text:
The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...
Say, can I get a chuckle over REPUBLICANS saying elect us because we'll get you jobs and DEMOCRATS saying Keep us because the stock market is booming?
The GOP establishment hasn't done all that well. The liberal establishment, Clinton's first two years and Obama's Congress and Presidency, has done even worse. (A.D. 2006: Democrats win Congress and economy goes from mediocre to bad. A.D. 2010: Tea Party-GOP coalition wins one house of Congress and jobs begin to grow, but not faster than population.) So the Tea Party and Libertarian realm must have the answers. (The farther left, from Greece to the USSR, is obviously even worse.) Whether Romney, who is trying to make some of the right noises, knows in practice what he's saying, each voter must decide for himself. (I'm inclined to vote for the Constitution Party, to point our leaders in the right direction.)
Trickle down? As a Mormon, I gather Romney could say Follow me and each of you can become Gods with capital Gs. As a politician he's not saying that, but what could beat it? The trouble is, that's what the serpent said in Genesis 3, and look where that got us. Egalitarianism is the original sin. (And in political practice, anyone who promises to take money from one group and give it to another is certainly trying to take power from people in general and give it to himself, because it requires power to take money and redistribute it; so redistributionists necessarily seek power.)
It's not that deep Andrew, mostly because so much of our revenue is already spent before it is collected. Like your home budget, what does it matter if one or all the inhabitants committed to the bills? The tab still must be paid. But would it be fair that all the children's piggy bank go into the kitty versus a small percentage of the adult's blossoming wallet? Especially when the piggy bank had been sparsely deposited to in the recent past. Did I just call the 1% the adults and the 99% the children? Maybe, maybe not, but unless the 99% stick together the 70% ownership of wealth by the 1% is an equivalent to the analogy.
Romney is a Reagan without the personality. Both were/are blinded from seeing the real needs of this country. Both advocate trickle down economics, which has been the demise of the middle class. If the Bush tax breaks for the wealthy had worked as promised, we would be at full employment. The cards are stacked against the middle-class, and the next senate and presidential elections will determine whether or not they continue to slip into poverty. The problem is, many of the middle-class continue to be gullible to the right-wing lies.
Yes ngadad, you just called the 99% children and as we know all to well most young children are trained to obey their elders. The elders in this case are those seeking the power to control them. Like if you behave I will give you a piece of cake, the one I took from your friend because he had a bigger piece.
I put it this way because people with closed minds or small minds don't seem to understand the concept if you don't make it simple for them.
harp...in theory, trickle down means as the wealthy and businesses make more money they will spend more and create more good paying jobs. True some are spending more, but the good jobs have been avoided by using low wage contractors(illegals?), importing and working existing workers more hours. The trickle down is now more like a drip.
There is this myth that, if only wealthy people had more money in their pockets (i.e., paid less taxes), they would use it philanthropically to hire a bunch of unemployed people who are living on the government dime. This is BS. Businesses hire more workers if, and only if, there is more demand for their product or service than they can efficiently produce with their current workforce.
EaTn said: "globalization is part of the issue, but if that were true for all of us then the wealthy would also be feeling the pain. They've been seeing significant gain while the middle class has felt all the pain. We need a new deck of cards."
The wealthy are not feeling the pain because they own stock in the international companies that are utilizing third world labor. The international companies have to use third world labor in order to compete in the new world marketplace. Our standard of living will not get better until our politicians in Washington negotiate a balanced trade agreement with countries like China that impose taxes on American products imported to their countries. In order for American companies to do business in China, they have to partner with a Chinese company and produce their products in China.
cactus said...
Globalization is the cause of the middle class standard of living decline. We are competing with third world countries for jobs and they are winning. That means their standard of living is increasing at the expense of ours.
Cactus, you are right if you start the statement with the way our government has handled globalization is the cause etc.......
We have the highest business tax rates in the world then selectively provide a means to those favored to pay a much lower rate. Unfortunately, those favored are primarily financial institutions instead of wealth creating manufacturing operations.
Many countries require at least one half of the products sold in their country be produced there but not the U.S. Many, including Canada, have reduced the burden on businesses to make them more competitive but the U.S. government has done the opposite. We do not have trade agreements with nearly as many countries as China. Trade agreements negotiated properly protects both countries but we keep doing business and getting the short end of the stick without having trade agreements.
It is interesting to hear some members of congress opine that increasing oil production in America wouldn't help since oil is from the world market. Apparently they are not aware of the law that prohibits the selling of American produced oil to other countries. They apparently don't realize that regardless of where the supply comes from an adequate supply from reliable sources will help keep gas prices down. High gas and food prices are the most devastating tax possible that affects the middle and lower income the most.
Romney can say that he will create 12 million jobs all he wants. But, the only plan that he has revealed for doing so is tax cuts for the wealthy. We've been there, done that and got the t-shirt - which is now the only rag some of our citizens have to wear.
Repeat a lie often enough - and the Republicans have the machine for crafting their lies and the megaphone for spreading them - and fools become avid believers.
The percent of disposable income spent for food and fuel has doubled or more for the lower and some middle income families in the past few years. It doesn't take an economist to figure out that a person with $500 a week income spending $50 a week buying gas to get to work and back is spending 10% of their income. Of course the percent goes down proportionally with those with higher incomes. ~1/3 of the cost of a gallon of gas is local, state and federal taxes. Then add the royalties paid the government by the oil companies and the subsidies paid to oil companies by the government and who is being had other than the consumer with the lower income taking the brunt of it. Tell me again how congress and the administration of either party cares about people.
All you mopes on the left are absolutely right. Obama's plan has worked really well so far.
Romney's business experience consisted of "increasing shareholder value" for its investors. This is code speak for "improving operating efficiencies". In other words, closing and selling off the manufacturing plants (assets) and laying off the workers (liabilities).
MTJohn said... Andrew - why do you believe that the Republicans will really get anybody a job? Romney can say that he will create 12 million jobs all he wants. But, the only plan that he has revealed for doing so is tax cuts for the wealthy. We've been there, done that and got the t-shirt - which is now the only rag some of our citizens have to wear.
Why should anyone believe that any more than they believed it when told "I will cut the deficit in half my first term" or "I will reduce unemployment to under 8% to around 6%" "I will close Gitmo the first year in office" etc. etc. The roar of the cannon sounds good but no hole in the target. Why do you chose to believe either of them? Is it a family tradition handed down?
I rather see someone get a tax break, even the wealthy, than give an incompetent, bloated, inefficient wasteful government more to waste. Talk about trickle down. The governments cost to collect or confiscate from the people, skim off their part and pay to make an expensive attempt to redistribute it is indeed a trickle.
Efficiency drives companies to close American plants and reopen them in a low-cost Asian country, like China or Vietnam. The jobs that are left over in the shadow of the empty plant generate low wages for the few American workers that can still afford to buy anything. Thus starts the downward spiral. If we want to bring this economy back, then we need to bring back American manufacturing.
ricardo said... Romney's business experience consisted of "increasing shareholder value" for its investors. This is code speak for "improving operating efficiencies". In other words, closing and selling off the manufacturing plants (assets) and laying off the workers (liabilities).
Why would you not do that if a business is failing and not profitable. I try to invest where the managers are willing to make hard decisions and provide a decent return on the money I have put at risk with them. The government could learn from some of them. Quit pouring money down a black hole and put it where it will be more effective. If you owned three businesses with two profitable and one not would you keep putting money from the two that were in the one that wasn't and wouldn't be?
In the real world people invest and take risk to make money not to be benevolent or to redistribute wealth like the government. When a business is successful employees do better than if the business is not successful. Granted some businesses have poor managers and those should be avoided by investors, GM is a real good example.
harp, I agree with you. My point is that Romney should not tout his business experience as job creation, since that was not the goal of his firm. The only job he was interested in was his own. My other point was that the loss of American manufacturing over the last 2 decades is at the root of the sluggish economic recovery.
Ricardo said....
If we want to bring this economy back, then we need to bring back American manufacturing.
I couldn't agree more. How would you propose bringing that about? What incentive would anyone have to invest and take the risk in the U.S.? Would it be because of the business friendly local and state governments? Would it be because of the tax rates that are competitive in the world? Would it be the necessity to only have an entire accounting function to comply with the complex tax codes? Would it be because of all the reporting and paper work requirements imposed at the local, state and federal level? Would it be because of the regulations and duplication at the local, state and federal level? Or, maybe the attraction will be the way political leaders publicly abuse those that are successful and profitable? Perhaps an attraction to the U.S. may be that some political leaders advocate unions in a business so some of the dues can be contributed to their political support? These are only a few of the incentives to attract businesses to the U.S. Should we expect an overwhelming number soon?
harp3339 said..."Someone please explain trickle down economics."
George Bush I probably explained it best - "voodoo economics". The term Reagan used was "supply side economics". The theory is pretty simple - the more wealth the wealthy and powerful accumulate, the more they will invest their wealth in ways that benefit all of the rest of us. However, experience has shown that the more wealth the wealthy and powerful accumulate, the more they invest their wealth in ways that benefit themselves.
The rising tide was supposed to float all boats. In practice, the rising tide floated the luxury yachts and swamped all the rest of us.
HARP AND CACTUS MAKE VALID POINTS... The wealthy are doing fine because they 3rd world labor makes a product, pays a man a dollar a day, then brings it here and sells it for a profit. Then the profits are split between the investors in the business so the stock market goes up and if your lucky enough to have a job your 401k goes up as well. But if you don't have a job you are put on the gov dole and the middle class sees an increased tax burden by being asked to pay for the basic needs of a would be employed person. Like jon ross says why would a business invest here when a dollor a day spent over there gets you a POLO shirt that can be sold for 60$ here. So it becomes a positive feed back mechanism. People loose jobs, gov revenues decrease and gov expenditures increase. Pretty simple. Now charge the few that have jobs more for gas and food and you get what is going on today. It is easier to collect a check than to serch for work that only covers gas and food. Now add in a few extras for the upper class like carried interest and roth IRA's and we can see why the stock market is going up as well as unemployment and debt.
What is not a myth but rather a certain truth is that Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats/ want other people's money.
And how would these same obtain other people's money? Well, there is open and direct theft which is of course illegal, and risks consequences. And then there is indirect theft wherein these same vote for a politician to do their unconstitutional stealing for them in the form of confiscatory taxation.
These same are greedy and covet the money of others but justify their greed and covetousness in the name of fairness, equality, helping the poor, investment etc.
These same should be mindful of the word of God : " The Lord makes poor and makes rich; he brings low and he exalts" ( 1 Samuel 2:7, ESV).
conservative said..."What is not a myth but rather a certain truth is that Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats/ want other people's money."
Close, but no cigar. We are tired of the wealthy getting wealthier at our expense and then investing the proceeds to invest in a government that works well only for themselves.
MT: You are deep in the left brainwashing!
"There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire, if you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain. Do something to make more money yourself – spend less time drinking, or smoking and socializing and more time working."
"There were several inspiring speeches this past week during the Republican convention that said it is not where you came from but where you end up, most notably Rice, Ryan, Rubio and Romney. They are successful because of their winning attitude in life. They were determined to be someone with a successful impact and each shared their success stories in their speeches. Message: Your ATTITUDE determines your ALTITUDE in life."
I see where the press has uncovered a former girlfriend of Ryans. Funny how they have NO regard to researching Barry's college days. I'm sure there must be more than one out there that knew him. Maybe not. The 4th Estate is no more.
MRCTV's Joe Schoffstall ran into "Good Morning America" host George Stephanopoulos at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida. When asked if he believes there is a liberal bias in the media, he responds,"I don't." When asked again, he walks away.
Right George, and geezers don't drive Buicks.
"According to new research released today by Rasmussen, more voters identify themselves as Republican than ever in the last 8 years. More importantly, by a 4 point margin, more voters identify as GOP than Democrat. This is the largest spread between the parties ever. Worse for Democrats, the number of voters who identify with their party is also approaching an historic low."
"If the GOP advantage holds through November, it is likely that the electorate will be evenly split, like it was in 2004 or possibly have a Republican edge. If that is the case, then current media polling is way off-base. Democrats and the media may wake up in shock on November 7th."
Don't despair, Jack_Boot, the Fourth Reich will save your precious ideals.
mymy said..."MT: You are deep in the left brainwashing!"
It never ceases to amaze me how effectively the right-wing propaganda machine is defined the greatest flaws of the conservative movement and then ascribed those flaws to the left.
I heard the applause lines that your repeated. I'm still waiting to see the evidence that demonstrates that there is any logical connection between that rhetoric and reality.
Wealth redistribution is not an expression of envy - it is a demonstrable fact. It also is fact that the rate of wealth redistribution has accelerated since 1980.
Jack_Dennis said..."When asked if he believes there is a liberal bias in the media..."
Of course there is a liberal bias in the media. There also is a conservative bias in the media and that bias has the larger megaphone. It is more than disingenuous for Fox and Clear Channel to brag about their market share and also complain about the liberal main stream media - they are the main stream media!
You couldn't be more wrong, Jack. I don't think the left will have any problem with the fact that Ryan had a relationship with an African American woman, but the right wing base may freak out. I think the left will have more of a problem with her stealing $77,000 from her employer. Were they sleeping together during this larcenous interlude in her life? I think we should move on. Wait. Apparently he went to her wedding in May, so he's forgiven her in his heart. That's good, right?
Romney to Ryan: "Hey, man that's not what we Mormons mean by 'sister' wives!"
Glad to see Deneeta has wised up and become a democrat in her later years, since that republican business model landed her in federal prison.
degage said..."MT, you seem to forget the dems had complete control of the house and senate for all of 2009 and 2010..."
