LGP Political Discussion Thread

[ExPatriatePen]

Doublem,

My boss just called, he said you didn't report to my job today... what gives? Don't make me send the Gustapo over to arrest you. You're younger and in better shape than I am, the "powers that be" decided it's your responsiblity to support me... let's go, what are you waiting for... Remeber, if you don't start "breaking my share of rocks" you're going to be thrown in jail.

[Shyster]

Seriously, are you joking right? The inequalities in this country has grown by a huge number since the 1960s, the top 1% now has more money then they did before. The working wages have decreased, health care has increased, tax breaks on the rich. The workers in this country has been screwed over for so long that they believe all this crap they are told.

Speaking of that, you have a job yet?

[ExPatriatePen]

The hubris just floors me:

Obama rejected "carping" by critics that this is a "big spending government bill," citing a report from the Congressional Budget Office that it will reduce the projected federal budget deficit "by $132 billion the first 10 years and by over $1 trillion in the second."

Does Obama think the American people are stupid enough to actually believe this? Oh wait, they are, NEVERMIND.

I guess it is Christmas time, Santa Obama.

[shafnutz05]

COMING UP NEXT, ON THE OBAMA COMEDY TOUR....

"In the long run we can't continue to spend as if deficits don't have consequences, as if waste doesn't matter, as if the hard earned tax dollars of the American people can be treated like monopoly money, that's what we've seen time and time again, Washington has become more concerned about the next election than the next generation."

You'll be howling as he tells hilarious jokes like this and dazzles the crowd!

[bh]

The hubris just floors me:

Obama rejected "carping" by critics that this is a "big spending government bill," citing a report from the Congressional Budget Office that it will reduce the projected federal budget deficit "by $132 billion the first 10 years and by over $1 trillion in the second."

Does Obama think the American people are stupid enough to actually believe this? Oh wait, they are, NEVERMIND.

I guess it is Christmas time, Santa Obama.

The thing that kills me about that statement is that it's talking about the deficit, not the debt. There should be no deficit period! Here in Maryland the budget must be balanced before it can be passed. Why can't the central government operate under those conditions?

The debt is just getting to rediculous levels.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/18/govern ... -debt.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[eddysnake]

The hubris just floors me:

Obama rejected "carping" by critics that this is a "big spending government bill," citing a report from the Congressional Budget Office that it will reduce the projected federal budget deficit "by $132 billion the first 10 years and by over $1 trillion in the second."

Does Obama think the American people are stupid enough to actually believe this? Oh wait, they are, NEVERMIND.

I guess it is Christmas time, Santa Obama.

The thing that kills me about this bill is how shredded it is from the beginning. Listen, I'm all for a new healthcare bill (if done correctly) but as you can see in the updated version, it is now illegal for Americans to buy their drugs from Canada, which was not part of the original bill. So Obama met with the big daddy Insurance and they said it's going to be way cheaper for us to buy from Canada (because they put in bids as to how much they are willing to pay) so that means less profits for us. Basically they took a bill and passed it on to everyone who needs to make a buck and then alter it so they still have the cash coming in. This isn't the first, nor the last, it looks like this country is in the direction of going back and forth between red and blue and just think oh the next one will fix it, let's just bash the current, because it will be okey dokey when the next (insert Dem or Rep here) come along...

[doublem]

Yes, that's true but when the private forces buy off the government, well look what happens. And why does someone that always rides in on the high horse of morality never call out these immoral actions by private enterprise. Like this for example.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4645596.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You don't seem to realize that this line of argument supports my position. Do you think that the government agencies involved were somehow duped into being bought off, or manipulated? That some poor sucker-pollyanna in government with nothing but the best of intentions in his heart never saw these big mean corporations coming? Corporations and powerful people go to government explicitly to take advantage of the legitimate coercive and physical force it provides. Your answer to this, then, is MORE government?!

That is like saying we shouldn't have laws because corruption might happen. I will take my chance with someone trying to at least write some type of rules.

[slappybrown]

Yes, that's true but when the private forces buy off the government, well look what happens. And why does someone that always rides in on the high horse of morality never call out these immoral actions by private enterprise. Like this for example.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4645596.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You don't seem to realize that this line of argument supports my position. Do you think that the government agencies involved were somehow duped into being bought off, or manipulated? That some poor sucker-pollyanna in government with nothing but the best of intentions in his heart never saw these big mean corporations coming? Corporations and powerful people go to government explicitly to take advantage of the legitimate coercive and physical force it provides. Your answer to this, then, is MORE government?!

