is the level of indoctrination. Our schools up here are absurd. Our college graduates are so inept, they listen to Buffet talk about a 12.2% payroll tax that his employees pay and they don’t even realize Buffet pays half the tax the employee doesn’t pay the full.
These college graduates don’t even do the research to find out what the payroll tax is because they are so lead on a liberal path. My brother who is a physics post grad even got into a debate regarding solar panels and whether or not they would be able to power a building with a fellow physics major. My brother is top class, so was the person he debated with. Yet the other guy was so indoctrinated, he heard Obama and his team say we could power buildings that way, and he just believed it. My brother following that worked up the equations. It wouldn’t even power half of a building if the entire building was made of solar panels, and would cost a ridiculous sum of money.
And again, the liberal indoctrination is in. Kids like to believe they are giving to help someone else, that the business is the big bad enemy, and they so willingly listen to the lies on the left because hey, they sound like sugar.
Then I looked up FDR’s insanity. As I said in another forum he actually thought increasing the cost of food in the great depression and taxing the rich to pay for it was a good idea. My question is why not leave the cost low and tax the rich to pay for it? He literally was forcing a reliant system for people to need him. Then I looked at the food subsidies. The poor used to eat better than the rich. It costed more to make a ding dong than it did to make a vegetable. Now it costs more to sell a vegetable than to sell a processed food in a plant like a ding dong. Subsidies really help the poor eh?
Every program they’ve made us rely on screws us. And I’m quite frankly sick of it.
Bob – again you make my argument on the reason for obesity in this country. Thank you.
And the only reason Warren Buffet pays 1/2 the taxes his workers do is because of the screwed up tax structure in this country that helps the rich get richer and the middle class get poor. When Buffet made that point, he was actually giving a speech about restructuring the tax code because he felt it was wrong that he paid less tax than his workers! I am a born-again Democrat, as my parents (military family) were staunch Republicans and I followed in their footsteps. They are no longer. I guess reformed partisans are just as bad as reformed smokers.
My god, I don’t even know what to say to you google gal.
I make your argument for Obesity? You mean the food subsidies that FDR put in place? You might want to reconsider that democrat statement.
Furthermore: Buffet used a full 12.2% payroll tax assumption as if his secretary was paying that rate. She does not pay that rate. She paid 6.2% of a payroll tax. Buffet was misleading in his statement.
Further: His secretary very likely does not pay an effective rate less than him. My effective rate last year as a single male owning a house with $63,000 of income was under 15%. I believe it was 12%. This year with a kid with $75,000 of income as head of household it will be about 7%. I pay less than him. The average american’s effective rate is lower than Buffet’s. I’ve seen these studies. Those who avoid taxes at the richest of the rich amount to 1% of 1%. The amount of revenues you could get from them (rob from them) is nothing. You are not entitled to their money. And they are not screwing people by having it. They created your job. In taking their money though you are screwing people.
Grow up.
Bob, you were unfortunate for being born on the left coast, but also lucky you saw the light and are not lost in the wilderness of Progressive Socialism. Any state that would elect and retain Patty Murray has to be about as goofy as Minnesota which elected a pro wrestler as Governor and a left wing comedian as Senator. I was born in Oklahoma and now live in Texas. These two states are bastions of Conservatism. I have a degree in Economics and studied all the systems from Communism, Marxism, Socialism and Capitalism. Back in the day, the professors didn’t ram their liberal leanings down our throat like today’s professors do. It is no wonder college graduates now don’t know anything about real life or how to compete in our society. They want everything handed to them on a silver platter and because many are lazy, they are content to live on Mom & Dad and get their entitlements since they are unqualified to do a job. You are right about FDR. He just mimicked what Roosevelt and Wilson started and extended the Great Depression by 6 years with all his failed government hand out programs and high taxes on business. The only thing that saved him was WW11 when massively unemployed men volunteered to fight and women had to man the factories. Unemployment dropped drastically as a result. Of course, the national debt tripled in a few short years. FDR is the poster child for Progressive Socialism. They say that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it and this country is repeating it big time. It is too bad that real history is not taught at the secondary level or college or we wouldn’t have so many dunces running around like Googlegal.
Now I’m an insane, rambling, dunce? Nice, Agent. I sure am getting your blood boiling!