No they didn't. The R's still had sufficient numbers to filibuster in the senate. And, you seem to forget that Obama made a concerted effort, especially during his first two years to govern from the middle. You also seem to forget that the R leadership's highest priority was not governing for the benefit of all citizens by doing everything they could do to help Obama fail.
Why Mitt Romney is Unlikable!
A lot is being said in the media about Mitt Romney not being "likable" or that he doesn't "relate well" to people. Frankly, we struggled to understand why.
So after much research, we have come up with a Top Ten List to explain this "unlikabiunlikablilityity."
Top Ten Reasons To Dislike Mitt Romney:
- Drop-dead, collar-ad handsome with gracious, statesmanlike aura.
Looks like every central casting's #1 choice for Commander-in-Chief.
- Been married to ONE woman his entire life, and has been faithful to her,
including through her bouts with breast cancer and MS.
No scandals or skeletons in his closet. (How boring is that?)
Can't speak in a fake, southern, "black preacher voice" when necessary.
Highly intelligent. Graduated cum laude from both Harvard Law School and
Harvard Business School...and by the way, his academic records are NOT sealed.
Doesn't smoke or drink alcohol, and has never done drugs, not even in the counter -culture age when he went to college. Too square for today's America?
Represents an America of "yesterday", where people believed in God, went to Church, didn't screw around, worked hard, and became a SUCCESS!
Has a family of five great sons....and none of them have police records or are in drug rehab.
But of course, they were raised by a stay-at-home mom, and that "choice" deserves America's scorn.
Oh yes.....he's a MORMON. We need to be very afraid of that very strange religion that teaches its members to be clean-living, patriotic, fiscally conservative, charitable, self-reliant, and honest.
And one more point.....pundits say because of his wealth, he can't relate to ordinary Americans.
I guess that's because he made that money HIMSELF.....as opposed to marrying it or inheriting it from Dad or depending on the govenment.
Apparently, he didn't understand that actually working at a job and earning your own money made you unrelatable to Americans. My goodness, it's a strange world, isn't it?
So you liberals think Hussein Obama taking money from the wealthy and distributing it to his communist friends like the Unions and Bill Ayers, and failed solar energy companies is a better way?That is why Hussein Obama's economic policies are a complete failure because he chooses to take care of his friends versus the people who need it the most.
dude_ : leave it to you and your ilk to bring up race.
So, everyone gets to be middle class without working for someone else? The government hands out equal pay to all citizens? And how would you propose to accomplish that?
Oh, yeah, it's done in Saudi Arabia. That's because the King owns all the oil and he uses our petro dollars to bribe his own people into remaining docile.
So, all you liberals need to do is invent something that the United States can sell to the rest of the world for enough money to support all of us at middle class income levels.
Good luck with that. Bozos.
The best argument for keeping the estate tax comes from the Republican playbook:
If entitlements turn people into lazy slackers, as Romney claims, then we definitely need to tax inherited wealth in excess of $5 million.
If there is no estate tax, the Romney sons stand to inherit a windfall of about $50 million each. If Romney really believes handouts cause indolence, he surely doesn't want that for his sons.
joneses wrote: "So you liberals think Hussein Obama taking money from the wealthy and distributing it to his communist friends like the Unions and Bill Ayers, and failed solar energy companies is a better way?"
Bill Ayers received money from the wealthy? I'm sure you will have no problem whatsoever in backing up that claim. Hurry!! I'm holding my breath.
Francis, investment in alternative energy companies has been ongoing for decades, through grants and loans. The success rate of those investments stands at 98%. Solyndra and a few others have failed over the years, but to hear people like yourself, the Energy Department's alternative energy program has been a comple failure.
The fact is that it has been highly successful.
The investment into Solydra straddled both the GWB and the Obama Administrations, and while neither President had a direct hand in any decision made that resulted in undeniable failure, people like yourself lay it at Obama's feet anyway.
There isn't a banker on this entire planet who has makes decisions to loan money, who has a 100% success rate of repayment. A 98% success rate is quite phenominal and there are many jealous bankers out there who would love to imitate such a success rate.
"That is why Hussein Obama's economic policies are a complete failure because he chooses to take care of his friends versus the people who need it the most."
(Yawn...) Oh...did you type something that was new and refreshing?
Naw...excuse me. I'm going back to sleep.
Romney and his pals (NASCAR owners, not the fans) benefited the most from globalization. It allowed them to strip American companies of assets, fire workers here while hiring cheap foreign labor, and send the profits OUT of the US to the Cayman Islands and secret Swiss bank accounts. That's the Republican brand of patriotism.
moon4kat: You should be careful. Some people may think you're serious.
Annnnnnnnnnnd! The funny thing is, they really didn't build that. Not Romney, Ryan, Huckabee, McConnell. None! Not a one! In Mitty's case, Chinese sweatshops may have helped to build his fortune, along with a lot of other ventures, misadventures and whatever else.
According to Vanity Fair:
"thanks to a rather remarkable video buried on YouTube, it seems that Republican nominee Mitt Romney, for all of his commitment to the concept, has been the beneficiary of having other folks build it. Chinese sweatshops, to be exact.
Of course, anyone attending the amped-up dog-and-pony show in Tampa—or watching it on TV—on Wednesday night could not possibly have known that. After going through Baghdad Green Zone–like security procedures to get into the Tampa Bay Times Forum—highlighted by bomb-sniffing dogs—attendees were met by a ring of bright, glowing signs saying, "We Built It," in white type on a red background that encircled the entire convention floor."
Wow mooncat! You mean there are NO democrats with overseas bank accounts? Why wouldn't someone with money want to protect it from an unfair tax system? What's illegal about it? And if it's so secret, how did you find out about it? Just jealous over rich people? Steal money from those who earned it, and give it to people who don't. That's the democratic brand of patriotism.
Ujokin, I'm sure that Romney and his Bain cronies would like to set up lots of Chinese factories just like the one he visited in the video. I can't believe he's gullible enough to believe that BS about barbed wire fences and guard towers keeping people out. Puhleeze.
Charlotte received a $50 million federal grant to help cover security costs. Also assisting police is a new local law that allows the city manager to declare a large-scale gathering an "extraordinary event" and lets law enforcement set up security boundaries and limit what can be brought into the event zone.
We did not suspend the Fourth Amendment," Newbold said, referring to the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches. "I think a good, lively demonstration is great. We're just hoping it doesn't get out of hand." 'FREE SPEECH' ZONES CRITICIZED
Charlotte set up a designated parade route and speakers platform as "free speech" areas for activists to express their opinions during the Democratic convention Tampa officials quickly learned that protesters were loath to stay within the city-established spots but tended to comply with police orders as long as they got time to make their case in front of television cameras before being asked to move along.http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-09-02/news/sns-rt-us-usa-campaign-securitybre88100m-20120901_1_protests-at-democratic-convention-big-protests-activists-plan/2
Here's a pretty picture of the windmills that are supposed to take the place of fossil fuels. Just beautiful!
DNC security rules trigger free speech worries
Throwing out the homeless, limiting free speech. Man, you liberal/dems have truly wandered from the farm.
Only three things matter:
A financial system that doesn't repeat the failures of 2008.
Fixing the housing and lending markets.
Getting people back to work.
After a full week of watching Romney, I still have no idea of any plans he has that can address the three biggies.
Plenty of tax cut fairy dust. Not many details.
"Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley of Maryland, who is considered a possible contender for president in 2016, bucked other Obama surrogates on Sunday, saying that the country was not better off now than it was four years ago".
On CBS's Face the Nation, host Bob Schieffer asked: "Can you honestly say that people are better off today than they were four years ago?"
Responded O'Malley: "No, but that's not the question of this election. The question, without a doubt, we are not as well off as we were before George Bush brought us the Bush job losses, the Bush recession, the Bush deficits, the series of desert wars -- charged for the first time to credit cards, the national credit cards."
Quipped Schieffer: "George Bush is not on the ballots."
Actually, almost four years ago to the day (Sept 15, 2008) was the collapse of Lehman Brothers.
Yeah - I, personally, am doing a lot better than in 2008. 2008 was a very, very, very bad year. I had six months with no income coming in. My lender threatened to foreclose though in the end I was able to save my home.
And I do realize I was one of the lucky ones.
Good times, 2008!
Mira, after 3&1/2 years and as many years of Obama campaigning We The People still don't know how he plans to save this country. Oh I forgot, He doesn't. He still says he hasn't got the story out and give him more time. Sorry Mira, time has running out.
MT, correction 2009 was the year Scott Brown won. 59-41 Still not enough to stop Obama with the help of Snowe and Collins. We still got bamboozele with Obamacare. He didn't get cap and trade but that didn't stop him he did an end run around congress with the EPAs regulations. Gas prices out of sight along with food prices. But then you probably aren't affected.
Well - a quick look at the U.S. economy
Investment finance industry : record profits Oil industry : record profits
Auto industry : alive and operating Education industry : alive and operating Health care industry : alive and operating
Housing industry : in real trouble Lending industry : in real trouble Construction industry : in real trouble
So why, exactly is Mitt Romney targeting his efforts to the oil and finance industries?
It's because the man who pays the piper gets to call the tune. He's their $200 million man and they think he's worth every cent.
degage - R's blocked legislation to create the debt commission; R's, including Ryan, prevented legislation to enact any of the debt commission's recommendations; and, R's refused to work with the president on health care reform.
And, as a footnote, gas prices are "out of sight" today only because gas prices took a significant dip during the recession. Gas prices have not yet returned to the highest prices that we experienced during the Bush years.
I am affected by the economy. I was better off in 2004 than I was in 2008 and I am better off today than I was in 2008 - but not as well off as I was in 2004. And, the decline that I experienced from 2006-08 was largely the consequence of trickle down economics and the failure of government to enact and/or enforce regulations that would otherwise prevent highrollers on Wall Street and in the banking industry from ripping off the rest of us.
Three commandments are missing from the platform of the party of the Ten Commandments. The Romney/Ryan ticket would be a lot more attractive if they would run on the premise that 1)thou shalt not steal; 2) thou shalt not bear false witness; and, 3) thou shalt not covet.
MT you are wrong the republicans did't refuse to work with Obama on health reform that was done behind closed doors in the dead of night and the republicans were not invited. The dems say the republicans refused to work with them, then when they did bring up something they were beat down by the dem majority. And rememer the dems ran the house and senate the last 2 years of Bushs term. And as Alpo so nicely put it the president doesn't have control of the budget. Of course the democrat senate hasn't even brought a budget to the floor in 3 1/2 years. Polosi kicked the can down the road too. they wanted to be able to blame the republicans. Not working, the majority of the people aren't that stupid.
Well said, MT!
DG - The whole country saw the Republicans try to take their little red ball and go home. They have been throwing a world-class pout since 2008.
We do need to fire the Congress. That seems to be a much harder thing to accomplish.
Bush's faut, Bush's fault! Tell us when it's ever going to be Obama's economy. You're senate won't even pass a budget! Obama's spend spend spend has got us nowhere. Where's Obama's plan, or budget for the future? Taxing rich people does absolutely NOTHING to put us back on firm financial ground. Unemployment is the same as it was three years ago.
TOES: Not according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
White House releases beer recipe
here's part of Obama's "laser like focus" on jobs.
No one is happy with 8.3%. I am thrilled with the direction, if not the speed.
What we did learn from the financial crash is that the wrong policies can actually make things worse. That line can go up as well as down.
I am concerned that Mitt's focus really does too much like that of GWB. Deregulation in finance and a wild west oil industry didn't work that well last time. In fact, it damaged the country pretty badly.
MTJohn said... mymy - it is still the economy/jobs/direction of the country, etc. And, in 65 days, you will be voting for more of the oligarchy that created the mess Obama, without any cooperation from Congress, was unable to clean up.
Others would say that congress in the house could not clean up the mess because Obama and the senate would not cooperate. I tend to think we have found ourselves with a bunch of professional politicians in both parties with more selfish interest than country loyalty. I wouldn't trust Obama as far as I could throw my gas guzzling car. I am leery of a man that changes the gait of his walk and the way he talks situationally, a virtual cameleon.
Foreclosures began to spike in 2007. The working and middle class were already loosing jobs by the time the markets crashed.
One of the problems was not seeing the problem develop.
The big unemployment jump was in 2008. The housing crisis started earlier.
TOES02800 wrote on September the 1st and then revived today: "Alpo's happy with 1.7% growth. 8.3% unemployment is a sign of "recovery"! We're on an "upswing" don't ya know?"
When have I ever written that I am "happy" with the rate of recovery? I haven't. What I wrote is that the economy is slowly recovering and that jobs have been added each month for the past 31 months straight.
It took almost 15 years for this nation to recover from the Great Depression, and it will take more than four years to recover from this, the second worst recession since then.
Unemployment peaked at 10.2% in October, 2009. The 8.3% figure today most certainly is an improvement.
Economic growth during the last two quarters of 2008 and the first two quarters of 2009 were negative in nature, peaking at -8.2% during the fourth quarter of 2008. Beginning in the third quarter of 2009 until the present day, the economy has grown consistently above the zero line, between a half-percent to 4.75% per quarter, which is weak but definitely an improvement.
"50 million on food stamps is a sign of "economic freedom" according to Queen bitch Pillosi."
I am no fan of Nancy Pelosi, nor am I responsible for her poor assessments or choice of words.
"So it's really not that bad at all! (according to alpo)."
Again, I have never stated that the conomy of this nation "is not bad at all." I have stated that in the Chattanooga area, it has definitely been worse, and that we are doing better.
"It's not Obama's fault you see. It's that damn Bush!"
