|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 12:39:42 AM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 634
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
i will say it for you one more time very slowly MAKING PROFIT NECESSARILY MAKES A COMPANY MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHICH IS $12TRILLION IN DEBT. Bzzzzt. Wrong. But you don't desire to see it so we'll just agree to disagree. Making profit does not equal efficiency. Never has, never will. In fact your insistence on profit = efficiency is so inaccurate it's pretty laughable. And most companies carry some kind of debt load. So maybe the government has too much debt load right now. Big deal. Stop two wars we can't afford for starters. In any case, all your squawking means nothing and isn't even factually correct.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 2:28:56 AM
|
|
|
awash1
Posts: 57
Joined: 12/11/2009
Status: offline
|
I'd love to see two wars we can't afford stopped and our under-appreciated troops brought home. Where do we sign up for that?
_____________________________
www.amandawashington.net
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 8:18:08 AM
|
|
|
_jjp_
Posts: 2084
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: relady
Bzzzzt. Wrong. But you don't desire to see it so we'll just agree to disagree. Making profit does not equal efficiency. Never has, never will. In fact your insistence on profit = efficiency is so inaccurate it's pretty laughable.
what's laughable are the comprehension skills here. I am making the point and quite clearly that a company that profits is necessarily more efficient than the US government as the US government runs a deficit yearly. The US government runs a deficit because it can not perform it's stated goals within their means.
quote:
And most companies carry some kind of debt load.
nothing like our government does, a company could not sustain that kind of debt.
quote:
So maybe the government has too much debt load right now. Big deal.
it is a very big deal considering we pay over one billion dollars a day in interest on that debt AND the current administration has a healthcare bill that will further place us in debt with just direct costs of the healthcare predicted by those trying to sell it to us to reach $1trillion dollars in the first ten years.
It is a big deal because like the unions almost learned (until the government stepped in) you can only bleed so much out of an institution (including government) before it has to fold up and leave you completely without aid.
quote:
Stop two wars we can't afford for starters.
well since paying for the armed forces is an actual job of the US federal government at least in that instance they are doing what the constitution grants them power to do. I agree though it is time to stop the wars, we should have prosecuted them like real wars from the beginning instead of police actions.
quote:
In any case, all your squawking means nothing and isn't even factually correct.
so it's not factually true because you claim it isn't? The facts are that the US federal government consistently runs a huge deficit, generally larger than even they predict which is a pretty darn good indication of inefficiencies within their ranks. I have posted the waste and inefficiency information for but a single government program (directly related to this topic) yet i am the one squawking what isn't factually true?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 8:35:46 AM
|
|
|
Restored_Heart
Posts: 741
Joined: 7/23/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
quote:
ORIGINAL: relady
So maybe the government has too much debt load right now. Big deal.
it is a very big deal considering we pay over one billion dollars a day in interest on that debt AND the current administration has a healthcare bill that will further place us in debt with just direct costs of the healthcare predicted by those trying to sell it to us to reach $1trillion dollars in the first ten years.
I would also submit that being in massive debt to another country (China) could also endanger our national security as it renders us somewhat subservient to the lender. (the borrower is slave to the lender - in Proverbs)
Profits do not necessarily mean efficient process, but they do imply decently efficient cost handling. The Gov't has not demonstrated efficient cost handling in the recent years. Until they can do a better job handling what they are already doing, it is insaniity to think that they will suddenly start doing a better job if we give them more money
_____________________________
It not that I don't think that the health care system needs reformation, but with the Gov't's track record, I fear that it will be like trying to sculpt a statute of my great-grandmother by using a shotgun.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 9:50:54 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3527
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Restored_Heart
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
quote:
ORIGINAL: relady
So maybe the government has too much debt load right now. Big deal.
it is a very big deal considering we pay over one billion dollars a day in interest on that debt AND the current administration has a healthcare bill that will further place us in debt with just direct costs of the healthcare predicted by those trying to sell it to us to reach $1trillion dollars in the first ten years.