That is like saying we shouldn't have laws because corruption might happen. I will take my chance with someone trying to at least write some type of rules.

If you are distrustful of corporations and concentrated power, why are you so trusting of governments and concentrated power? This is an odd paradox that I can never understand from statists.

[doublem]

It's a tough call. It really depends on how they are written. Right now I have no faith in anyone besides a few to do this correctly. You can never be sure that the power you hand anyone is going to be used correctly but it would be like not having any other type of laws that may be screwed up by people.

[doublem]

Doublem,

My boss just called, he said you didn't report to my job today... what gives? Don't make me send the Gustapo over to arrest you. You're younger and in better shape than I am, the "powers that be" decided it's your responsiblity to support me... let's go, what are you waiting for... Remeber, if you don't start "breaking my share of rocks" you're going to be thrown in jail.

I don't know but who is going to pay my medical bills since I can't get insurance with the job I have. You want me to beg my neighbors and find out about that great American generosity, oh I guess I'm not working hard enough.

[doublem]

Seriously, are you joking right? The inequalities in this country has grown by a huge number since the 1960s, the top 1% now has more money then they did before. The working wages have decreased, health care has increased, tax breaks on the rich. The workers in this country has been screwed over for so long that they believe all this crap they are told.

Speaking of that, you have a job yet?

Yea, but I still can't get that insurance thing and pay for my E.R. visit last week.

[shafnutz05]

Yea, but I still can't get that insurance thing and pay for my E.R. visit last week.

I have no problem with the government providing tax breaks to companies that provide for their employees' insurance. That way, anyone that works (part-time or full-time) at least has access to it. I like this solution because it keeps the government's dirty, greasy hands off of the healthcare system, and is an incentive-based rather than a punishment-based program like the one they are offering.

[shafnutz05]

I know you all hate Rush Limbaugh, but he brought up a great point today.

When FDR, LBJ, and the rest of the big social program guys passed their bills, they frontloaded the benefits and backloaded the taxes. Essentially, everyone got to enjoy all of the new free stuff, and by the time they got nailed with the taxes (aka getting the bill), there were enough special interest groups entrenched that there was no way the programs would ever get repealed.

The Democrats now are doing the exact opposite. Starting as soon as this monstrosity gets passed, we, the taxpayers, are going to get slammed with higher taxes. The "benefits" of this bill (emphasis on the quotes) will not be seen until 2014. Four years of people being hit with higher taxes to pay for a bill that the vast majority of Americans don't want. This sounds like a recipe for success, if the Republicans don't muddy it up like they do so well.

And as far as this bill goes? AMEN to it being a strictly partisan bill!! That is the only good news...not one Republican in the Senate voted for this crap. Because you know if Snowe or another liberal Republican would have voted for it, all we would be hearing about is how they came to a bipartisan solution.

[HomerPenguin]

If you are distrustful of corporations and concentrated power, why are you so trusting of governments and concentrated power?

In this system the ultimate government is supposed to be all of us. I'm in favor of that government having power, but not the plutocracy we have now.

This is an odd paradox that I can never understand from statists.

It's similar to the paradox of anarchists who either don't care about or have no defense from unchecked corporate hegemony. And yes, I get that we've got that right now anyway; we live in a corporate plutocracy.

[Shyster]

I don't know but who is going to pay my medical bills since I can't get insurance with the job I have. You want me to beg my neighbors and find out about that great American generosity, oh I guess I'm not working hard enough.

Are you freaking serious? You will. You. Pay your own bills. I pay mine; you pay yours. You.

Glad to see you finally cowboyed up and got a "real job." It is real, yes? Well, in the real world, with real exprenses, you are responsible for paying them yourself. Really. The rest of the world is not obliged to stand in for your mommy and daddy, to wipe your butt and put band-aids on your skinned knees. Pay. Your. Own. D**n. Bills.

[HomerPenguin]

When FDR, LBJ, and the rest of the big social program guys passed their bills, they frontloaded the benefits and backloaded the taxes.

Prior to Reaganomics and then George and Dick's Excellent Adventure, you could do that kind of thing without having to worry too much about the deficit.

[shafnutz05]

Prior to Reaganomics and then George and Dick's Excellent Adventure, you could do that kind of thing without having to worry too much about the deficit.