I have categorically stated many times that no President, even GWB, is responsible, nor can they wave magic wands to magically create jobs in this nation, nor can they make people go out and spend money.
"Bush's $4 trillion deficit in eight years was the problem! Obama's $5 trillion in four years had nothing to do with it."
Under both administrations, they have had most of the same EXACT people in Congress, who voted to spend that money. There are many people to blame, not just one President or the other.
"Alpo claims to be in business for himself."
Yes I do, and yes I am.
"Remember alpo, you didn't build that, so you need to pony up and give it to the government before your liberal guilt overcomes you."
Unlike yourself and all the other Obama bashers who just live to interpret and take out of context, the President's words from time to time, I am in full appreciation of all my customers, my employees, the construction workers who built the roads and the very building that I purchased and now own that contains my business, and the taxpayers, former and present, who years ago paid for the paving of all the road that leads to my place of business.
There are many people, some who are dead and buried, who deserve credit for assisting me in the building of my fairly successful business that I enjoy today. I most certainly did not get here on my own.
There is an important question as to why nobody saw the rise in foreclosures and their linked mortgage-backed derivities from being a real danger to the country.
It was because both industries had been deregulated. Investment banks now had access to the nations homes. They stripped them of their wealth, crippled the nation with debt, and moved on to new targets.
Derivitives was an off-book market whose transactions were done in the dark. The banks have fought very hard to keep it that way.
Romney wants to deregulate even more. Smart move?
degage wrote: "Mira, Your graph was interesting. Note the low point was when the dems took over the house and senate in 2007 It went up from there."
Okay then, if you feel that all that happened is the result of the Democrats dominating both Houses of Congress, then you should have no trouble in citing the pieces of Legislation passed during those two years that led to the collapse of the economy over the last two years GWB was President.
If you're going to make an observation like that, then please`enlighten us with the rest of the story that proves it a relevant observation.
There's no other way that the Democrats could have been responsible for the collapse of the economy during those two years that they held control of both Houses of Congress, unless they passed some legislation that paved the road and caused it.
What were those bills? Which of them were signed by President Bush? Nothing passed by Congress becomes law without a President's signature on it.
Your assertion that the Democrats in Congress caused the financial collapse of this nation's economy would have landed with a thud on the desk right in front of GWB.
So let's see your evidence.
MTJohn, please explain to me how the the "wealthy" get wealthier at our expense."
Please also tell me who the "our" are.
And please explain "investing the proceeds to invest in a government that works well only for themselves."
And "Close, but no cigar" : What did I get right?
Degage, looking back at your comment, I may have misread what it was that you were stating. You added the comment "It went up from there."
Could it be that you were possibly giving credit to the Democrats for a rise in the employment numbers? If so, then please disregard my previous post, and I apologize in advance for directing my comments to you.
Many times over the last few years, many people that have blamed the Democrats for this mess, simply because the dominated both Houses of Congress during the last two years that GWB was President, when everything came crashing down, and that was what I was addressing.
The numbers behind that graph are even more interesting.
Lowest Unemployment: May 2007 4.4%
Last Decrease Before Crash: Feb 2008 4.9%
Rate when Lehman Bros Failed: Sep 2008 6.1%
Rate when Bush left DC: Jan 2009 7.8%
Last month rate same as now: Feb 2009 8.3%
Peak unemployment: Oct 2009 10.0%
Lowest unemployment after Crash: Apr 2012 8.1%
It might be fair to assign 1.5% of the employment problem to Obama's watch and 3.4% to Bush just based on the numbers. The question is how we keep this from ever happening again.
Easy to answer - Do you know where the money that was in your 401K and the money that was in your home went?
The answer: Goldman Sachs.
It flowed there through two channels. 1) direct bets that GS made against the derivities market and 2) GS was the final resting place of the tax-dollar funds flowing through the bailout of the investment banks and from the European rescues of Greece, Spain, and Italy (they've been busy).
Still believe in trickle down?
miraweb wrote: "Romney wants to deregulate even more. Smart move?"
This. OMG this.
The above has been a campaign promise spoken by Mitt Romney several times. He even made reference to it during his Convention speech. His desire to return to making some of the same mistakes that are without a doubt at the core of the negative consequences that this nation is suffering this very day, is one very big reason why this man should not be elected President.
Anyone who has any investments or a retirement account should be running as far away from Romney/Ryan as humanly possible, for both men have vowed to repeal Dodd-Frank and both men have expressed a desire to monkey with the Fed.
Here's a rather detailed dissection and fact-check of Mitt Romney's Convention Speech;
If you vote for Hussein Obama you are voting for another 6 trillion dollars in debt, an increase in unemployment, more downgrading of America credit, continued war in Afghanistan with no clear objective, more government take over of private industry, more job loses due to unfair regulations, more funneling money to the union bosses, a weakened military, more deterioration of the middle class, more decline in the median income, runaway inflation, continued high gas prices, more investments in failed energy companies.
But worst of all it will be a sign that more fools like alpussy are dumber than we think.
MTJohn, regarding the Republican party : "Three commandments are missing from the platform of the party of the Ten Commandments." and "1)thou shalt not steal; 2) thou shalt not bear false witness; and, 3) thou shalt not covet."
The Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats would holler "separation of church and state" ad nauseam if they did. Where have you been?
I would bet a Coca Cola that the Demoncrats will have no commandments or any Scripture reference in their platform. The hypocrisy would be palpable and would surely be met with derisive laughter.
Seriously, could you be any further out of touch?
ricardo said... Ujokin, I'm sure that Romney and his Bain cronies would like to set up lots of Chinese factories just like the one he visited in the video. I can't believe he's gullible enough to believe that BS about barbed wire fences and guard towers keeping people out. Puhleeze.
Plus, ricardo, that promise of 12 million jobs Mitty and Rynose are promising sounds like an eerily and disturbingly comparison to the size of a certain segment of American population. Maybe Biden knew what he was talking about after all when he implied the Romney gang would put people back in chains? hmmmmm SSLOL!
Ujokin: Plugs Biden hasn't been right on anything yet. (see cheap caps and Hair Plugs by Earl)
MTJohn, regarding your "the more wealth the wealthy and powerful accumulate, the more they will invest their wealth in ways that benefit all of the rest of us."
Well I'm certain that you consider the small business man wealthy. The small business man employs most of the people in the workforce. In other words they provide jobs which "benefit all of the rest of us." How can you not see that? How is it even possible that you can't see that? Please tell me.
According to you "the theory is pretty simple", and yes, I agree with you!
Less than 2% of small business owners have incomes over $250,000 per year. The remainder - and that includes the bulk of physicians, lawyers, landscapers, dog walkers, designers, plumbers, electricians, general contractors, accountants, and others - really could benefit from some regulatory help to lighten the burdens of hiring new employees and running the business.
However, what Romney has said he will do - kill the Dodd-Frank banking reforms, make Medicare a private insurance voucher system, and deregulate the oil industry have no impact on small businesses.
The few things he has mentioned that are business focused - reducing taxes and getting new trade agreements may have some benefits for small businesses, but seem to be really targeting large businesses.
Reducing the deficit would help large and small businesses, but it can't be done without raising taxes. Reagan had to do it. GHWB had to do it.
It is just not possible otherwise.
Romney won't go there, which means reducing the deficit is a pipe dream.
Health care costs is one of the biggest issues facing small business. The old system has been really devastating to small businesses.
Romney plans to "replace" the ACA but with the Congress he has, he may just be able to get a repeal. He'll never have the votes to pass a new bill. That leaves us with the old health care system that was falling apart. Not good news for small businesses.
That leaves regulatory reform. The problem for small business is many of the regulations are state and local, not federal.
There is work to be done at the federal level to ease the lives of small business people, but a lot of what makes running a business difficult is in the hands of the states.
Business people know the phrase "show me the money."
We are all still waiting for Romney to "show us the plan."
MTJohn, regarding your "However, experience has shown that the more wealth the wealthy and powerful accumulate, the more they invest their wealth in ways that benefit themselves."
Well, that is expected isn't it? When they use their wealth to start up a small business they do want to increase their wealth. They take a risk though. They hire you and me and that benefits you and me. It really does. This is common knowledge. This is the way it has always been done.
You seem to adhere to the mistaken belief that a small business man is suppose to just unselfishly provide jobs for you and me with no return or increase in wealth for himself. Can you really be that out of touch?
conservative wrote: "You seem to adhere to the mistaken belief that a small business man is suppose to just unselfishly provide jobs for you and me with no return or increase in wealth for himself. Can you really be that out of touch?"
Why don't you stick to the point the man was making, rather than to read more into what was posted?
The simple fact is that cutting taxes for the wealthy or for corporate America for that matter, has not resulted in any meaningful increase in jobs for the middle class over the past 10 years.
Job creation since President Obama has been in office has been far greater than it was during GWB's eight years in office. GWB's tax rate adjustments did not and still do not work to boost employment in numbers high enough to overcome the effects of a stagnant economy.
The only plan to create jobs that will ever begin to right our economy is going to have to include funneling more money back into the pockets of the lower and middle class or it will never work.
People in those two classes who have disposable income, will absolutely spend it. And given that most of this nation's population fall into those two lower income classes, it stands to reason that if people can only afford to budget for the necessities of life, their want lists keep growing and the economy will remain stagnant.
It's very hard to sell creature comforts to a nation of people whose income has dropped or who have been laid off from job after job, totally afraid to go into debt when their job prospects are constantly uncertain.
The middle class and the poor will sit on their cash reserves like the rich do, but for totally different reasons.
Those who have higher incomes resent paying more in the form of taxes because it makes them feel as if they are supporting an entire nation of "deadbeats."
Well what in the hell do these people think created this nation of "deadbeats," if indeed these same people are the "job creators," as is being shoved down our throats all the time?
People whose incomes at or barely above minimum wage do not buy new cars, houses, or shop for name brand clothes. People whose retirement accounts have been raided will step up contributions, further eroding the amount of disposable income left over at the end of the month. People who live in an aura of uncertainty, who live with the thoughts that they may not have enough to support their families, are loathe to spend a dollar more than what is absolutely necessary to be constantly prepared for the worst.
If the wealthy expect those who are barely getting by to pay the bulk of the taxes needed to fund the expenses of Gov't, to house, feed, and clothe their families, and to have enough left over to boost the economy by patronizing their businesses, then this country is indeed doomed.
This nation may be in the midst of a Mexican stand-off.
see above
We're talking the blame america first crowd.
Viewer warning: Never ask Alpo for directions.
MTJohn, regarding your "Wealth redistribution is not an expression of envy - it is a demonstrable fact. It also is fact that the rate of wealth redistribution has accelerated since 1980."
Well now, the truth is there has been a great deal of "wealth redistribution" and it has largely been due to envy and covetousness, especially by Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats. These have been at the forefront in redistributing wealth. Who said this? - "we are going to redistribute the wealth"
The many federal programs have done just that. Do you deny the increase in number and cost of these programs since your date of 1980?
Don't you know that 47% of American households pay no federal income taxes? Don't you know that these 47% are the ones who are largely eligible for the programs which are funded by the "wealthy" whom you envy and falsely accuse of wealth distribution.?
How can you possibly believe money or wealth is taken from people who pay little or no income taxes and given to the "wealthy?" Now that is a "demonstrable" lie!!!
Actually, it is 13% of households qualify for support such as Social Security, SSDI, SSI, and other assistance.
I'm pretty willing to give the elderly (whose median income is about 1/3 that of younger folks) a pass on taxes. They've already paid quite a lot.
Not sure who the other 33% are who aren't paying taxes, but they aren't the poor, the old, or the disabled.
I can only think of a few ways to pay zero income taxes. Many of these don't cut Medicare, FICA or consumption tax:
Working with low wages
Claim a substantial business expenses or losses
Maximize deferred income in health saving accounts, IRAs, 401k, and related instruments
Hide money from the tax man offshore
Find and exploit loopholes in the tax code
The first method is available to any American. The rest are the domain of the better-off. I will be very interested to see Our Mitt's 2011 tax return on October 15. Should be a lot of innovative ideas there.
MTJohn, regarding your "Of course there is a liberal bias in the media. There also is a conservative bias in the media and that bias has the larger megaphone."
Correction please, if you were to combine the viewership of CNBC, CNN, MSNBC, ABC,CBS, NBC you will find far greater numbers than those for FOX. Also FOX has many Liberal commentators (fair and balanced) unlike those other networks.
I personally don't consider FOX Conservative in a strict sense, just a relative sense in comparison to the Liberal networks.
"Don't you know that 47% of American households pay no federal income taxes?"
This number is a statistical anomaly. That number usually stays around upper 30 to low 40%.
"Correction please, if you were to combine the viewership of CNBC, CNN, MSNBC, ABC,CBS, NBC"
All of those networks are not liberally biased. ABC and CBS are very neutral.
"Also FOX has many Liberal commentators (fair and balanced) unlike those other networks."
Fox does not have "many" liberal commentators. They have a few. The networks you mentioned have a few conservative commentators as well. Try again.
"I personally don't consider FOX Conservative in a strict sense, just a relative sense in comparison to the Liberal networks."
And you would be wrong.
A sad story on the news tonight. A woman had coverage under a small business health plan from Aetna. She got cancer and the plan raised her premiums multiple times (as they can for smaller plans) until, eventually, she was left with no coverage.
She applied for Medicaid and for disability benefits but has not yet received them. She died before she found out that her state, Florida, already has a high-risk pool from the ACA where she could have got coverage.
This is what drives me crazy about the health care debate.
There is so much garbage being thrown around that real people with real needs never hear about the things we have now (like the risk pools and coverage up to age 26) and know nothing about the things that are coming next in the pipeline.