Googlegal, I challenge you to show where I called you insane. Misguided, rambling, dunce perhaps. You have obviously been well indoctinated into the Progressive solution to this country’s problems. If you are interested in learning something, I would recommend you read Milton Friedman’s books on Capitlism and why it is so much better than Keynesian philosophy of Tax & Spend. Perhaps a light bulb above your head will light up and you may question what you believe. I won’t hold my breath that you will do that since you are entrenched in your beliefs.
I was responding to Bob’s post asking why Romney was a bad candidate. He said that I was insane and you called me a dunce.
I guess your answer is ELECT Romney. The rich shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate; they can hire a tax expert who finds ways to avoid paying taxes. You’re being told that WE wouldn’t want a President who pays MORE taxes- it is unamerican for the wealthy to pay more…They are the “job creators”.
I’m not impressed with multi-million Dollar IRAS, Swiss Bank accounts and failure to disclose HOW he avoided paying his fair share.
If Romney is elected with his “Tell-Nothing” approach to governing and lack of disclosure…SOMEONE is nuts and it is NOT me !
Thinking, it is not wise to throw rocks if you live in a glass house. There are plenty of rich Democrats like Kerry, Pelosi, the witch Debbie Wasserman Schultz who have millions squirreled away in offshore accounts. They avoid paying taxes at all costs. Kerry wouldn’t even pay his yacht taxes in Massachusetts and moved his yacht to Rhode Island. The answer to the tax issue is to go to a fair or flat tax and get rid of the 2,000 page tax code and eliminate all the loopholes like your friend Jeffrey Immelt and Warren Buffet enjoy. I tell you what, when Obama releases all his school records, fake Social, and other records, we will ask Romney to release more tax records. He has released two years and that has been good enough in prior years for other candidates. All the rich Democrats should release theirs as well. I bet we would find Romney has paid a lot more taxes than they have on their fortunes.
Thinking, us right wing extremists as you call us believe in a Constitutional Republic and aim to restore it in November. The Progressive Socialist agenda is dying due to failed tax and spend policy and government largesse. The very states you mention are in the biggest trouble. California leads the pack and is in dire trouble. Several cities have already filed bankruptcy and there answer for dealing with funding issues is to raise taxes again. Is it any wonder that businesses and citizens are fleeing the state in record numbers to escape excessive taxation and environmentalist wacko regulations? By the way, including the 2010 Mid Term shellacking, Conservatives have won victory after victory in a number of states with Governorships, House & Senate races and state legislatures. This tells me the citizens did wake up and they don’t care much for the failed Progressive agenda. We will see you in November.
No. But we care for Mitt Romney less. Too bad you couldn’t have chosen a better candidate. Oh wait! That’s the best you got! And The Golden State’s new official 2010 population of 37.3 million is a 10 percent increase over 2000. Nobody is leaving the state in droves.
Explain why Romney is a bad candidate.
Since you and Agent are no longer replying to me because I’m insane, I guess you are not expecting a response…
Excuse me Googlegal for not replying to you right away. I was at lunch enjoying my Chick Fil A sandwich. I had a longer than usual wait to get it, but it sure was good. Reading your rants against Bob only solidifies my opinion of your misguided Progressive leanings. You maintain that the ideas you put forth have merit and disparage other peoples opinion. You just can’t win the argument. It is a fact that California has lost thousands of businesses and regular citizens. They have been replaced by non tax paying illegal aliens which only adds to their woes. I am sure these people will start up a lot of new businesses there, right?
googlegal: That was my original thought yes. But now I’m geniunely curious on the source of your anger against republicans. This is not simply partisan differences. This is anger. Your reasoning toward not liking Romney should be an interesting read. I’m curious if it will involve Bain Capital (which would signal a high amount of anger) or something more like an understanding regarding tax systems (something that would be a higher level of indoctrination in schools and a lower level of anger). I’m really curious to know which lie it is you followed to come to the conclusion that Romney was a bad candidate. You realize he eliminates capital gains taxes for anyone making under $250,000 a year correct? When you sell your house after you retire that includes you. 52% of americans rely on stocks to retire. 52% of Americans would benefit. Under Obama’s course of action the amount of capital gains taxes on the middle class would be insanely high by comparison. That does not help the middle class. At all. My father for example invested well with a lower income. Even though he had 7 kids and didn’t make much he managed to get about a million into his retirement account. And through Obama’s plan, my mother (since he died) will be paying ridiculously high taxes on that including the dividend stocks he had. We are estimated $200,000 in taxes. Does that sound fair?