I would also submit that being in massive debt to another country (China) could also endanger our national security as it renders us somewhat subservient to the lender. (the borrower is slave to the lender - in Proverbs)
There's a saying that goes something like, "If you owe the bank $100,000, the bank owns you. If you owe the bank $100 million, you own the bank."
China is so into us that it can't screw us without screwing itself.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 10:48:22 AM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 1005
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
quote:
ORIGINAL: relady
So maybe the government has too much debt load right now. Big deal.
China is so into us that it can't screw us without screwing itself.
"maybe"? I gasped when I read that. Are there other people who feel this way? "big deal"??? In fact it is a VERY big deal.
Yes... the US is (fortunately for us) in a "too big to fail" situation, but that doesn't make us too big to suffer a lot for our debt choices. Mutually assured economic destruction is not an economic policy anyone should like. Our currency may never recover, we will face inflation or recession risks perpetually until we stop this.
I've got to ask again - are there more people who hold the view that deficit spending and debt "might" be an issue but are (no) "big deal"?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 1:48:24 PM
|
|
|
tacitus
Posts: 2308
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
I've got to ask again - are there more people who hold the view that deficit spending and debt "might" be an issue but are (no) "big deal"?
The answer to that is a resounding yes, if recent polls and surveys are anything to go by. I think it's been an unspoken understanding for some time that in spite of all the manufactured outrage from politicians (both sides) and activists the dirty little secret is that not that many people really care too much about deficit spending -- they just want the spending on the things that they support.
Even conservative voters -- the ones who claim they want to cut spending the most -- when asked where the spending cuts should be made, they simply can't agree on what it is that should be cut. Well, they want to cut foreign aid, but that's less than 1% or the budget anyway, and they want to cut "welfare" but when you start naming specific programs, like Medicare, support for cuts goes way down. And since most conservatives have never met a military or law and order related rise in spending they didn't like, I think it's fairly plain to see that once you remove the partisan aspects of where the money should be spent, there are very few Americans of any political persuasion that are really motivated to get spending under control. And even if conservatives are better than liberals overall, any advantage gained is quickly lost once you factor in all the tax cutting that they also want (and much prefer).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 2:04:42 PM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 1005
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tacitus
quote:
I've got to ask again - are there more people who hold the view that deficit spending and debt "might" be an issue but are (no) "big deal"?
... not that many people really care too much about deficit spending -- they just want the spending on the things that they support.
I was afraid of that... I guess I could have guessed that the same people who say things like "the bank pre-approved my loan so I can 'afford' a bigger house than I thought" ...or "I got a great deal on this new car, I know because the payments are less than before" would say "the federal deficit is no big deal".
wrt to manufactured outrage. I was against the deficit in 1984 and I'm against it in 2010 -- I am outraged that there are no fiscal conservatives to be found anywhere and no one needed to manufacture my outrage.
I hope I'm not in the minority... but I expect we'll find out soon enough.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 3:32:48 PM
|
|
|
tacitus
Posts: 2308
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: online
|
Yeah, well I suspect you will be back to being a voice in the wilderness as soon as the next Republican administration takes over. And even if the Republicans were back in control of everything by 2012 -- what are the odds that the government budget would be any smaller in 2016 than it was in 2012? I think I would put the number at about, erm, 0%?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 3:52:18 PM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 8180
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tacitus
Yeah, well I suspect you will be back to being a voice in the wilderness as soon as the next Republican administration takes over. And even if the Republicans were back in control of everything by 2012 -- what are the odds that the government budget would be any smaller in 2016 than it was in 2012? I think I would put the number at about, erm, 0%?
I think that would depend on who is President, and who is running congress.
I really see a trend of wanting physcal responsible in office. If the national parties would just get off their good ole boy stuff; maybe we could get some.
Thaanks
RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 4:37:57 PM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 1005
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tacitus
Yeah, well I suspect you will be back to being a voice in the wilderness as soon as the next Republican administration takes over. And even if the Republicans were back in control of everything by 2012 -- what are the odds that the government budget would be any smaller in 2016 than it was in 2012? I think I would put the number at about, erm, 0%?
So the only solution is to wait until the government becomes insolvent?