The insurers and the Congress have taken all the oxygen in the room.
All of the on-air time that could be spent helping us understand the actual law is sucked into political soundbites and Congressional cage match play-by-plays.
Easy123: You need to stay away until your skull knits together.
TOES02800 said... "I think dupe_abides wants to be Obama's "macho, macho man". Maybe he heard Biden say Obama carries a "big stick"."
This is the kind of crap you spew when you don't paste? You should consider working at the Comedy Catch. You could clean the spit off of the microphones each night.
Miraweb, you make an excellent point about the ACA. When Pelosi said what she did about it, that they needed to go ahead and pass the bill so that we could actually see what's in it, and she got lampooned by the Repubs for making what they called a presumptuous and ludicrous remark, she knew exactly what she was talking about. She knew full well that the Obama haters were spreading so many lies about it, with so many people believing them, that the only way people could judge for themselves the true efficacy of the new bill would be for them to gain first-hand knowledge of it by seeing how it applied to them in real terms.
The Repubs have been fighting it so hard because they know that once it goes into effect it will prove to be more popular than they want it to be, and then there will be absolutely nothing they can do about it. Poor saps.
Obama said it wouldn't cost the taxpayer a "single dime". But it turns out to be a huge tax on middle class people. What lies have been spread about it? Obama himself lied about it! You dems are happy now, but just wait until the bill comes due for it. You'll be agonizing for a way to blame the republicans for it.
Good video of the nut case with 15 kids demanding she and they be provided for. That is only one of 1000's we have created with the system we have. Now what do we do? The probability of the 15 being welfare dependent is high. It is a bigger problem each generation.
Sad as the situation is I still DO NOT think any government has the right to take from some to give to others. We all benefit from basic government services such as protection, roads, streams and air quality, parks, commerce etc. etc. etc. regardless of how little is contributed. This is equality and spreading wealth.
Where are all the churches and charities? She and the kids are fortunate that everyone is not as uncaring and insensitive to the situation as I am. I contribute to and would direct them to charities that receive voluntary donations and provide food, clothing and shelter.
TOES02800 wrote: "Obama said it wouldn't cost the taxpayer a "single dime". But it turns out to be a huge tax on middle class people."
Here ya' go troll. Educate yourself a little bit!;
As for the war on old folks,SOME liberals like Easy have one. I believe Coffin dodger would be a bit disrespectful of the elderly. This senior citizen has noticed that he makes remarks about seniors more than anyone else on this site. He says his parents taught him to think for himself, well he didn't think very well when the tried to teach him respect. Yes Easy you do , coffin dodger is not the first time you called jack,conservative old people,just because you don't agree with them. In turn they call you a child. Nobody wins with those attitudes.
TOES02800 wrote: "That would be like forcing someone to buy an expensive car without them even seeing it first. Even if they didn't want a new car in the first place. Ridiculous."
The only thing ridiculous about your argument is that the Republicans used to be for self-responsibility until the Democrats came on board with ObamaCare and the individual mandate. Now it seems that the Republicans are against self-responsibility.
People will never "need" an expensive car. Most people in this nation purchase the inexpensive models if they buy new or they get by with used cars.
Not many people at all make their way through life without the need for health care. So it is an easy stretch to determine that having health care coverage should be one of the neccessities of life.
Thus, it is quite reasonable to expect people who can afford to insure themselves and their families for the expense of health care should someone fall ill, to do so. After all, aren't most Republicans/Conservatives of the opinion that their taxes should not be used to financially support people who are quite capable of supporting themselves?
Why do some people set themselves up to be hypocrites on this one issue? How many conservatives and Republican cheerleaders who write posts in this very forum expressed outrage over social programs like welfare, TANF, disability fraud, etc., but when it comes to an expectation for people to insure themselves to pay the expensive costs of health care, they suddenly throw up their hands in mock outrage, declaring that the mandate is akin to a violation of some imaginary constitutional provision that provides that everyone has a right to be a bum and a burden to the nation's taxpayers if they refuse to provide health care insurance for their families.
Clearly and undeniably, there are people who cannot afford insurance, and there are those who can easily afford insurance, but refuse to do so, becaue they think they will never get sick.
It is the latter category of people who should be forced to insure themselves. ObamaCare provides assistance to those who cannot afford to insure themselves on their own.
If people would look at the plan with an honest and open mind, they would see the win/win situation in it for everybody and their individual concerns. If people would take the time to educate themselves to the specifics and the facts, the rumors and the lies would stop.
300 million people in this country have health care insurance. They currently have no worries if they fall ill.
It's long past time for many people in this nation to shut-up, stand aside, and to allow people who truly do care about other people beside themselves, to be allowed to work to solve a very big problem facing far too many Americans today.
There's nothing "ridiculous" about that at all.
Harp3330 wrote: "Good video of the nut case with 15 kids demanding she and they be provided for. That is only one of 1000's we have created with the system we have. Now what do we do? The probability of the 15 being welfare dependent is high. It is a bigger problem each generation."
We've created them? Who is this "We?" I do not excuse people like that, nor will I defend them for one minute, but short of a law being passed that would demand the immediate seizure of any child born into circumstances where the parent(s) are unable to provide for the costs of raising it, leaving the adults to fend for themselves, there are no easy solutions to the problem.
With all the people running around declaring that every life deserves a chance to live, abortions are out of the question, sterilization of such people is way too controversial, so what do we do?
The children have to be supported somehow, don't they?
"Sad as the situation is I still DO NOT think any government has the right to take from some to give to others. We all benefit from basic government services such as protection, roads, streams and air quality, parks, commerce etc. etc. etc. regardless of how little is contributed. This is equality and spreading wealth."
This is a problem that has been pondered for decades. There are no solutions that any clear majority can agree on. So, life will go on, welfare babies will continue to be born to welfare queens, and the American people will continue to support them.
"Where are all the churches and charities? She and the kids are fortunate that everyone is not as uncaring and insensitive to the situation as I am. I contribute to and would direct them to charities that receive voluntary donations and provide food, clothing and shelter."
The "demand" is far greater than the charities out there that can or will help.
In my opinion, a solution that makes a little sense, would be to provide absolutely free and widely accessible birth control to any and every citizen out there who would use it. From condoms all the way up to IUD's, the prevention of an unwanted pregnancy should be a goal of everyone, including the Catholic Church.
It won't solve the problem in every case, for there are women out there who love babies and who love being pregnant. There are those out there that absolutely know that the key to a welfare check, a free apartment, and food enough to feed themselves, is to pop out a baby that they cannot afford to raise.
Short of altering our justice system to include a provision for passing a death sentence upon irresponsible people, there are no easy answers.
alpro said...
It's long past time for many people in this nation to shut-up, stand aside, and to allow people who truly do care about other people beside themselves, to be allowed to work to solve a very big problem facing far too many Americans today.
There's nothing "ridiculous" about that at all.
alpro....that is a rather sanctimonious position to take with at least one half or more of the people in a republic form of government. Providing reasonable health care for all is a good objective although not a constitutionally defined right. Obamacare is defended like it was the ultimate, the best and only way to do it. It reminds me of a kid being told their poop smells like roses and they think they have done something good when they crap all over somebody. I would bet you have not read the AHCA as passed.
A must read from one leftist to the others: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/09/03/john-cusack-obama-just-another-ivy-league-hole#ixzz25PI0e1e1
Dems are utterly shameless... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/03/dems-bring-in-crowds-by-busload-to-fill-stadium-for-obama-speech/
alpro comments re welfare mothers...
The "demand" is far greater than the charities out there that can or will help.
Apparently the demand is more than the government can afford. I am a proponent of allowing tax payers to REDUCE their taxes owed by up to 20% of the amount owed if contributed to a qualifying charity. Most charities are much more efficient than any government involved
Al also said....
In my opinion, a solution that makes a little sense, would be to provide absolutely free and widely accessible birth control to any and every citizen out there who would use it. From condoms all the way up to IUDs, the prevention of an unwanted pregnancy should be a goal of everyone, including the Catholic Church.
I agree totally and would encourage and provide free sterilization as well. The nut case with 15 kids demanding someone support and the sorry azz man fathering 10 of them should both be neutered.
Harp3339 wrote: "alpro....that is a rather sanctimonious position to take with at least one half or more of the people in a republic form of government."
If people were more honest in their assessments of ObamaCare, then I would not have to resort to becoming "sanctimonious." But you have to know that there has been very little honesty coming from those who oppose ObamaCare.
"Providing reasonable health care for all is a good objective although not a constitutionally defined right."
I care not one whit what the constitution defines in regard to health care. Health care is not a constitutional issue. It is a moral issue. Conservatives/Republicans/Ron Paulians love to portray themselves as authorities and preservationists of morality, but they sure fall on their faces on this issue.
If an embryo has a right to life, then people of all ages should have the same expectation of equal access to a health care system that sustains their lives for as long as possible too.
"Obamacare is defended like it was the ultimate, the best and only way to do it."
Nobody I know defends it to that degree. It is however defended as a good start. It is defended as a solution for most people who do not or cannot afford the costs of providing health care for themselves.
"It reminds me of a kid being told their poop smells like roses and they think they have done something good when they crap all over somebody."
Well goodness knows that some of your exressed positions on issues that have been raised in here, could be used against you to describe yourself in such terms.
It's certainly no secret that you're a self-preservation kinda guy, with little regard for others. So it's rather easy to see where you are coming from whenever you post an opinion in here.
If it's not a problem for you, it is of no concern to you. If it is a problem of yours, you sing a totally different tune.
"I would bet you have not read the AHCA as passed."
The hell I haven't. I have a saved .pdf file in a folder on my computer containg every word of the entire bill as it was passed by Congress, that I refer to routinely whenever the need arises to correct someone's attempt to relate misinformation.
"How could both news outlets have such differing accounts?"
"Two possible scenarios."
The MSM is supporting Obama - no matter what.
No matter what - Obama is being supported by the MSM.
Liberal Media Takes Quote Completely Out of Context to Paint Romney as Out of Touch
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rusty-weiss/2012/09/01/liberal-media-takes-quote-completely-out-context-paint-romney-out-touch#ixzz25OEIoziy
Al, you have said in the past that you have a pre existing condition and can not get health care. You have also said you had not taken care of yourself for a few years which caused you to be hospitalized. So why didn't you take care of yourself Al? Don't you have a responsibility to listen and follow what your doctor tells you to do, or you feel it is the governments role to do make sure you exercise and eat right? You have posted several times you eat at restaurants. How healthy is the food at the restuarnats you eat at Al? Do you eat the low calorie foods from the menu or do you order the deep fried food or hit the buffet line?
What else should the Govt. force us to buy Al? A membership to a gym because they believe working out will make us more healthy? Maybe they will force us to pay an extra tax to eat at the restaurants you love to go to. Is that except able Al. How much control should the govt have and how much force should they be allowed to use to make use purchase a product?
You liberals love to tell us how we should live and what we should buy but this never applies to you.
mymy: It's shameful. And the media is forever tarnished. Old school journalists are spinning in their caskets.
Rains Wash Away 'Mount Obama'
alpro said...
It's certainly no secret that you're a self-preservation kinda guy, with little regard for others. So it's rather easy to see where you are coming from whenever you post an opinion in here.
You are pretty accurate in your assessment. If being unable to provide for myself results in my death then so be it. I have never and never will ask you or anyone else for financial assistance. I have no issue with helping children, the disabled, the elderly but screw those that are healthy and able to provide for themselves.
You seem to have no qualms with insisting that others fulfill your bleeding heart one for all and all for one centralized government control mentality. It is evident that a democrat can lay a stink bomb down and you will justify and defend it. I can't see either party being so deserving of such blind loyalty. My not voting will likely be a default Obama vote but I see D.C. as hopeless anyway. If there is anything to salvage in 4 years we will get a chance to again evaluate all options.
Jack_Dennis said... "mymy: It's shameful. And the media is forever tarnished. Old school journalists are spinning in their caskets."
Yeah, Jack_, that started with the advent of Fox News. One of you rubes tried to pin Murdoch's tactics on the left the other day, to beat all. Truly shameful biased lies on an industrial scale. Every day. Thanks for caring.
dude_: you are truly FUBAR. seriously.
You lefties out there just can't stand the fact that there is one news channel that doesn't spin out the liberal lies.One voice in the darkness that brings light to the bias.And to make matters worse,it has the most viewership of them all!
In 2010, the network's programs took the top 10 spots for most-watched cable news programs in the 25–54 demographic and the top 12 spots among total cable news programs viewers.Wikipedia
It just scares the hell outta the left that there is a media outlet that doesn't toe the liberal line.
Just wait: Fri. there will be a new jobs report! You can bet it will not be good.
Guess what is going to happen during the Dim 0 crat convention?
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – A California delegate has been ejected from the Democratic National Convention after he allegedly tried to impersonate a member of Congress and hassled the hotel staff trying to assist a drunken, passed-out delegate.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/03/california-delegate-leaves-convention-after-trying-to-impersonate-congress/#ixzz25Q1Mq422
alpro said...
If an embryo has a right to life, then people of all ages should have the same expectation of equal access to a health care system that sustains their lives for as long as possible too.
I don't subscribe to either of those beliefs. I am pro-choice on both ends of the life cycle.
tu_quoque said...If we want these funds invested in businesses in this country and thus creating jobs for our citizens then we will have to make business creation and maintenance attractive here.
Please tu_quoqe don't confuse those that don't want it to be like that. They prefer taxing the heck out of them and blasting them if they make a profit even though they keep buying imported products.