My reasons for not endorsing Romney are the following:
1. He originally instituted a similar healthcare bill in the State of MA that he proclaimed would be a model for the nation. When the nation did use this model to develop a healthcare plan, he called it an “unconscionable abuse of power.” I have to believe this sudden change of heart is only because the bill was supported by Obama. That, in my mind, is not a strong indicator of his character.
2. He has flip-flopped from being pro-choice to pro-life. As a woman in this country, I find it highly offensive that any man has right to tell me what I can and can not do with my body.
3. He has also vacillated on same-sex marriage, seeming to blow with whatever political wind will benefit him at the time.
4. He is a practicing Mormon and I have great trepidation in anyone that follows and believes that Joseph Smith was the Messiah.
Other than those points, he appears to be a good man with strong moral values and dedication to helping others. But the above points are too important to me to get past.
Does that answer your question? You mistake my passion for the issues for anger.
Googlegal:
I do not doubt your passion.
Let’s go through this:
1. State and Federal law are very different. Stating that it was a model to the rest of the country does not mean he forced it on everyone else. You can’t speak for what he would have done, because you interpret what he has said incorrectly. 50 states are 50 states so each can put in place their own attempts. Your point here is moot and if this is the most you have against Romney your credibility is lacking in real life issues.
2. Let me show you something and then say something: http://housethatjadebuilt.blogspot.com/2010/08/sweet-day.html
Republicans only avidly attempt to get rid of partial birth abortions. Here is a baby at 12 weeks old. That baby is not your body. You are in dire need of a wake up call.
3. You mean like Obama who had a majority and never once attempted to pass any laws regarding this in his first 2 years of presidency and then stated that he was for it as per political winds? Also furthermore: Most republicans are against any law with wording which could in any way limit funding to churches which “disrciminate” against gays. If you were not aware, almost any law which Gays want passed want integrated discrimination wording (with good reason I would say, as a balanced Republican I understand not wanting to be discriminated against) however in most legal cases this translates to removing any public funding, religious tax credits, or similar aspects from for example Catholic needs providers such as psychologists who basically receive trauma clients who are getting government funding. I’m not sure you are aware, but the Catholic faith provides more of this service than any other organization in the world. It is tricky balancing the wording. And most democrats are for putting in wording which puts in control for religions. I’m sorry, but control is not ok over religions. You listen to the gays, you don’t listen to the religions, which is sad because the religious movement itself actually helps people. The gay movement (by that I mean the actual movement’s endeavors) only seeks to be gay. Yet you love the gay movement and hate the movement who seeks to give essentially low cost assistance to anyone who asks.
4. The Majority of practicing Mormons follow the family model. As I’m sure you may know, Mormons have among the lowest divorce rates in the world and sell themselves on a family model. I find things wrong with many religions. Mormons are not among the ones I dislike. Put your silly comments about religion against the man who Obama follows, who preaches about “god damn America” and is actually anti pretty much everything. You want to hear insanity listen to one of those sermans which Obama seems to prefer over normal Christian gatherins which I’m sure you have at least one point been to. Obama’s preacher is by no means normal. I can barely stomach to listen to him.
5. and most importantly, you are ignoring the economy in it’s entirety. You are ignoring real issues for passion issues. Drop it. They are playing you like a record googlegal.
You actually think that is a real baby??? If that’s the best you got, stay home.
GOOGLEGAL:
LOOK THE DAMN IMAGES UP YOURSELF. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT A 12 YEAR OLD BABY LOOKS LIKE. IN FACT, IF ANYTHING YOU’RE CORRECT IT LOOKS FAKE. THEY LOOK MORE HUMAN.
And if the best you can say is “HAH! THAT’S NOT A BABY! BABIES DON’T EXIST AT 12 WEEKS!” Then you are a @%!%$ing idiot.
Pardon my passion, but LIFE f@%#!%#!ing is important.
So is medical care. And I am NOT heartless. The reason I am against 12 week old abortions if because they are LIFE not your @%!ing body. The reason I am against Universal Healthcare coverage is that it WILL limit care.