I'll resist the urge to go on a rant and just say... It could happen and it would be BAD for all the citizens.
If the next administration (Rep or Dem) ignores this I predict it will birth a viable third party which will take power at the expense of the current majority (R or D) and eventually replace one of them (whoever is viewed as the bigger idiots).
Back to the OP... if HC passes and debt grows (even if unrelated) there will be backlash. If the taxes are in place but not the benefits, the benefits will be repealed. Once the benefits are in place, repealing them will be harder (if not impossible) so the only choice will be to raise taxes or allow the deficit to balloon.
My view is that we give up a something now and get debt under control or we allow debt to spiral and lose everything later.
|
|
|
|
|
Madam Pelosi on transparency - 3/9/2010 5:50:21 PM
|
|
|
_jjp_
Posts: 2084
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
|
Madam Pelosi on transparency
quote:
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy..."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Madam Pelosi on transparency - 3/9/2010 6:10:48 PM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 1005
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
Madam Pelosi on transparency
quote:
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy..."
I had to go read the link to see if she really said that? She did...
It strikes me like No Child Left Behind on steroids... for years after that was passed I kept hearing things that were in NCLB that were working out REALLY badly. But it's the law so people do it. No easy way to back out the lunacy from the good ideas...
I can only hope now...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Madam Pelosi on transparency - 3/9/2010 6:34:25 PM
|
|
|
GodandGuns
Posts: 1507
Joined: 10/1/2008
From: The Sound of Madness
Status: offline
|
just one word
scary
_____________________________
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW.
The Medic, the unsung hero on every battlefield. It is impossible to imagine the mental/emotional trauma inside a Medic, and there is no triage for that.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Madam Pelosi on transparency - 3/9/2010 7:57:30 PM
|
|
|
its_GO_time
Posts: 735
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
Madam Pelosi on transparency
quote:
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy..."
Health care reform wouldn't be nearly as scary, if there were actual people who knew what they were doing(other than padding their own nest egg). Nip-Tuck Pelosi is the poster child.
_____________________________
"Jehovah has power enough without borrowing from our puny arm. Peace, ye unbelieving thoughts, be still, and know that the Lord reigneth." -C.H. Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/9/2010 10:33:53 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 634
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
Are there other people who feel this way? "big deal"??? In fact it is a VERY big deal. Yup, it's about as big a deal as it was in the 80s when I was fretting about our deficit & debt and Ronald Reagan and the Repubs were ignoring it. There are ways of getting it under control but I don't think at this juncture that that should be the primary goal. Get us out of two stupid wars and immediately the growth of the debt will subside. A lot. Really fast.
And I find the Bush supporters who couldn't find anything wrong with him running up the debt just a little more than hypocritical in expecting a President to just **poof** make almost a decade of spending spending spending disappear overnight. It wasn't important to any of you, oh, about a year and a half ago. Or 3 years ago, or 5 years ago. Hypocrites.
quote:
I was against the deficit in 1984 and I'm against it in 2010 -- I am outraged that there are no fiscal conservatives to be found anywhere and no one needed to manufacture my outrage. Good for you. Please note, my previous rant does not apply to you. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 4:36:54 AM
|
|
|
tacitus
Posts: 2308
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davelinde
So the only solution is to wait until the government becomes insolvent?
In all probability? Yes, I'm afraid so. If there is one problem with democracy, it's that it can make it darned tough for elected officials to make unpopular decisions until they are forced to.
quote:
I'll resist the urge to go on a rant and just say... It could happen and it would be BAD for all the citizens.
True, but if the economy begins to grow again, and the jobs start coming back as forecast then I have little doubt that people's attention will wander.
quote:
If the next administration (Rep or Dem) ignores this I predict it will birth a viable third party which will take power at the expense of the current majority (R or D) and eventually replace one of them (whoever is viewed as the bigger idiots).