It is amusing how people drive their imported car, watch their imported TV, use their imported phone, munching on imported food while talking to their family and friends about those terrible American businesses that laid off their neighbors. Who with any reasonable intelligence would construct or invest in a manufacturing facility in a country with the tax rates, regulations duplication and excess that we have plus government supported unionization? There is no surprise considering the number of career politicians and lawyers we have elected.
Click on the link below to see the difference between a wonderful wife and mother and just a plain old corporate wife.
tdern writes:
You lefties out there just can't stand the fact that there is one news channel that doesn't spin out the liberal lies. One voice in the darkness that brings light to the bias.And to make matters worse,it has the most viewership of them all!
Personally, I love Fox News. It provides so much rich material for the Daily Show that I can count on a good belly laugh pretty much every day.
I also keep in mind that all you need in this country to get the whole country watching is O.J., a helicopter, and a white Ford Bronco.
Or a guy who sings badly. Or Facebook.
We're pretty easy to please.
I think the Congressional Republicans needs to man-up and take their lumps.
The country faced its worse crisis in 89 years and the GOP leadership decided that sitting on their ample behinds rather than getting the country on its feet was what they wanted to do.
Unemployment is actually down - despite no help at all from the GOP. It might have been down a lot more with less time on imaginary legislation and more time getting the country to work.
A lot could have been done in four years. It wasn't. By deliberate choice.
It was the dummest strategy ever at the worst time in history. They were all about protecting their own jobs.
Whatever it takes. Whatever the cost to the country.
Will Romney keep his promises? I don't know but, I do know Obama doesn't hesitate to let his alligator mouth over load his chickadee arse. Just a few examples; I promise to cut the deficit in half (a debt double in 3.5 years), I will bring employment down to well under 8%(It remains at 8.3% with M6 at over 17%), I will close Gitmo in my first year in office (little change in the population after 3.5 yrs). Promises may not be a good criteria for making a voting decision.
Did you hear Obama say if you have health care now you can keep what you have.....he failed to add unless your employer decides to change what and how they provide it or how much of the premium they pay or the insurance company no longer offers what you have without significant premium increases to handle the added coverages required by law.
miraweb said...
I think the Congressional Republicans needs to man-up and take their lumps.
The country faced its worse crisis in 89 years and the GOP leadership decided that sitting on their ample behinds rather than getting the country on its feet was what they wanted to do.
Unemployment is actually down - despite no help at all from the GOP. It might have been down a lot more with less time on imaginary legislation and more time getting the country to work.
Your premise requires one to accept that the house legislation passed but Reid not allowing a senate vote on any of them would not have had a positive effect and only Obama's idea were of value. What are some specific rejected Obama items that would have increased jobs and reduced unemployment? Why will the senate not vote on his budget proposal? Without a telepromptor he ahhh, uhh, oh yeah, you know ah ah ah let me say this about ah uh uh uh that.
The rabid righties are out in full force today. You guys seem to be having a grand old time high-fiving each other for spouting off your nonsense. Sometimes I can handle the idiocy that you guys vomit up but other times it just depresses the hell out of me, how irrational and dumbed down you can be. Alprova, you, miraweb, dude_abides, and a small number of earlier commenters are the only ones talking any sense here. Personally I don't know how you can deal with this insane asylum atmosphere of raving mad lunatics. And I am not exaggerating when I say that. Most of what they are saying is absolutely insane and beyond any degree of reason. I can't stand the god-awful stench here today - it literally makes me sick to my stomach. You smug, self-important "rugged individualist" types can stay here all day and sling your sh#t and guffaw and snort and cackle with glee over how smart you think you are, but this cess pool of idiocy is just too much for me to handle. Have at it, cretins. Wallow in the filth of your own crap.
Well - if you really want to go full pedantic:
No its not … its headed back up – Dunce !!
Darling TQQ -
it is = it's
it belongs to = its
Real legislation can be done but it takes substantial compromise and cooperation. "My way or highway" legislation doesn't serve the country whether it originates in either legislative body.
It wastes time. It wastes money. It doesn't solve our problems.
TQQ: Great example of one of the best lying techniques in Congress: playing with statistics to say something that people's real experience knows does not reflect in anyway the actual truth. Also known as "Ryanspeak".
The only trouble is, we were all there in 2008. We saw the country collapse. We know when it happened, why it happened, and why it might happen again.
Harp - I'm not sure where you were going with that.
I am pretty sure employers have always been able to change their coverages. Most negotiate it every year.
The main difference is now, if an employer drops health insurance, you can get it somewhere else (even if you have a pre-existing condition).
Until now, the only plan available for many working people was SOL.
rick1 wrote: "Al, you have said in the past that you have a pre existing condition and can not get health care. You have also said you had not taken care of yourself for a few years which caused you to be hospitalized. So why didn't you take care of yourself Al?"
Well let's see. My six figure income was cut completely off, my employer sponsored insurance was canceled. I spent most of the three years repositioning myself to recover financially. Suffice it to say that my health was not at the top of my list at the time.
"Don't you have a responsibility to listen and follow what your doctor tells you to do, or you feel it is the governments role to do make sure you exercise and eat right?"
Onjection!! You're leading the witness.
My problem was not that I failed to exercise or eat right, at least by that point in my life. I had lost a great deal of weight due to living a better lifestyle. I put off seeing the doctor and taking medication because I could not afford to do so.
Everything started going south in June, 2011.
"You have posted several times you eat at restaurants. How healthy is the food at the restuarnats you eat at Al? Do you eat the low calorie foods from the menu or do you order the deep fried food or hit the buffet line?"
My diet primarily consists of vegetables and fresh fruit, with a very ocassional serving of meat. I eat the same things when I dine out.
"What else should the Govt. force us to buy Al? A membership to a gym because they believe working out will make us more healthy?"
Hey...if Americans keep porking up, why not at some point in the future?
"Maybe they will force us to pay an extra tax to eat at the restaurants you love to go to. Is that except able Al."
Of course it's not acceptable, because you have no clue to the restaurants that I love to go to, nor what I eat when I go to them. I'm very careful to select sensible foods and to avoid that which aggravates my conditions.
"How much control should the govt have and how much force should they be allowed to use to make use purchase a product?"
Dunno. That's too broad a question to expect a reasonable answer.
"You liberals love to tell us how we should live and what we should buy but this never applies to you."
Of course it applies to me. It always has.
Since we last visited the subject of my personal health care issues, I am happy to now report that I have obtained health care insurance, through the State of Goergia's Pre-existing Condition Insurance Pool, which was set up last year as one of the early high-risk insurance programs outlined in ObamaCare.
One of my physicians turned me on to the program. I pay $455 a month. While my monthly expenses have not been reduced very much, because the premium doesn't quite off-set the savings in co-pays, at least if I am hospitalized in the future, most of those expenses will now be covered.
You're full of it again alpo. Politi"fact" is already a liberal biased, debunked "source". Ever notice how the "truth-o-meter" always seems to come down on the liberal side? That's not by accident.
Just look up Warren Fiske's background.
Virginia Politifact editor has history of voting in Democratic primaries
Court confirms: Obamacare funded by middle class tax increases
The funny thing is there are good facts and valid points on the conservative side of the argument.
The GOP has just become so used to making stuff up that they keep doing it even when there is no need.
Kind of like the proverbial child who lies when the truth would serve him better.
My best laugh came from today's Tea Party email offering:
"Feed America a crap sandwich with a smile, it's still a crap sandwich."
Amen, brother. Sing it loud!
President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/with-landmark-lawsuit-barack-obama-pushed-banks-to-give-subprime-loans-to-chicagos-african-americans/#ixzz25R0QLEqe
You people are as stupid as you are blind.
Harp3339 wrote: "You are pretty accurate in your assessment. If being unable to provide for myself results in my death then so be it. I have never and never will ask you or anyone else for financial assistance."
Well, while I certainly hope that you never have to face that dilemma, I'm quite sure that you, like most all other people, will swallow that lump of pride and do whatever you have to in order to live.
"I have no issue with helping children, the disabled, the elderly but screw those that are healthy and able to provide for themselves."
"You seem to have no qualms with insisting that others fulfill your bleeding heart one for all and all for one centralized government control mentality. It is evident that a democrat can lay a stink bomb down and you will justify and defend it. I can't see either party being so deserving of such blind loyalty."
Uh huh...
"My not voting will likely be a default Obama vote but I see D.C. as hopeless anyway. If there is anything to salvage in 4 years we will get a chance to again evaluate all options."
My vote for Obama is a waste of my time, for Mitt Romney will carry all three states in our area, but I will cast it anyway.
Of course there will be plenty to salvage in four years, regardless of who wins or stays in the White House. If Mitt Romney wins, I don't think that my life will be altered at all.
However, if the Republicans win both Houses of Congress, and if they successfully repeal ObamaCare, it's back to being uninsured again for me. But, I've been there and done that before. I'll do whatever I have to do and play my hand with the cards I am dealt.
Biden: "If it weren't so hot, I'd tell you how better off we are"
Obama voters need some of that free Obamacare for a mental evaluation
TOES02800 wrote: "You're full of it again alpo. Politi"fact" is already a liberal biased, debunked "source". Ever notice how the "truth-o-meter" always seems to come down on the liberal side? That's not by accident."
Democrats have amassed many "pants on fire" assessments on that site too. The reason why I like and trust Politifact is because they document every position and assessment they make.
Facts will always be facts, and I have found no evidence to suggest that Politifact and a couple of other factchecking sites on the web, are guilty of imposing any personal bias into their efforts to sort fact from fiction.
You're a lost cause, so don't think for one second that I post to sway you into recognizing the truth to a thing you post. I do it to keep you from infecting the minds of people who do care about knowing the truth.
So believe whatever you wish. You're nothing but a troll who posts to get a rise out of people, and the content of your posts prove it.
TOES - Just want to be sure I have this right.
An attorney from Chicago during the Clinton administration (when 23 million jobs were created) won a discrimination suit against Citibank that then forced Senators Gramm, Leachy and Bliley to repeal Glass-Steagall.
Then the powerless Citibank and friends were driven (completely against their will) to tie derivitive trades to mortgage backed securities and completely implode the world economy leaving millions out of work and millions of homes in foreclosure, including some of the people in Chicago.
The implosion occurs, as scheduled, just two months before the attorney from Chicago wins the presidency - giving him his dream job of cleaning up after a worldwide collapse.
Ok . . . Just what are you smoking, over there?
TOES02800 wrote: "Rickaroo agreeing with other liberals. What a shocker."
You're clearly confused in your mind and have him or her mistaken with another member. Rickaroo has been consistent in expressing an objection to all things coming from the right.
You're not fooling anybody alpo. You try hard to come across as the smooth talker, but the content is less than credible. How is my producing video and quotes from the horses' mouths being a troll? Hell, I could say the same about you. Your false sense of the liberal point being the only valid point speaks VOLUMES about you. You're the Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow of TFP. Sell your fullofitness to who will buy it. I'll keep posting videos and quotes from the people. You can keep using liberal leaning websites to try and prove yourself.
mira: I never said Obama "imploded" the world economy. But he sure did his part in his domain. He's part of the problem. Now that he's president, he's a much bigger part of the problem.
moon4kat, conservatives think democrats are liars and The democrats think conservatives are liars. We won't change our minds and you won't change your mind. Problem is some think they can change the others mind by name calling. I'm not saying you are a name caller just that some on this site are. Too bad we all can't be a little more cival.
One more thing Alpo, do you have to make all your comments so long? can't you say anything in less words? Your posts are tiresome. To write a letter to the editor you have to keep it 200 word and under , but not so here. Maybe there should be a limit here too.
These liberals are so mesmerized by Hussein Obama they are not capable of holding him accountable for all the lies he told them when he was running for election. He has not fulfilled one promise he made to these blind liberals and they are to stupid to see this. These liberals like alpussy and rickeroo even lack the courage to ask Hussein Obama or any of their candidates to explain what Hussein Obama wants to move the country to or what he wants to change it to. It is amazing how gullible they are.
"The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama's first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers's home".
"The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I've recently spent days looking through them...."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2008/09/23/barack-obama-bill-ayers-stanley-kurtz-makes-connection#ixzz25RKlNDxW
Obama the domestic terrorist?
miraweb said... Harp - I'm not sure where you were going with that.
I am pretty sure employers have always been able to change their coverages. Most negotiate it every year.
They have been able to and normally it is a premium adjustment to cover added cost. The current trend for next year is much different. Most large employers are self insured at cost plus about 4% to an insurer to administer it. The employer defines the coverage they will pay X% of the anticipated premium. Many of them are opting out of this practice specifying a fixed amount they will pay per employee toward health insurance. Next year with all the unknowns, the coverage mandates such as a kid to age 26 and other mandates adding to the cost, employers will make a fixed amount deposit to an HSA for employees or retirees and the employee will have to select and pay for their own coverage, use it to pay medical expense or taxes for not having coverage. This results from the unknown potential cost of Obamacare. This enables the employer to determine what health care cost to them will be. So, you can keep what you have is BS and the supporters of Obama care knew it was.
Al was asked "How much control should the govt have and how much force should they be allowed to use to make use purchase a product?"
Al responded "Dunno. That's too broad a question to expect a reasonable answer."
Al was asked "What else should the Govt. force us to buy Al? A membership to a gym because they believe working out will make us more healthy?"
Al's response was "Hey...if Americans keep porking up, why not at some point in the future?"
In other words you are in favor of a totaltarian form of government.
RickyRoo That stench may be your upper lip.
Obamacare: Lies, Mistruths, Falsehoods and Fabrications
"Legalization of something does not necessarily make it a good idea. It was once legal to own a slave. Democrats who voted against abolishing slavery in 1864, have been doing their part ever since to enslave Americans to one social program or another. Obamacare is just the latest example".