Agent is similar. There are no heartless people here.
No piss off. You’re arrogant hot headed childish crap is beginning to piss me off. You honestly believe the democrats have the “generous open minded” thing corenered? Just like every dumb @$$ washingtonian, you need to stop being a tool.
Wow! Who’s angry now?? Calm yourself, Bob. If the 12 week old FETUS is in my body, it’s part of my body. You and nobody else, especially a man, has a right to tell me I HAVE TO GIVE BIRTH!
And it’s not a BABY, because it can not survive without being attached to MY BODY.
Really googlegal?
Which part of your body is that baby? Just because it needs you to survive does not make it a part of your body.
You called it a fetus. What part of the female body is a fetus? How does it operate to maintain the woman’s body? Does it have a specific role for the woman’s body? No. It’s not your body.
It inhabits it a short time. That fetus is a baby. Like it or not.
And no heartless woman is going to tell me she loves the world, but that a fetus is a part of her body she can kill at 12 weeks old.
Contraceptives, hey I’m all for it. But not a baby.
Medically, it’s a fetus. It’s not a baby until it’s born. And if I choose to terminate a pregnancy, that’s my perogative. You and the world don’t need to be involved in that decision.
Medically, it is a fetus, which is not a part of your body.
And if you want to kill a baby, or a baby who has autism as an example because they cannot survive on your own (the same thing) it is killing.
I’ll be sure to stay out of your way when it comes to killing, I mean seriously, if something makes you experience discomfort you’ll probably reduce to a caveman and kill over it.
You found me out. I’m a Monster! I didn’t kill anyone. But if I supported a 14 year old girl having an abortion because the child would have not a chance in hell – then, yes, I kill babies. AND support sex education and contraception to avoid the above scenerio from happening in the first place. I will burn in hell.
The heck they aren’t leaving in droves!! You keep grasping googlegal, but you just can’t hold on!
I live in CT and in the past month alone I have noticed a surge of CA license plates around my state…they are moving EAST now..the funny thing is, the ones who are moving here are the ones who left here in the 80’s to strike it rich! Guess they aren’t getting the same bang for their buck out there in CA, eh?
Not much bang for your buck in CT. I lived there for 8 years and found it very expensive.
Well, then I’m glad you left! There are enough liberals in this state to choke a horse.
No such thing as too many liberals…
“No such thing as too many liberals…” You poor, poor misguided thing.
Health care at a “free” clinic is not free. There is a co-pay that is based on your income. A single mother of 2 making $9.55 per hour does not qualify within the federal poverty guidelines. However, that person (working full time, mind you, and not “leaching” off the system) would only bring home about $1,200 per month. Hardly enough to pay rent, feed and clothe her family, transportation costs, insurance, AND pay out-of-pocket for medical care. Who’s not doing the math or their homework?
Agent, let’s just not reply to her.
This girl is clearly insane, and I am not in the mood for a repeat of some of these post’s crazy ramblings.
Bob:
I don’t agree with farm subsidies any more than you do. Just because I am left of center doesn’t mean I’m for every government program out there. In fact, the multilayered Department of Agriculture has no real mission, much less a methodology other than to provide cash to congressional pet constituencies. Its vital functions, such as crop reporting and forecasting, food inspection, and scientific research, are buried beneath politically driven cash transfers and could easily be farmed out to other agencies. In these days of record federal deficits and national debt, it is long past time to eliminate the department — or at least rename it “The Department of Food Subsidies.”
Free-market conservatives don’t dare touch the Department of Agriculture, given the senatorial clout of Midwest farm states and the mythology of the independent American yeoman farmer. Don’t expect left-wing Democrats to object either. In a brilliantly conceived devil’s bargain, the Department of Agriculture gives welfare to the wealthy on the one hand, while on the other sending more than $70 billion to the lower-income brackets in food stamps.
Yes. You’re right there googlegal.
Now why do republicans not dare touch those areas which the democrats created?
Because they are threatened every year by people saying they are “against” the middle class. The democrats passed it. Hate them for it. The democrats scream at the republicans when they try to remove it. The barrier is the mindset of democrats. Until that hate war is removed the subsidies will not go. Blame the party at fault thank you very much.