Hmm. That's a really tough one. I think the Democrats and Republicans have pretty much got the system sewn up between them. The only possibility I can see is if there is an independent presidential candidate who is genuinely either non-partisan or bi-partisan. A new party from the left or the right is never going to get off the ground since everyone on one side would be afraid that a split would just allow the other side in (which it would). If the Tea Party decides to get serious and launch their own candidates across the country, that would be the best news the Democrats could have. (I'm sure you agree that any claims of bipartisanship the Tea Partiers make are transparently false.)
But even a truly independent candidate is going to find it really hard going if all his or her campaign promises are do what it takes to slash the debt. As soon as he talks about raising taxes or cutting the military budget, he loses one whole bunch of people, and as soon as he talks about slashing Medicare or welfare checks, or whatever, he loses another whole bunch. It would only work if the crisis is imminent, real, and tangible. And we're not even close to that point yet.
quote:
Back to the OP... if HC passes and debt grows (even if unrelated) there will be backlash. If the taxes are in place but not the benefits, the benefits will be repealed. Once the benefits are in place, repealing them will be harder (if not impossible) so the only choice will be to raise taxes or allow the deficit to balloon.
Given the mess Obama inherited, I am sure he was well aware of the dangers going in. The CBO scores the plan as revenue neutral, so if they are right, the health care overhaul should not add to the debt at all (depending on what exactly ends up passing of course). That's a far cry from the Bush Medicare prescription benefit bill that will add 1.2 trillion to the debt in the first 10 years.
quote:
My view is that we give up a something now and get debt under control or we allow debt to spiral and lose everything later.
I agree, up to a point. I think we had to do something to stave off the chances of a full blown depression. People have short memories, but back at the end of 2008 many very intelligent people really did think we were staring into an economic abyss. No doubt the effect of the stimulus package will be argued over for years to come (though it's hard to deny that it saved a lot of jobs in states that were running out of money), but I don't think Obama had much choice but to do it. A slump in government revenue at a time when only government is between people and destitution doesn't solve the debt problem at all -- it probably makes it worse.
So I dunno. I am all for cutting programs that don't work or aren't necessary, but you only ever get figures in millions by doing that, not billions or trillions.
I was going to launch into a list of things I would do, but it's very late and I need to go to bed. It's also getting a little off topic.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 4:41:02 AM
|
|
|
_jjp_
Posts: 2084
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: relady There are ways of getting it under control but I don't think at this juncture that that should be the primary goal.
Actually it does need to be the primary goal, otherwise all the other nice to have things will have to disappear one day. You know what is also hypocritical? Whining about Bush's druken sailor spending tactics as you defend and demand the current president to spend more than Bush ever thought of.
quote:
expecting a President to just **poof** make almost a decade of spending spending spending disappear overnight.
I for one am not asking him to make a decade of spending to disappear but it is stupid to add to the problem neigh double the problem over the next ten years. Stupid, Stupid, stupid. That would be like me not being able to make all of my current payments so i go out and borrow more and more money, eventually that would catch up and ruin me. So to will this country have to face this one day and continuing to add more and more spending on top of already is painting the US into a very ugly corner. In 2008 the interest on our debt totaled $1500 per man woman and child in the US, if you count only those who actually pay taxes that totals 3268 per taxpayer. That is just the interest, that doesn't include any debt reduction, current budgetary needs, or additional trillions of dollars in spending.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 5:05:32 AM
|
|
|
_jjp_
Posts: 2084
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tacitusGiven the mess Obama inherited, I am sure he was well aware of the dangers going in. The CBO scores the plan as revenue neutral, so if they are right, the health care overhaul should not add to the debt at all (depending on what exactly ends up passing of course). That's a far cry from the Bush Medicare prescription benefit bill that will add 1.2 trillion to the debt in the first 10 years.
I find it interesting that a valid accounting can be made of a bill that no one knows what is in it yet but i gave the CBO estimation a read to see where they came up with the savings that will offset the cost (this assuming the whole thing is a program with no overruns, LOL). One of the places they say savings will come from, cutting medicare payments to doctors by 21% immediately then 6% per year for several years thereafter, I am sure that will help medicare patients find doctors willing to accept them  . Also a portion of the cost of the legislation is hidden in what the CBO calls "several unfunded mandates" and the CBO also noted that the costs of the unfunded mandates would exceed the thresholds set forth in the unfunded mandates reform act. I think it safe to expect that states will fight that unfunded mandate and the fed will either cave and pay for it which transfers more of the cost back to the federal governement and offsets the debt neutrality of this program. The CBO estimate is also contingent upon $149 billion from an excise tax on "high premium insurance plans" which if it remains in the bill will be a cost passed on to those who buy those plans, likely causing some portion of those people to no longer maintain a plan that meets the excise tax requirements and lowering that revenue for the federal government.