We'll agree on George and Dick, respectfully disagree on the Reagan era. But my point was, I am relieved they wrote it so that it wouldn't take effect for four years...plenty of time to undo the damage.

A bill that coerces private citizens into buying insurance from private insurers.......remarkable. A bill that is touted to promote competition, yet the drafters consistently refuse to allow interstate insurance sales, which would do more to create competition than any legislation could. Hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars in blatant, overt payoffs to senators and congressman for pork projects for their states. Five states getting special treatment because their senators waited a little longer to say yes. The stench of corruption is so strong with this bill that I can smell it when the winds blow out of the south.

[DelPen]

The hubris just floors me:

Obama rejected "carping" by critics that this is a "big spending government bill," citing a report from the Congressional Budget Office that it will reduce the projected federal budget deficit "by $132 billion the first 10 years and by over $1 trillion in the second."

Does Obama think the American people are stupid enough to actually believe this? Oh wait, they are, NEVERMIND.

I guess it is Christmas time, Santa Obama.

I like how the bill cuts Medicare $186 billion the first 10 years but we only end up saving $132 billion. So we're actually seeing a net increase of $54 billion.

And the whole saving money thing is a sham, it includes the first 3 years where there are no additional services.

[bh]

I don't know but who is going to pay my medical bills since I can't get insurance with the job I have. You want me to beg my neighbors and find out about that great American generosity, oh I guess I'm not working hard enough.

Are you freaking serious? You will. You. Pay your own bills. I pay mine; you pay yours. You.

Glad to see you finally cowboyed up and got a "real job." It is real, yes? Well, in the real world, with real exprenses, you are responsible for paying them yourself. Really. The rest of the world is not obliged to stand in for your mommy and daddy, to wipe your butt and put band-aids on your skinned knees. Pay. Your. Own. D**n. Bills.

lol,

[bh]

Yea, but I still can't get that insurance thing and pay for my E.R. visit last week.

I have no problem with the government providing tax breaks to companies that provide for their employees' insurance. That way, anyone that works (part-time or full-time) at least has access to it. I like this solution because it keeps the government's dirty, greasy hands off of the healthcare system, and is an incentive-based rather than a punishment-based program like the one they are offering.

See, I think this is one of the biggest problems. Individuals should be able to get the same tax breaks as companies. Wouldn't it be nice if you wanted to change jobs you wouldn't have to change providers, doctors, dentists, etc? Wouldn't it be nice if you could pick any plan available to you not just what you employer gives you? Maybe then it would be more like care insurance where you can pick and choose what type of coverage you want. I'd prefer to keep what my employer pays on me for health benefits and sign up for my own.

[bh]

The hubris just floors me:

Obama rejected "carping" by critics that this is a "big spending government bill," citing a report from the Congressional Budget Office that it will reduce the projected federal budget deficit "by $132 billion the first 10 years and by over $1 trillion in the second."

Does Obama think the American people are stupid enough to actually believe this? Oh wait, they are, NEVERMIND.

I guess it is Christmas time, Santa Obama.

I like how the bill cuts Medicare $186 billion the first 10 years but we only end up saving $132 billion. So we're actually seeing a net increase of $54 billion.

And the whole saving money thing is a sham, it includes the first 3 years where there are no additional services.

Is there somewhere that you can go read in clear and plain terms how this bill is supposed to be deficit neutral? I haven't seen anything showing it, just everybody stating that it is.

[bh]

Prior to Reaganomics and then George and Dick's Excellent Adventure, you could do that kind of thing without having to worry too much about the deficit.

that's a new one.

[SoupOrSam]

I don't know but who is going to pay my medical bills since I can't get insurance with the job I have. You want me to beg my neighbors and find out about that great American generosity, oh I guess I'm not working hard enough.

Are you freaking serious? You will. You. Pay your own bills. I pay mine; you pay yours. You.

Glad to see you finally cowboyed up and got a "real job." It is real, yes? Well, in the real world, with real exprenses, you are responsible for paying them yourself. Really. The rest of the world is not obliged to stand in for your mommy and daddy, to wipe your butt and put band-aids on your skinned knees. Pay. Your. Own. D**n. Bills.

lol,

Owned. I hereby nominate Shyster's post for Post of Infinity.