You’re not gonna like this one, but I truly believe FDR was a closet Republican and was praised by both Reagan and other Republican leaders.
The subsidy system survives not because it worked well, but because farmers lobbied to keep it. Subsidies beat the whims of a free market. We need to drop the subsidies and let the farmers farm.
So any time a president does bad things they are a closet conservative? And you’re trying to make the claim that a closet conservative put in place social security? I’m sorry googlegal, FDR was the most liberal president of our time. Were it not for him, the country would not have moved toward liberalism. Anyone who studies history knows the country leaned republican before him and leaned democrat after. It was his programs which were liberal which did so.
Were it not for the switch that happened in the 60’s the democrats may have actually gone back toward a different route, the route you think they actually went but did not. John F Kennedy was more like Bush than you would probably care to admit. A simple review of history will reveal this. Liberalism did change, but FDR was by no means a closet conservative. Even by modern standards he was and is a liberal.
Obama comparatively is still less liberal than FDR, which shows something considering how much the times have changed. The country leans more right currently than it did back then.
I am a liberal and make no bones about it. I am, however, not insane or a dunce. I have my beliefs about universal healthcare, pro-choice, and birth control – you bet. And I am passionate about those subjects. I do not agree with every democratic move nor disagree with every Republican move. I judge based on my own beliefs and what I believe to be fair and right. In no way am I condemning an entire party, but the acts of some members. There have been plenty of times I did not agree with a Democrat and I would speak up on that too. I think I have said the current healthcare legislation is not the be-all and end-all, but I do think it’s a step in the right direction. Mitt Romney agreed with me in 2002. But that’s changed now that he’s running AGAINST Obama (and not FOR President).
Nice smooth talking below, but I’m sorry no. You don’t disagree with democrats. If you justify it in your head by calling them closet republicans then you actually disagree with republicans in your mind. Psychology 101.
You can’t back petal the fact that you just called FDR a closet republican in order to state that subsidies are a republican issue. They aren’t. They were democrat implimented.
Further Googlegal:
Because you have been mislead by democrats, I highly doubt you are pro choice.
Define it. If you are ok with partial birth abortion then you are suffering from a morality issue. If you are like most women who just mean they are ok with contraception and are not ok with killing a baby at 12 weeks congratulations. You are not a democrat in those beliefs.
Also: You are pro gay unions most likely. If you are pro force against religions (as democrats currently are) then you are seriously suffering in areas of morality.
The areas you have passion in, you are being lied to, mislead, and forced to believe that republicans are some anti people, anti gay, anti everything force.
Rather than believe that democrats want an enemy and are over exaggerating which is obviously what is happening. Any republican who hates gays is a jerk. Any democrat who advocates the current gay movement’s attempt to dominate religion is a jerk. I don’t care about which party it is. Jerkism is jerkism.
And right now your primary reasons for being a democrat seem to follow the typical Jerk-ist mindsets. At this point I’m actually just trying to be funny while educating you. Pardon the odd wording.
I’m really sick of you telling me what I do and do not believe. And twisting my words around at the same time. I said I thought FDR was a closet Republican, tongue in cheek. I, in no way, was saying subsidies are a Replublican issue. You need to stop being so jaded and putting words in people’s mouths. You do not know me. To make presumptions about my beliefs based on brief blog comments is arrogant AND ignorant. I did not make this conversation personal and I wouldn’t presume to “educate” someone – only share my thoughts. I am tired of being attacked and would like to just agree to disagree at this point.
Googlegal, I hate to rain on your parade, but it is obvious that you didn’t study any true history in school or you would realize that the “New Deal” was the most Progressive Socialist program ever created up to that time and it was FDR all the way. Republicans had nothing to do with his Progressive vision. For the day, his entitlement programs would boggle your mind. His programs actually kept the country in Depression longer than it would have if he had incentivized business and lowered the oppressive taxes imposed on them. He didn’t create any jobs but government jobs which is exactly what your President is doing now. It is a huge drain on the economy and resulted in massive debt. As I stated in a prior post, the only thing that got us out of the Depression was WW11 because his imbecilic policies certainly didn’t.
Agent – Can you even read??? I said FDR was a closet Republican TONGUE IN CHEEK. Do you know what that means??? Lighten up you right wing GOPers. This is just a blog for an exchange of ideas. Not a forum to attack and insult others. Just stop.