Here's Obama's budget director lying out his ass.
Watch President's Budget Director Contradict President's Legal Argument for Obamacare
Even if you believe the administration claim to have helped 50,000 people with medical conditions gain coverage in the past two years, that's just 50,000 out of a population of more than 300 million. Harldy enough to justify overhauling the entire health-care system and depriving Americans of their liberty. The pre-existing-condition problem has been overblown by politicians. It's the old drill: Create a crisis, and then claim to solve it.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/they_re_still_lying_about_obamacare_CZx9G63bHeJb4b3zhogQMJ#ixzz25RXBU4gh
Harp -
You make a good point about the uncertainty that the continued fighting about ACA is causing for a lot of people. Employers and insurers work on longer timeframes than most of us and they can only plan ahead as far as they can see.
That is one of the main reasons for the phased implementation - to give everyone a chance to do what they have to do to be ready.
The legal challenge to the Supreme Court did make some people wait to move - but that is over. The law is constitutional.
The only remaining uncertainty is Romney's statement that he would toss the whole thing - leaving us back where we were before and without a Congress that can give him a bill to replace it.
As far as I can see, the uncertainty is being driven by the folks who have a financial hold on the GOP.
The law itself is pretty clear.
I do think this ongoing battle is actually harming people. With all the smoke and mirrors there has been very little time to tell people what they've got or haven't got under the new law.
If Alprova's physician hadn't said something, how would he have known he could get coverage?
Toes,even with ObamaCare there will still be 30 million uninsured.
Well mira, that's because they passed the law in the darkness of night on Christmas eve. Under locked doors in secrecy. Despite the fact that Obama said it would all be on C-span and his would be the most "transparent" administration in American history. Both were just two more lies from Obama.
Yes, Toes - they passed the law. That's how we do things in this country.
The law was challenged and the Supreme Court said it was constitutional. Also, how we do things in this country.
All three branches of the government are involved on this one.
August 1 was the implementation of free screening exams. A very good thing. This will save lives.
Eliminating the idea of dropping sick people because of pre-existing conditions was long over due. The insurance industry has been cherry-picking for decades. At the cost of people's health and lives. Done deal.
The recession made extending insurance for the under-26s even more important. They have the highest unemployment rate out there. Done deal.
Small businesses have been hurt the worst by the past health care environment. Coverage has gone down. Costs have gone up. That is the alternative to moving forward.
Romney won't have the votes to do anything else.
Top five Obamacare lies made by Hussein Obama
Yeah rick1, Wasn't the main goal of Obamacare to cover "every American" in the first place? So Obamacare doesn't even do what it was intended to do. It doesn't matter though, the main goal of Obamacare was to create another liberal entitlement for the gathering of democrat voters. Much like Johnson did with the unions.
Al with the amount of time you spend on the computer each day posting on this forum why didn't you take the time to find out for yourself that Georgia offered pre exisiting insurance. Just do a google serach and it will come righ up.
You make excuses as to why you did not take care of your health. There are lot of programs avaiable such as pharmacutical companies will help people with the cost of some their prescriptions, there are prescription savings cards you could purchase in order to help ou buy your medication. You still could have seen your doctor and worked out a payment plan. It is all about personal responsability but it appears you want the government to make those decisions for you.
Government run healthcare is far from the only route to affordable healthcare. How about reigning in frivolous law suits? Go after the ambulance chasers that make doctor's and hospitals insurance premiums so high in the first place. Minimize damages from the myriad lawsuits that plague the healthcare industry. These are the real reasons why healthcare costs have skyrocketed. That and government regulations that make medical device and pharmaceutical companies spend billions unnecessarily.
Instead of trying these simple methods of controlling costs, the democrats went whole hog on taking over the entire health care industry. Would you get rid of your house because of some peeling paint or a cracked sidewalk? Many things could have been done before jumping in to the last resort that is Obamacare.
The man can certainly speak for himself but I understand Al's dilemma. When a system has excluded you for 30 years or more, you don't wake up expecting that has changed.
TOES - Fun fact! Executive orders have numbers. You can see how many there are. George Washington made the first one to establish the Mint.
There were 13,488 in place when Obama was inaugurated. There were some real gems during the Bush years. "Trial of Unlawful Enemy Combatants by Military Tribunal" was a real fav along with "Furthering the Sharing of Terrorism Information to Protect Americans."
Wolf Blitzer interviewed DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and confronted her with the truth about Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan's Medicare proposals. Both men have said repeatedly that they would not change anything for Americans under the age of 55. DWS refused to acknowledge the truth and continued to stutter, lie and bark that they are going to ruin Medicare for American seniors. Of course she didn't mention that under the Democrats non-plan for Medicare, there won't be anything left for those of us under 55 years old, and there certainly won't be anything left for our children. I don't know how she stands herself.
What executive order was it that Bush signed that costs medicare $716 billion again? Which one did he sign that forced the country's people to purchase a product? Protecting Americans from terrorists? How terrible! Which order did Bush sign to allow untold millions of illegals to take jobs away from Americans? You're comparing apples to oranges now. Keep reaching.
Toes, you made some good points on how government has already increased the cost of healthcare. States mandating that insurance companies offer cerrtain coverages that you do not need but are still required to purchase increases your cost. When only a linmited number of insurance companies are allowed to operate in a state increases costs as well because it reduces competition.
Toes, we both know this is not about healthcare this is about the government having total control of our lives.
TOES - I have to give you this one. Bush's Medicare Part D only came in at $640 billion in unfunded costs which is less than $716 billion (though ACA is fully funded).
Both were laws - passed by the Congress - not executive orders.
Rick1 - Most states have almost no competition now between insurers. Getting information where people can see it in the exchanges will be one way to level that playing field. Perhaps, not as lucrative for the insurance industry, but a real win for everybody else.
"What executive order was it that Bush signed that costs medicare $716 billion again?"
"Which one did he sign that forced the country's people to purchase a product?"
No one is forced to buy anything. Try again.
"Which order did Bush sign to allow untold millions of illegals to take jobs away from Americans?"
These people are Americans. They are valuable members of society. They are educated as well. Try again.
"You're comparing apples to oranges now. Keep reaching."
You're 0/3. It's all misinformation with you. Would you like to try again, sweetheart?
TOES032800 wrote: "You're not fooling anybody alpo."
I'm not trying to fool anyone. I deal in facts. You deal in character attacks.
"You try hard to come across as the smooth talker, but the content is less than credible."
Like I said, you're a lost cause, and your troll status became firmly evident when you disrespected the First Lady with your comment about her. It was offensive. It was unprovoked. It was way over the top. It was xenophobic. And because you have refused to this day to retract it, it is unforgivable. You truly should be totally ashamed of yourself, but apparently you are without shame.
"How is my producing video and quotes from the horses' mouths being a troll?"
For one simple reason. Comments taken out of context, selctively edited and pieced together can be used to demonstrate practically anything imaginable.
If there existed enough video content of you as a public speaker, I could spend a couple of hours and "prove" that you were an admitted child molester, and every word would have come from your mouth too.
"Hell, I could say the same about you. Your false sense of the liberal point being the only valid point speaks VOLUMES about you."
While I pretty much side with the Democrats at the moment, from time to time, I defend Republicans and the Conservative point of view. For instance, you've never seen me condemn GWB for anything other than his insistance that we rush into Iraq under false pretenses.
I deplore false accusations and attacks upon any person's character, and it just so happens that Barack Obama seems to be the target of more falsehoods than any other person has ever had to endure, at least that I have ever witnessed.
"You're the Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow of TFP. Sell your fullofitness to who will buy it. I'll keep posting videos and quotes from the people. You can keep using liberal leaning websites to try and prove yourself."
Okey Dokey. That's fine with me. It's your credibility that is on the line every time you post. Personally, I love all of your posts. Keep up the fine job you are of exposing why many on the right are viewed as being bat-crap crazy.
degage wrote: "One more thing Alpo, do you have to make all your comments so long?"
No, and I don't, but when I do, it's because some things cannot be said in a sentence or two.
"can't you say anything in less words? Your posts are tiresome."
I don't ask a soul to read a word I write. Feel free to pass them up.
"To write a letter to the editor you have to keep it 200 word and under , but not so here. Maybe there should be a limit here too."
There is a limit. It's 3,000 characters per post. For the most part, I limit my comments to 3,000 characters or less.
Alpo: Please define troll. In a sentence or 2 if you can. Thank you so much.
rick1 wrote: "In other words you are in favor of a totaltarian form of government."
Objection your Honor!! Council is leading the witness again.
If you equate the health care insurance mandate and perhaps a hypothetical future mandate that people who are obese, join a gym and shape up for their own good, with totalitiarism, then I don't know how to respond. But I will do my best.
At no time have I ever expressed any admiration of or any desire to transform our form of Gov't to that of totalitiarism, which would entail a whole lot more than a couple of mandates to accomplish such a transformation.
Perhaps had I thrown in an endorsement for torturing people to death who refuse to get up and get out to join those gyms, you might have a point.
Perhaps had I endorsed punishing people who speak out against our Gov't, or had expressed an opinion that anyone who bashes our President deserves to be shot on sight, then I might understand your claim that I love totalitiarism.
There's quite a bit that would have to happen, or that would have to be proposed by myself, before you could begin to have any claim that I favor a totalitarian form of Gov't.
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
miraweb wrote: "If Alprova's physician hadn't said something, how would he have known he could get coverage?"
That's the thing. I knew that the bill as passed provided Federal funding for states to set up such programs, but I was shocked to find out that Georgia had indeed set one up.
Everything I had read on the state level said that the Republican dominated state legislators were opposed to anything ObamaCare, then low and behold, I find out that the State set up this high-risk pool, which is taylor made for people in my situation.
As someone who believes in personal responsibility, I jumped on it the minute I was told of the program's existence.
Most of the states have set up similar high-risk pools. The word of their existence however, is not getting out like it should.
alprova said....
However, if the Republicans win both Houses of Congress, and if they successfully repeal ObamaCare, it's back to being uninsured again for me. But, I've been there and done that before. I'll do whatever I have to do and play my hand with the cards I am dealt.
I truly hope not but I also have read the AHCA and it is not well written. It will be more costly than it should and it will impact those on medicare in a negative way. The insurers and states resist nation wide shopping for coverage because of competition and reduced state control. You would be shocked if medicare went away and those negotiated rates that distorts the system were eliminated.
One good thing is no denial for pre-existing condition cannot IF the individual had not previously declined available coverage. Insuring a kid to age 26 that is not a full time student is stupid and userous of those without kids in that age range. The number of TBD elements are worthy of concern.
I personally like the health care voucher proposal or an HCSA where the funds are deposited for every citizen with sufficient taxes collected to provide the funding. Requiring a provider to charge anyone provided a specific service the exact same amount or in the same way would force the insurers to compete based on efficiency of operations and quality of service. It is no surprise that insurers like Obamacare.
There is a web page where you can go and apply for insurance if you have pre-existing conditions. There are 35 states who now have high-risk pools. The remainder HHS will be managing.
One other link that is pretty good. This has information on nearly all insurance options (public and private) based on what state you live in:
rick1 wrote "Toes,even with ObamaCare there will still be 30 million uninsured."
If the states sit on their collective asses and don't do their parts to put together affordable insurance pools for the uninsured, then they only have themselves to blame for any failure that they are declaring is the fault of ObamaCare.
The Gov't is quite ready to assist the states with the tools and the funding necessary to get these programs started. Once they are up and running, it will be left up to the insurance companies to keep them going.
The states are not forced to comply with one tenet of ObamaCare. The insurance companies however, are required to offer several different type of insurance pools to the states.
It's very much defined like the setting out of troughs of water for the horses. It's there for the taking but you can't make them drink.
Ignorance and stupidity by legislators in those states that refuse to embrace ObamaCare for what it can and will do for the uninsured within their respective states, is not the fault of ObamaCare or anyone else. It is the fault of those empowered to do what is right for the people within their own borders.
Personally, given that the first plank was amazingly laid in my own state, which has allowed me to obtain health care insurance, I have every reason to believe that eventually, if ObamaCare is not repealed, that all the states will come around to adopt it a little at a time.
Ignorance and stupidity is thinking that putting health care in the hands of a massive federal bureaucracy will improve anything.
Clay Bennett = ignorance and stupidity.
Good weekend, BRP? Out of town?
This is where I have some trouble with the Ryan Medicare plan. Insurance companies do two things well - set eligibility and set rates.
In Medicare everyone over a certain age is eligible. Dead easy.
The rates are set by Congress.
That leaves insurers just holding the pen to sign checks on behalf of the government as the only job left. Not sure it is worth paying them just for that.
rick1 wrote: "Al with the amount of time you spend on the computer each day posting on this forum why didn't you take the time to find out for yourself that Georgia offered pre exisiting insurance. Just do a google serach and it will come righ up."
It sure does, but the last time I looked into it, Georgia legislators were firm in their resolve that they were rejecting anything and everything ObamaCare.
Don't act as if you knew anything different until today, because the last time this issue came up, you wrote nary a word about it.
"You make excuses as to why you did not take care of your health."
Who the heck are you anyway? I'm under no obligation to seek your approval or to request that you excuse me for a thing.
"There are lot of programs avaiable such as pharmacutical companies will help people with the cost of some their prescriptions, there are prescription savings cards you could purchase in order to help ou buy your medication."
Oh...I tried that route several times, and unless you have ever tried to do it yourself, you have no idea how frustrating it can be to attempt to deal with the companies directly or with companies set up to assist people indirectly with free or low-cost pharmaceuticals.
It's a nightmare, complete with all kinds of hoops to jump through, plenty of denials, and massive invasions of privacy that you must submit to in order to be approved.