So what you have is the neutrality of this legislation being contingent on the states and individuals with high premium insurance covering a large portion of the cost, failing that (which for the states is very likely since many of them don't have money now) the federal government will still pick up the tab and this is no longer debt neutral is it?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 6:21:11 AM
|
|
|
_jjp_
Posts: 2084
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
|
I also wonder, does the CBO factor in the cost of getting the healthcare passed? I mean it's only hundreds of millions in buy off money *cough* mary landrieu*cough*. What has been promised to others in order to get them on board? I think that cost should go into the calculation as well since every dollar the feds spend is another dollar out of our pockets and another dollar not spent on debt service.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 10:04:46 AM
|
|
|
davelinde
Posts: 1005
Joined: 5/5/2006
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: _jjp_
I also wonder, does the CBO factor in the cost of getting the healthcare passed?
I'd also heard that some Medicare cost increases have gone through in other bills already, making the whole "deficit neutral" idea a shell game.
Isn't there also an issue with timing where we start taxes first with benefits later? That skews the long term costs I'd guess.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 10:33:17 AM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 8180
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
Here is the main problem with the present health care bill that the Senate passed, and the House is considering.
see HERE
No one knows what is in the bill, how much it will cost, nor anything else.
And I for one do not want the Obama Administration to have free run with 1/6 of the economy by doing what ever they want.
Thanks
RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 11:01:19 AM
|
|
|
GodandGuns
Posts: 1507
Joined: 10/1/2008
From: The Sound of Madness
Status: offline
|
they have it already. he is making USA into his private corporation.
He owns GM, he took military insurance at least private under his control, out to control all the medicine in the country, all this for a paper writing lawyer with all of 180 days of any leadership prior to his aambushing of america
_____________________________
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW.
The Medic, the unsung hero on every battlefield. It is impossible to imagine the mental/emotional trauma inside a Medic, and there is no triage for that.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 1:31:18 PM
|
|
|
Soxfan
Posts: 1644
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Connecticut
Status: offline
|
Most polls say that if the election were held today, BO and the Democrats would be run out of Washington. That makes him even more dangerous.
Think about it. He essentially is already a "lame duck" president, with three years left in his term. He knows he has zero chance of re-election. He even said that he would rather be a "really good on term president" than a "mediocre 2 term president". Translated, his idea of success is implementing his radical agenda and transforming this country into the view of his leftist mentors.
That being said, I truly believe that he could care less what happens in 2012. As long as he continues to destroy this country, he can arrogantly say: "I control car companies...I'm gonna tell you where to fish...I'm going to tell you how much you can make....I'm gonna tell you what kind of healthcare you can have, etc", and you can't do anything about it for 3 more years!!!
Rasmussen has his Presidential Approval Index at -21, the lowest ever recorded for him. People fell for the image and are now realizing the mistake that was made. Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Emmanuel/Soros, don't care, and that makes them dangerous.
Mark my words, there is a reason you have not heard from Hillary recently (She wasn't even at the SOTU address). She wants no part of this train wreck. She's biding her time for 2012.
_____________________________
"This would be the first step in apostasy; men first forget the true, and then adore the false.".......C.H. Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Health Care Reform - 3/10/2010 3:03:33 PM
|
|
|
GodandGuns
Posts: 1507
Joined: 10/1/2008
From: The Sound of Madness
Status: offline
|
honestly she would have been heads and shoulders above anything Obama has done
_____________________________
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW.
The Medic, the unsung hero on every battlefield. It is impossible to imagine the mental/emotional trauma inside a Medic, and there is no triage for that.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