READ MY COMMENT ABOVE YOU CRAZY %@#%!%.
“Yes. You’re right there googlegal.
Now why do republicans not dare touch those areas which the democrats created?
Because they are threatened every year by people saying they are “against” the middle class. The democrats passed it. Hate them for it. The democrats scream at the republicans when they try to remove it. The barrier is the mindset of democrats. Until that hate war is removed the subsidies will not go. Blame the party at fault thank you very much.”
THAT WAS ME SAYING SUBSIDIES WERE REPUBLICANS
YOUR REPLY
“You’re not gonna like this one, but I truly believe FDR was a closet Republican and was praised by both Reagan and other Republican leaders.
The subsidy system survives not because it worked well, but because farmers lobbied to keep it. Subsidies beat the whims of a free market. We need to drop the subsidies and let the farmers farm”
THAT WAS YOU SAYING THAT FDR WAS A CLOSET REPUBLICAN. IF YOU WERE NOT REPLYING TO MY COMMENT OF BLAME DEMOCRATS FOR SUBSIDIES THEN YOU ARE A DUMB @$$. YOU REPLIED STATING I WOULDN’T LIKE IT BUT FDR WAS A CLOSET REPUBLICAN. THEREFORE, YOU WERE STATING AGAINST MY COMMENT TO BLAME DEMOCRATS FOR SUBSIDIES.
FURTHER: DO NOT PUT THE DUMB @$$ ARGUMENT THAT I AM “PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH” AND “YOUR BELIEFS”. BULL %@#@!%!ING @%@.
I SAID POSSIBILITIES, AND SAID THAT IF YOU WERE NOT THAT WAY, YOU WERE LACKING IN MORALITY. WHICH YOU ARE.
THANK YOU FOR PROVING TO AGENT AND I WHAT LIBERALS ARE ALL ABOUT.
And Bob, you can go back to bed now. F@*k you.
Shrew, maybe. But, who’s screaming? NOT ME. THAT WAS BOB.
AND LET ME REITERATE YOU @%#%!ING CHILD, READ THE POST.
I SAID WHAT YOU COULD BELIEVE. I SAID IF YOU BELIEVE THIS, YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT LACKING IN MORALITY. I SAID IF YOU DON’T, CONGRATULATIONS ON BEING A REPUBLICAN.
IN OTHER WORDS: I DID NOT STATE YOUR BELIEFS. YOU SOUND LIKE A %@#%@ING KID. AND NOW I’M GOING TO TREAT YOU LIKE ONE, I DO NOT TOLERATE WHINY LITTLE BRATS.
You and Agent sound so alike I get you both mixed up. Just keep up the rhetoric. I don’t care what you think. You’re a rude asshole.
Bob, from the above statements, I think you have succeeded in reducing Googlegal into a screaming shrew who is like a kid who doesn’t get their way and throws a tantrum. Progressives have nothing to convince the rest of us that their ideology is good since it is an abysmal failure in every way. They are like vultures waiting for America to die so they can pick at the carcass. They just can’t stand that Conservatism is on the rise and their whole reason for being is in jeopardy in November.
So I’m a child? I guess I should be thankful for your mature, misguided advice and “education”. No thank you.
Name the misguided part of my comments to do with gay marriage, infant mortality rates, health care coverage, the reverend comparison of religions between Obama and Romney, etc.
Misguided is voting for another president who will harm the economy and ruin our healthcare system to protect your precious need to abort a baby at third trimester. That one IS MURDER and is the only one republicans tend to go after.
That is what I call misguided. You need to be able to have your third trimester abortion, and contracptives paid for, even if you have to destroy the economy, destroy the healthcare system, and anything else to get it.
So I am single-handedly responsible for “destroying the economy, destroying the healthcare system, and anything else to get it”? Not bad for a @%#%!ING CHILD DUMB @$$! Keep up the fear mongering. The whole country is DESTROYED!! Get a grip.
Pretty sure you basically started a complete war with me.
I’m retaliating. And not to sound like a child, but you started it so I’m certainly going to finish it at this point. You’re going to learn when it’s not ok to whine and then point a finger crying “he’s telling me what I believe!” when I did no such thing.