Those prescription savings cards help with the cost of name brand drugs only, but are virtually useless when you seek to save money by insisting that you are prescribed generics, whenever possible.
"You still could have seen your doctor and worked out a payment plan."
Nope. For most of that time, there wasn't a penny left over after funding the necessities, with what I had to live on. I most certainly made all the adjustments, but it took time to recover from the loss of income that disappeared without warning.
"It is all about personal responsability but it appears you want the government to make those decisions for you."
What? You were coasting down the interstate just fine, but your brain just took the wrong off-ramp.
What ObamaCare has done for me, is to provide me the opportunity to purchase health care insurance, as a person with several pre-existing conditions, at a very affordable premium.
The State of Georgia, in its infinite wisdom, decided to come on board to see how this will all work out.
Take away PCIP, which is a direct provision of ObamaCare, and I am back to having no insurance and no options available to me to purchase health care insurance, at any price.
I made the conscience decision to seek to insure myself, once the opportunity arose for me to do so.
I have no clue what you are referring to, when you make any claim that I "want the Gov't making those decisions for me."
Please feel free to offer your explanation.
TFP: Please, please limit responses to 300 or so characters.
rick1 wrote: "Toes, we both know this is not about healthcare this is about the government having total control of our lives."
Gee, I must have missed that in the final bill that was signed into law.
Would you be so kind as to point out the relevant page number so that I can read it for myself?
Hsrp3339 wrote: "I personally like the health care voucher proposal or an HCSA where the funds are deposited for every citizen with sufficient taxes collected to provide the funding."
Vouchers are a horrible proposal. Without any adjustment in the program to accomodate any upward movement in premiums, people will absolutely have to pull out dollars, that most will not be able to afford, to make up the difference.
Whose going to pay those increased taxes on your second proposal? The elderly themselves? The poor? The middle class? The wealthy?
"Requiring a provider to charge anyone provided a specific service the exact same amount or in the same way would force the insurers to compete based on efficiency of operations and quality of service."
Price controls on providers have been in place for several years now. Competition for supplemental policies is very fierce currently, and that is a good thing.
"It is no surprise that insurers like Obamacare."
There is no mistaking that it will be a big boom for insurers, once the mandate kicks in.
They are going to get what they have been seeking for many years, which is premiums from the young and healthy. The trade-off is that paying out the medical expenses for those who are not so healthy will not represent such a burden to the insurers, that will then be off-set by the premiums coming in from those who are healthy.
Theoretically, this should cause insurers to push down insurance rates. Time will tell if that theory plays out to become reality.
If not, then the insurers should and likely will be eliminated from the equation. Insurers know doggone well that their days are numbered if they don't comply and deliver the goods for the chance they have been given.
Jack_Dennis wrote: "TFP: Please, please limit responses to 300 or so characters."
Here ya' go Jack. Knock yourself out;
alpro asked....
Whose going to pay those increased taxes on your second proposal? The elderly themselves? The poor? The middle class? The wealthy?
All of the above and increased as needed to increase the voucher amount. It will work better than a bloated inefficient government managed program. Who is paying those taxes now? Money borrowed from China is the right answer making it painless at present but the day of reckoning approaches.
alpo: twitter would certainly not fill the bill for you.
alpro said....
Price controls on providers have been in place for several years now. Competition for supplemental policies is very fierce currently, and that is a good thing.
Not price controls among providers but each provider set their own rates without collusion with other providers. However, they cannot give one insurance co. one price, medicare another then individuals still another.
The competition is still not keen except within those approved by the state commissioner.
By definition, no. I tend to stay on topic the majority of the time and any inflammatory remark I make is usually in response to an inflammatory remark by another poster.
It's very telling that you don't address people like Jack_Dennis, Joneses, Tu_quoque, JonRoss, TOES02800, and BigRidgePatriot with your question. You would never do that even though those posters constantly meet that definitition. You feel that those people are on your side. I, however, am not. That is why you have only posed this question to me. You either have reading comprehension problems and don't understand the definition or you're just talking out of your ass. Which is it?
This is a perfect example of the democrats/liberals intention of full government control of all our lives. In 2008 the democrat controlled house held hearings on the government confiscation of all individual retirement accounts to be put in the hands of the government and distributed as they chose. It did not ever happen but the scary part is these "I know what is best for you" democrats are willing to confiscate all our individual retirement accounts. I wonder why Hussein Obama is not pledging to do this now before the election? It is the same reason he did not pledge for the government to socialize health care before he was put in the White House the last time. Hussein Obama knew he would not get elected by running on these issues so he lied by not announcing his true intentions,
The Demoncrats around the country are saying that Americans are better off today than they were four years ago. Now I find that very amusing simply because the Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats are constantly complaining! Have you noticed the comments of these whiners here?
The OWS, a subgroup of the Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats are so satisfied that they have decided to destroy property, live in filth, be a public nuisance and blame others for their actions and condition.
Makes you wonder what the Liberals/Socialists/Demoncrats would say and do if they became dissatisfied with Owebama.
Displacing an incumbent is a daunting challenge. Displacing the current incumbent borders on impossible. Planning your affairs accordingly would be a wise move.
You may think Obama is the best thing to come along since ice cream and the washing machine but it won't hurt to look at Greece and Spain and determine what those people could have and should have done before their economy collapsed.
Are your investments and savings safe and secure if the economy worsens? Are you hedged against inflation? What if the dollar is replaced as the worlds reserve currency?
Romney hasn't seen anything like the attacks that will be coming over the next 60 days with credibility and accuracy never a consideration. Only Obama can beat Obama and that is not likely to happen.
The fact is this country is past the tipping point and regardless of who wins the pain will be the same for most of us unless one is able to plan and prepare for it. Wars will most likely continue being a drain on the U.S. economy while how bad we are losing the war against drugs becomes more evident. Play it right and you could become very wealthy over the next few years. A young person will never have a better opportunity to be among the top 5% along with members of congress.
Easy123: You've got a set, I'll give you that. Saying you're nasty ONLY in response to others is a huge lie. You seem more trollish than the ones you accuse. Easy the liar. Rings true.
I'm not mad, sweetheart. You're reaching. :-)
"Saying you're nasty ONLY in response to others is a huge lie."
I didn't say "nasty". I said "inflammatory". And it wouldn't be a lie either. Try again.
"You seem more trollish than the ones you accuse."
And that would show a lack of understanding on your part. Pot meet kettle. No one is a bigger troll than you, Jack_Dennis. Try again.
"Easy the liar. Rings true."
Not quite. Jack_Dennis, the troll. Jack_Dennis, the ignorant. Talk about ringing true! That's you're TFP persona in a nutshell. Just stating facts. :-)
Name calling and labeling people have never been effective in influencing them and their opinion on an issue. In fact that behavior can reflect poorly on the party, the poster or the candidate the name caller supports. An opinion with good reasons why that conclusion is reached may be effective if the other party is objective and has not considered that information before. Those that have a blind and unwavering party loyalty will not see, hear or utter anything contrary to their party line and talking points.
Harp, your statement about the difficulties of removing an incumbent are spot on and that's what worries me about a Romney victory! 4 more years of Obama w/a shot at a compentent candidate in 2016 seem to me a better option than 8 years of Romney! Our choices this cycle could hardly be worse!imo!
63 Days to Go!
It is still the economy/jobs/direction of country, etc.
Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock!
What kind of leader is so insecure that he needs a 74,000 seat stadium filled to capacity in order to cultivate his demagoguery?
"You didn't build that." "We make it possible."
It's all about Obama. It's always been about Obama. It will always be about Obama. In his mind, we are simply the serfs who serve the king.
We just laid off 200 people where I work. So you can bet these 200 people are not better off than they were before Hussein Obama's failed economic policies. The sad part is some of them will still blindly follow Hussein Obama because now Hussein Obama can keep them on a government handout program. And you know what happens to those that rely on government handouts. They live in poverty.
Here it goes again alpo. When all else fails, call the republicans Nazi's. The "racist" thing is getting worn out. What's worse alpo, being called a chimpanzee or being called Joseph Goebbels?
I don't care what the hell you say alpo. When Moochelle Obama had that federal worker go in a school and tell that little girl that the lunch her mother packed for her was bad, I lost all, if any, respect for that hag. She has NO business telling people what to eat, or anything else for that matter. She needs to stay out of EVERYBODY'S business! Nobody elected his wife.
Harp, with all due respect, your post of 8:48 can only be described as the kind of stuff that Ron Paul has been flapping his chicken wings about for years, and look where that man is today.
Now that the man is on ice, perhaps a little sanity will return to discussions pertaining to our financial systems. The sky is not falling, nor is it poised to do so.
The reality of the situation is that this nation was in far worse shape following World War II, and we are nowhere even close to being in the shape we were back then.
Pull your money out of your investment accounts. Empty your bank accounts. Stuff it all under your mattress. Then cower in your home and arm yourself to the teeth and shoot anyone who dares to ring your doorbell, if you must. Your 15 minutes of fame awaits you.
Any comparison of this nation and what led to our economy tanking to that of Spain and Greece is apples and watermelons. Ours collapsed due to the rescinding of protections that long kept market manipulators at bay for decades. We will survive and stabilization will once again return, with the passage of time.
Most of the time, you hover a little above ground. Today, you're out there somewhere close to the Moon. Try flapping those wings to bring yourself back to Earth.
TOES: Moochelle Obama
Mrs. Obama's 2nd-Term Agenda: 'Impact Nature of Food in Grocery Stores
Five things you won't hear at the Democratic National Convention:
The National Debt
The Real Unemployment Rate
Gas Prices
More than one third of Americans are on Government Assistance
The Federal Jobs Created
mymy: add "balanced budget" to the list. Of course, no MSM will ever ask him about it.
Mrs. Obama: Super Bowl Food Indulgence OK. She and Barry get to have kielbasa, cheeseburgers, deep-dish pizza and chicken wings. But we mere people of the Obama kingdom get celery and veggie dip.
The audacity and nerve of these pompous as#holes.
Remember when Micheal Moore had that movie out that bashed Bush? He was invited to all the networks and was praised by Matt Lauer and the like for an "outstanding" film. Yet you don't see Dinesh D'Souza being invited on any MSM. Could it be liberal bias?
Add a budget, war in Afghanistan, first ever lowered United States credit rating, his lie about closing Gitmo, when GM is going to pay back our money, his raiding Medicare to the tune of 716 billion dollars, the largest tax increase in history to fund his socialized Obamacare, the democrats plan to confiscate all individual retirement accounts (see link below), Hussein Obama's destroying the middle class, Hussein Obama's attack on religious freedom by dictating what the Catholic Church can and cannot require from their health insurance companybased on their religious beliefs, Fast and Furious, only President in recent history to not visit the Billy Graham library because he does not want to piss off the Muslims and Atheist, Hussein Obama's Class Warfare, Hussein Obama's hate speech, Hussein Obama loosing the respect of our closest allies like Israel and Great Britain, Hussein Obama bowing to our enemies, Hussein Obama cuddling up to Hugo Chavez, Hussein Obama's open border plan, Hussein Obama giving amnesty to illegal immigrants from Mexico, Hussein Obama's relationship with Weather Underground Terrorist and Communist Bill Ayers, his relationship with the American hating Jeremiah Wright, Hussein Obama's grades in college, Hussein Obama's college thesis. This could be a never ending list of Hussein Obama's failures.
"When Moochelle Obama had that federal worker go in a school and tell that little girl that the lunch her mother packed for her was bad, I lost all, if any, respect for that hag. She has NO business telling people what to eat, or anything else for that matter. She needs to stay out of EVERYBODY'S business! Nobody elected his wife."
What you described above never happened. It was a school official who made that call and took it upon herself to interfere with two children's lunches, not once, but twice in the same week. The First Lady had not a thing to do with it.
Joneses: The list is long and I'm aware of the things you mention. The list of five are topics in the campaign that Obama cannot talk about = his failed policies that resulted in things being worse not better. He has no plan, but counts on the sheep to still believe. The sheep = takers or students with no life experience to understand what the heck is going on! The students being bussed in are probably just doing it for a day of free fun and will probably not vote.
So you're saying 69,456,897 Americans are either "takers or students"? That's how many votes President Obama got in the last election. You're a moron if you believe what you have just typed. Your baseless rhetoric is asinine.
Name the failed policies. All of them.
alpro responded sarcastically with....
Pull your money out of your investment accounts. Empty your bank accounts. Stuff it all under your mattress.
No, no, no the worst thing to do is to hold cash. The point is there is and will be investment opportunities like those not seen in this life time.
and alpro went on to say......
Then cower in your home and arm yourself to the teeth and shoot anyone who dares to ring your doorbell, if you must. Your 15 minutes of fame awaits you.
I don't know how you got to that. I have and will only shoot someone that I know is trying to kill or seriously injure me. I rarely lock the doors. I know you think all will be roses and Obama will save the day. You may be right, It won't do me any harm if you are, it just won't be as profitable for me as I anticipate.
We are closer to being like Greece and others than you think although we aren't yet. How much longer can we sustain the growth in the debt without dire consequences and pain at some point? Is it 26 trillion? 30 trillion? Or do you think there is no limit and the current rate of increase in spending is no problem? Neither party has anything on the table to stop the spiral only to slow it down a little which is not likely.