[shafnutz05]

I really don't know why all of these liberals are getting into a tizzy over the lack of a public option in the Senate bill. I have been saying this since day one, and I will repeat it ad nauseam. Do you REALLY think that Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid/Barack Obama are going to let a bill pass that completely shuts the door on the opportunity for a government-run single payer system? This has been their ultimate objective for decades, because of the absolute power that it allows over us.

How long do you think private insurers are going to be able to stay in business? It's funny how these insurance companies are always made out to be these evil, money-grubbing enterprises. Did you know that the profit margin for the private health insurance industry is a whopping.................two percent? This makes it less profitable than Tupperware, the railroad industry, Hershey, and Yahoo (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091025/D9BI4D6O1.html). TWO PERCENT.

By any modern standard, that is a pretty measly profit. Yet, the Democrats tell us that the private insurers are taking advantage of us and making these obscene profits, when they really aren't. So what are they doing? In this bill, they are placing downright ridiculous requirements on insurance companies. Essentially, not only are they going to be forced to cover "preexisting conditions", but they will also be forced to insure someone that has already fell ill. Can you imagine if the homeowner insurance industry was forced to accept insurance applications after the applicant's home was already up in flames? This, among with other restrictions, are intended to completely bankrupt the private insurance industry. As their current profit margin shows, it's not a far jump to being completely unprofitable, and thanks to an overbearing federal government, they will drive a private industry into bankruptcy.

So what happens when these insurance companies go bankrupt? Well, you might have guessed it. Uncle Sam is going to come swooping in, GM/Chrysler style, and gobble up these companies in the guise of "saving the failing health insurance industry". And before we know it, we are going to have no choice but to accept the single payer, government-run healthcare system. We will have no other options, and we will have nowhere to run. And all that rhetoric about competition you hear the Democrats spouting? Complete BS. They will only be happy when there is NO competition, and they are the only show in town.

So....private health insurance companies make a measly profit of 2%. Of course, I am sure there are still many of you that would welcome these new punitive measures that would drive these companies well into the loss column, and eventually drive them out of business. This kind of government policy, which effectively allows private business but enacts measures that make it impossible to succeed, are a veiled, dangerous form of fascism.

[Troy Loney]

I really don't know why all of these liberals are getting into a tizzy over the lack of a public option in the Senate bill. I have been saying this since day one, and I will repeat it ad nauseam. Do you REALLY think that Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid/Barack Obama are going to let a bill pass that completely shuts the door on the opportunity for a government-run single payer system? This has been their ultimate objective for decades, because of the absolute power that it allows over us.

How long do you think private insurers are going to be able to stay in business? It's funny how these insurance companies are always made out to be these evil, money-grubbing enterprises. Did you know that the profit margin for the private health insurance industry is a whopping.................two percent? This makes it less profitable than Tupperware, the railroad industry, Hershey, and Yahoo (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091025/D9BI4D6O1.html). TWO PERCENT.

By any modern standard, that is a pretty measly profit. Yet, the Democrats tell us that the private insurers are taking advantage of us and making these obscene profits, when they really aren't. So what are they doing? In this bill, they are placing downright ridiculous requirements on insurance companies. Essentially, not only are they going to be forced to cover "preexisting conditions", but they will also be forced to insure someone that has already fell ill. Can you imagine if the homeowner insurance industry was forced to accept insurance applications after the applicant's home was already up in flames? This, among with other restrictions, are intended to completely bankrupt the private insurance industry. As their current profit margin shows, it's not a far jump to being completely unprofitable, and thanks to an overbearing federal government, they will drive a private industry into bankruptcy.

So what happens when these insurance companies go bankrupt? Well, you might have guessed it. Uncle Sam is going to come swooping in, GM/Chrysler style, and gobble up these companies in the guise of "saving the failing health insurance industry". And before we know it, we are going to have no choice but to accept the single payer, government-run healthcare system. We will have no other options, and we will have nowhere to run. And all that rhetoric about competition you hear the Democrats spouting? Complete BS. They will only be happy when there is NO competition, and they are the only show in town.

So....private health insurance companies make a measly profit of 2%. Of course, I am sure there are still many of you that would welcome these new punitive measures that would drive these companies well into the loss column, and eventually drive them out of business. This kind of government policy, which effectively allows private business but enacts measures that make it impossible to succeed, are a veiled, dangerous form of fascism.

That 2% number is irrelevant....what was the spread between the premiums and funds they dispersed...wouldn't the down profits have more to do with the down economy and the poor performance of their investment portfolios?