I think I said I got you mixed up with Agent, didn’t I? You both are tag-teaming me and I’m just trying to keep up.
Comments above are credited to: Victor Davis Hanson and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University
The name of your source or credibility is irrelavent.
The methodology is relevant. The fact that you followed a source regarding infant mortality without understanding the methodology shows why your sources mean nothing to the republicans in this forum.
If you make an A+B=C statement we will however listen to you.
So, Googlegal, you are now mad that we called you on your closet Republican statement on FDR. When someone says they truly believed that FDR was a closet Republican, that doesn’t sound very “tongue in cheek” to most folks. You are typical of the far left crowd who can’t win an argument so we are right wing GOPers. For the record, I am not a GOPer and am now Independent since I don’t like a lot of the reach across the aisle RINO’s in office now. However, when it is between the choice of what we have now and anyone else including our local mayor, the choice is very easy.
Yup I’m rude for telling you that your bull is bull. I’m rude for telling you the truth, that like it or not you killed a baby for your body.
I’m rude for telling you the way the healthcare system works, and how it’s good for us not to have a universal healthcare system.
I didn’t crack at your BS until you had the gaul to state that I was stating your beliefs. I didn’t crack until you had the gaul to say that a 12 year old baby is your body. It isn’t. If you are for abortion have the balls to state that you are killing the kid because you don’t want it. Don’t take the coward’s route of stating it’s your body. It isn’t. It never will be your body.
You believe what you believe and I’ll believe what I believe. I am pro-choice. I am not pro making the choice for others. And you ARE rude, belittling, and arrogant. Even if I wanted to have an indepth conversation with you on the issues, it is impossible because you nitpick my every word while trying to shove your point of view down my throat. So just chill out, quit screaming, and leave me alone, OK?
I’m sorry no. I’m not letting that go. You came into this forum uneducated, making statements without research regarding the infant mortality rate, and then you’re upset I nitpicked your facts? That’s not arrogent, that’s being prepared.
I only acted like a dick to you because you have completely acted like a smart @$$ in this forum.
And belittling? I think not. I acted that way after you whined stating I was telling you what you believed. That is like it or not labeling me a caveman like you liberals tend to do. And guess what? Being called a heartless, uneducated, fox following, person is not the way to debate. I called you wrong. You don’t like that you’re wrong? Deal with it. Don’t throw out crap like that unless you expect me to point out how ridiculous you are.
Side comment: To do with anything we have debated it has not been opinion. This isn’t differing beliefs. This is some moron pulling a baby out of their belly and stating, hey, I didn’t kill that. Yes. You did. This is someone stating comments to do with gay unions which are totally misleading. Yes, republicans are against gay marriage, when it affects religion.
This is about someone stating Mormonism is more extreme than reverened Wright.
This is about someone stating that a payment delivery system will lower costs, using a reference point that was false.
You have been wrong in every one of your statements. And I’m tired of Americans like you ruining this country, and trying to force the whole country to do it at the same time. You want something your way? DO IT IN YOUR STATE WITH YOUR STATE LAW. Get out of Texas’s hair and life, get out of Oklahoma’s hair and life, and if you want to practice what you preach STFU about how they handle abortions or gay marriage. They don’t want it. Go do it somewhere else. You won’t rest though until everything is YOUR way and I won’t have that.
I admitted I didn’t research differences in infant mortality. What else do you want me to say about that?
AND I stated, TWICE, that I addressed the belief comment to you when I meant it for someone else. What else do you want me to say about that?
I NEVER stated “Mormonism is more extreme than reverened Wright”. Those words came from you.
I NEVER stated anything about comments to do with gay unions, unless you mean marriage. And I am for gay marriage. What is the problem with that?
I have not been “wrong in every one” of my statements. I know you think your intellect is far superior to mine. Maybe it is. But in putting forth your statements in such a rude and demeaning manner, I wouldn’t listen to thing you have to say. I guess I am being childish. So be it.
I thought you were’t talking to me.
Here is a news flash. Our wonderful Labor Department is now admitting that the unemployment rate increased to 8.3% Of course, it is closer to 20% if we count all the ones who have given up looking for work. The article is stupidly written and says that manufacturing added 25,000 jobs, but manufacturing activity fell in the month. Hmm! Doesn’t make much sense, does it.