I agree however Hussein Obama was partly elected to fulfill a promise he made to cut the debt in half which his failed policies failed to accomplish. There are only two reasons why he failed his obligation to cut the debt in half and actually ended up adding almost 6 trillion dollars to the debt. He was lying or he is stupid of which neither is deserving of occupying the White House any longer than he has. Based on Hussein Obama's track record we can assume he will add another 6 trillion dollars or more making our debt in four more years rise to 22 trillion dollars putting America at more risk of default on our debt causing more out of control inflation. How does this help the poor or the middle class? It does not but it surely hurts them by pushing more into poverty and relying on the government to take care of them. This has proven to be his agenda and it is a sign of his definition of moving the country forward. Forward to Hussein Obama is making more people dependent on Government and making government more in control of our lives.
Easy: Perhaps you might want to name the SUCCESSFUL policies. I'll wait.
I can't think of an unsuccessful policy.
His foreign policy has been successful with ending the war in Iraq, set a timetable to end the war in Afghanistan, killed many leaders of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, keeping Iran's nuclear capabilities in check, and there are plenty more.
His energy policy is investing in the future with clean energy and he wants to expand drilling around the United States.
His social policies have done well to make bring equality among Americans. Repealed Don't Ask, Don't Tell and supports same-sex marriage. Supports contraception for women! Supports a woman's right to choose. And the list goes on.
His economic policy has kept our country from collapsing. The Stimulus saved or helped create 2-3 million jobs. Extended the Bush tax cuts. Passed healthcare reform. Supports labor rights and equal pay for women (Lilly Ledbetter Act). Helped save the auto industry. And the list goes on. The next 4 years will tell how successful his economic policy was though.
miraweb said... "Good weekend, BRP? Out of town? This is where I have some trouble with the Ryan Medicare plan. Insurance companies do two things well - set eligibility and set rates. In Medicare everyone over a certain age is eligible. Dead easy. The rates are set by Congress. That leaves insurers just holding the pen to sign checks on behalf of the government as the only job left. Not sure it is worth paying them just for that."
Yes, not last weekend, just incredibly busy, managed to make it to the Ron Paul rally weekend before last…
The solution to health care costs, without destroying the health care industry through bureaucratic rationing and rate suppression, is to return to catastrophic health insurance backed up with health savings accounts. The government can subsidize this system as necessary to help out the poor.
When health insurance consumers pay out of their own savings accounts for routine care they will become cost conscious consumers. I had two examples of this recently that are typical of every experience I have had with health care over the last several years.
Case Study #1: Doctor visit 3 months after blood work, everything is OK. Opt to pay cash and take 50% discount, $70 saved. Opt out of repeat blood work until one year has expired (prescription has not changed for 10 years) another $700 saved. When I asked to forgo the blood work because of the cost the doctor asked, "didn't insurance pay for it"? When asked what that has to do with the appropriate frequency of testing … No answer. End result 92% savings, just for asking.
Case Study #2: Patient goes into doctor with chronic nose bleeds, explains to doctor that he does not have insurance. Doctor does outpatient surgery to remove growth, charges $50 cash rather than the $1500 typically charged the insurance companies. End result 97% saved, just for asking.
In my experience, these examples are not all that unusual. All we have to do is become health care consumers instead of being entitled health care prima donnas and we could easily reduce health care costs on our own.
Hussein Obama's attempt to destroy the Middle Class is working.
There's been a lot of talk in recent years about the "hollowing out" of the American middle class. A new study by the National Employment Law Project (NELP) confirms the troubling trend. NELP broke down jobs into low/ middle/and high-wage groups based on median incomes. Looking at the period from 2009 when Obama took office through the first quarter of 2012, the study found: "High-wage" occupations accounted for 19% of the jobs lost during the recession and 20% of the jobs gained during the recovery. "Mid-wage" occupations suffered 60% of job losses during the recession but only 22% of the growth during the recovery. "Low-wage" occupations accounted for 21% of the losses and a whopping 58% of the growth. In other words, NELP found what many Americans already know: The market for middle class jobs has shrunk and most of the jobs that have been created during the recession are in low-income areas like retail and food services.
Hussein Obama is wining the war on the Middle Class by destroying it as we all know the biggest threat to communism is a strong middle class.
BRP - some interesting ideas there. It does get a step closer to single payer and taking the insurance industry out of the loop. Unfortunately, that plan is about as likely to happen as single payer. The insurers have a real stranglehold here.
You literally just changed the articles words.
This is what you said:
"Looking at the period from 2009 when Obama took office through the first quarter of 2012,"
This is what the article really says:
"Looking at the period from early 2008 through the first quarter of 2012, the study found:"
You are a liar. You have purposefully lied to suit your agenda. It's all propaganda and lies with you. Would you like to try again, liar?
The correct version of this article after I did the research and found it had been altered by the person who sent it to me still confirms Hussein Obama has failed the middle class and is actually destroying the middle class.
Hussein Obama's attempt to destroy the Middle Class is working.
There's been a lot of talk in recent years about the "hollowing out" of the American middle class. A new study by the National Employment Law Project (NELP) confirms the troubling trend. NELP broke down jobs into low/ middle/and high-wage groups based on median incomes. Looking at the period from 2008 through the first quarter of 2012, the study found: "High-wage" occupations accounted for 19% of the jobs lost during the recession and 20% of the jobs gained during the recovery. "Mid-wage" occupations suffered 60% of job losses during the recession but only 22% of the growth during the recovery. "Low-wage" occupations accounted for 21% of the losses and a whopping 58% of the growth. In other words, NELP found what many Americans already know: The market for middle class jobs has shrunk and most of the jobs that have been created during the recession are in low-income areas like retail and food services.
Hussein Obama is wining the war on the Middle Class by destroying it as we all know the biggest threat to communism is a strong middle class.
Let's all tune in tonight and share the thrill and optimism that will propel our great country into the future! This is a wonderful opportunity to shed the cynicism and partisanship that divides our nation. A chance to once again become a unified and goal oriented society. First and probably most important on our list of objectives should be to dispatch with this wackjob cult member who somehow managed to fool enough of us to get the nomination of the republican party. Seems the only non-wacky thing about this guy is his vicious penchant for destroying families' lives to line his own pockets. I won't go on about the White House having a Bible inside that has another Book in addition to the Old and New Testaments, which has some truly crazy sh!t in it, if we elect the cultist. To recap, stay positive... and don't elect Satan.
A list of Hussein Obama failures and lies.
If I wanted to watch bulls&$t I would go to a farm. It is proven you liberals are looking up to Hussein Obama as some kind of messiah therefore making you a member of another Kool Aid drinking cult. All these dummycrats are going to do is parade a bunch of communist liberals out on the state and display a bunch of hate speech.
Easy: Perhaps you might wanna give up on calling people liars. It gets tedious.
"Democrats desperately avoiding calling it "Bank of America Stadium". Not sure if they're trying to distance themselves from banks or America" -Dennis Miller
miraweb said... "some interesting ideas there. It does get a step closer to single payer and taking the insurance industry out of the loop. Unfortunately, that plan is about as likely to happen as single payer. The insurers have a real stranglehold here."
Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating for single payer nor does what I am proposing get us closer to single payer. Separating the payer from the consumer is the problem, not the solution.
We might get sucked into single payer before we learn our lesson. I would like to think that someone soemwhere will try what works and set an example for the rest to follow.
I do not waste time conversing with these foolish liberals anymore. My time is better spent not conversing with fools. They are a pathetic gullible childish group of people filled with hate and racism who have not the intellect to know when their messiah, Hussein Obama is lying to them. I suggest you stop wasting your valuable time with these foolish Kool Aid drinkers as well. Most of them are not affected by Hussein Obamas failed policies as they live off us hard working taxpayers. All some of them do is sit around on their fat asses pissing and moaning on this message board, eat and sleep. This is all they have left of their pathetic lives.
See you later, I have got to get back to work.
Even the OWS movement is against Hussein Obama and his failed policies.
CHARLOTTE--On Tuesday, a group of more than 100 protesters shouting "Obama is a traitor" temporarily shut down official bus service that ferries around delegates at the Democratic National Convention. The protesters, some of whom were lying down in the street, were surrounded by Charlotte police, who used their bicycles to build a barrier around the group. "What do you think of free speech zones?" shouted one protester to the police and onlookers, referring to the cordoned off areas for activists. "Does that seem strange to you?" Protesters also shouted that accused Wikileaks source Bradley Manning should be freed. At one point, the protesters raised a tent above their heads and set it on the ground. "Bad news, guys, they've pitched a tent," a police officer joked. "They might be here for the duration." Delegates and convention-goers who were forced to wait for buses to be rerouted expressed surprise that the Occupy presence has been stronger at the DNC than the Republican convention in Tampa last week. "I didn't see them at the Republican convention," said Wandra Ashley-Williams, vice president of the Maryland State Conference NAACP. "That's not good."
Jack_Dennis, I just finished laying out a plan for our political happiness, replete with mutual understanding, respect and friendly discourse and you have to dive right back in and call someone tedious. I hope a Mormonster creeps into your swastika adorned boycave and lays an egg in your throat, you fascist-fundamentalist freak. I hope to hell you and I didn't evolve from the same monkey. I hope there's a grease fire in the many folds of your sebaceous skin and you try to put it out with water.
Jack_: That is truly a typically bland, bland response.
The Special Theory of Conservativity:
BRP - the closest financial model that we have is currently veterinary care. The veterinarians have traded one frustration for another. They know how they will get paid - but a lot people can't afford it. During the recession the vets had a real uptick in requests for euthanasia for pets that could easily be treated, but whose owners just didn't have the money.
Now - I am not suggesting we euthanize granny - but there is a similar dynamic that can happen when granny is no longer able to make decisions for herself.
If lil' Johnny has control of gran's health care savings account there will be a incentive to not treat her for things that she herself might go in for. Where the bulk of medical care expenses come in the last two years of life - when most of us are least likely to be in charge of our affairs - there is a perverse incentive that has to be addressed.
Jonsey takes notice of OWS:
Yeah - there are real issues that many on the left and the right (and even Clint Eastwood mentioned Guantanamo in his speech) have with the current administration. It would be very valuable to have a conversation in the country about that - but that isn't where the Republicans went.
They are putting out stuff like today's GOP email offering that starts:
He is the president who has no real birth certificate, multiple social security numbers, a surrendered law license, sealed college and grad school records, altered selective service records and a multiplicity of other felonious actions. Now he's hell-bent on irreparably damaging America with his foolish, frivolous, and dangerously reckless actions.
And finishes:
NOTE TO THE CONFUSED: We don't need any more dead weight on our ship. If you're just taking up space and not contributing even with your prayers, then do us all a favor and go practice boot licking skills. God knows, it may come in handy if you are leaning left. Why don't you practice looking up to your master and telling the Obamites that you love the taste of their boot polish.
This little gem comes right before they ask for a donation. Priceless.
There are a lot of things really worth talking about. One of the good points of having a loyal opposition is there is someone to give an outside view.
Unfortunately, that isn't happening now. And we could really use it as a country.
dude_: Sorry, I just can't get down to your level of nastiness.
Yes, Jack_, I know. You're a man of principle and discipline. You're an educated, refined and stolid man of deep thought and conviction. You don't always drink beer, but when you do, you prefer Dos Equis.
miraweb said... " the closest financial model that we have is currently veterinary care. The veterinarians have traded one frustration for another. They know how they will get paid - but a lot people can't afford it. During the recession the vets had a real uptick in requests for euthanasia for pets that could easily be treated, but whose owners just didn't have the money. Now - I am not suggesting we euthanize granny - but there is a similar dynamic that can happen when granny is no longer able to make decisions for herself. If lil' Johnny has control of gran's health care savings account there will be a incentive to not treat her for things that she herself might go in for. Where the bulk of medical care expenses come in the last two years of life - when most of us are least likely to be in charge of our affairs - there is a perverse incentive that has to be addressed.
I am surprised that you trust the government with those decisions more than you do lil' Johnny. At least lil' Johnny has ties to granny that will motivate him to do the right thing. Government has proven over history to be a much less benevolent keeper. Would you care to discuss the government sponsored animal euthanasia rate during the downturn? We took on two rescue pets during the downturn. I am sure our local animal shelter systematically stepped up euthanization as the numbers dictated. The animals did not even need to be ill to meet their fate, just less "desirable".
Beyond that, most if not all of the socialist countries are finding themselves in dire financial situations that are going to make it more and more difficult for them to take full care of granny. The bureaucratic parasite that attaches itself to government largess grows until it kills the host.
I have three dogs myself.
Unfortunately, lawyers offices are filled with people who are fighting with their adult children. The number of contested wills alone show the problems that can happen when heirs get greedy or impatient.
End of life decisions are really difficult to make. I've been there. Adding in a financial decision doesn't make it any easier.
I can see a lot of value in your proposal - but I still believe that inherent perverse incentive must be addressed for it really to work.
Jack_Dullard and his lachrymose, levity-less life. Go stir your pinto beans, it's almost time for Obamarama! Hail to The Chief, Jack!
The DNC will be streaming live on Youtube and from President Obama's website.
miraweb said... "I can see a lot of value in your proposal - but I still believe that inherent perverse incentive must be addressed for it really to work."
I guess I see it a differently. I cannot justify taking from people I don't know to protect myself from the possibility of some misbehavior on the part of my own family. I spend time worrying about how to protect my family from the financial collapse the government seems to be hell bent on bringing upon us.
Mira, the Government is already asking seniors what their plans are. I had to go for a medicare question and answer session with my doctor. He had to ask me all sorts of stupid ouestions about my intentions should I need extra care at the end. I took that as, they wanted to be free to deny me certain care. Like Obama put it give them a pill and make them comfortable. I'm not so old they shoud be concerned yet.
Does anyone know what happened to anniebelle, Haven't seen her on here lately. Hope she is all right.
ricardo: What happened to the tolerant, all-inclusive left? Religious bigotry? You're bad for bidness, Ricky.