LGP Political Discussion Thread

[MWB]

its not about health care to him, its about attacking acheivement in the name of equality.

What makes you draw that conclusion?

[Hockeynut!]

its not about health care to him, its about attacking acheivement in the name of equality.

What makes you draw that conclusion?

You just don't get it, MWB. Only lazy people don't have health insurance. They simply don't want to work hard enough or study enough to get a job with benefits.

Never mind the fact that employer provided health care is crippling a lot of businesses. This is only about lazy people who want to suckle from the government teat.

[pittsoccer33]

these politicians know the healthcare bill will not cut the cost of healthcare (although thats how they advertise it) they know cap and trade will not create jobs (although thats how they advertise it) they know the stimulus plan will not save the economy (although thats how they advertised it).

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

[doublem]

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

LOL that would be some voting block, I'm pretty sure that is how Obama got elected. Question, how do the illegal aliens vote?

[Hockeynut!]

how do the illegal aliens vote?

Uh oh. Now you did it.

[pittsoccer33]

This is only about lazy people who want to suckle from the government teat.

You don't think people have a responsibility to provide for themselves? I pay about $25 a month for my health insurance. When my roommate was between jobs he paid about $125 for three months of health insurance.

You don't want to pay for my motorcycle insurance or car insurance or homeowners insurance, so why do you want to pay for my health insurance?

[pittsoccer33]

Question, how do the illegal aliens vote?

ask acorn. then ask them how dead people voted and how more people voted for Al Franken in some districts than there were registered voters.

[MWB]

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

If I were to take a guess, welfare recipients and illegal immigrants make up two of the smallest voting blocks.... maybe 1% and 0% respectively of the total voting population.

[MWB]

these politicians know the healthcare bill will not cut the cost of healthcare (although thats how they advertise it) they know cap and trade will not create jobs (although thats how they advertise it) they know the stimulus plan will not save the economy (although thats how they advertised it).

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

So union members don't produce anything and aren't achievers? I'm sure many of them would be happy to hear that.

[Hockeynut!]

Sure, everyone should provide for themselves. No one has a right to health insurance. But there should be a safety net of some sort. That's what I think, but then I'm just a worthless liberal.

If you're 59 years old and your manufacturing company where you worked for 38 years shuts down and send all of it's business to China and you can't afford to pay $885 a month to keep up with your COBRA insurance and you get a cancer, that's your own fault because your a lazy bum. I'll be sure to tell my neighbor that it's his fault he's going to die because he couldn't afford the insurance and now he can't afford chemo.

[pittsoccer33]

So union members don't produce anything and aren't achievers? I'm sure many of them would be happy to hear that.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/11 ... rkers-sit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

every time a union contract comes up it is less work more pay. unions in manufacturing are the worst offenders. the ones who have to deal with the end client (like truck drivers for instance) are much more in tuned to the cost structures a business faces.

in michigan their lawmakers are trying to raise the minimum wage to $10 per hour. so few people work for minimum wage (mostly kids in jobs like wendys or blockbuster) so that wont be helping many families put food on the table. what it WILL do is provide a kickback for union members who's contracts are tied to minimum wage increases.

and if raising minimum wage will help create a middle class, why not raise it to $50 an hour??

[pittsoccer33]

That's what I think, but then I'm just a worthless liberal.

now i wouldnt say something mean like that, i like having some people to spar with during the lulls in the work day.

[MWB]

So union members don't produce anything and aren't achievers? I'm sure many of them would be happy to hear that.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/11 ... rkers-sit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

every time a union contract comes up it is less work more pay. unions in manufacturing are the worst offenders. the ones who have to deal with the end client (like truck drivers for instance) are much more in tuned to the cost structures a business faces.

in michigan their lawmakers are trying to raise the minimum wage to $10 per hour. so few people work for minimum wage (mostly kids in jobs like wendys or blockbuster) so that wont be helping many families put food on the table. what it WILL do is provide a kickback for union members who's contracts are tied to minimum wage increases.

and if raising minimum wage will help create a middle class, why not raise it to $50 an hour??

You are throwing a huge blanket over all union members. Obviously there are some bad unions, with the auto union being the worst offenders. However, that doesn't mean that most unions are bad are unproductive.

[doublem]

This is only about lazy people who want to suckle from the government teat.

You don't think people have a responsibility to provide for themselves? I pay about $25 a month for my health insurance. When my roommate was between jobs he paid about $125 for three months of health insurance.

You don't want to pay for my motorcycle insurance or car insurance or homeowners insurance, so why do you want to pay for my health insurance?

Health care isn't welfare. People literally can't afford it. I know the world you live if you work hard and pray to Jesus everything will be fine, but in the real world things are a little more complicated. Hard working people all over the country can't afford it, and again please look at the facts you aren't going to pay for it, it will simple be an OPTION. Did you read this article? http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/2 ... eneurship/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; But health care will stop people from working hard, right?

[MWB]

But health care will stop people from working hard, right?

I know I stopped working hard as soon as Obama got elected.

[DelPen]

http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.as ... 9&catid=37" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not the norm but let's reform the current government programs and work to bring costs down first, if that doesn't work after say 4 years then look for something different. Tort reform and punitive damages being stricken from medical lawsuits would be a good start which would lower malpractice insurance.

One thing that puzzles me, they say this could have cost up to $360,000 or $600 a ride. Why does an ambulance ride cost $600? Do they work the price of buying all the equipment into the ride?

[Ron`]

But health care will stop people from working hard, right?

I know I stopped working hard as soon as Obama got elected.

We all should have even if our jobs were not lost. Get on the entitlement train and go back to just pure bartering for goods or services. That would have thrown the government for a loop...

[Geezer]

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

If I were to take a guess, welfare recipients and illegal immigrants make up two of the smallest voting blocks.... maybe 1% and 0% respectively of the total voting population.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... yers-hook/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Illegals don't need to vote to glom onto federal social programs including heathcare. It also isn't much of a secret that the far left is very supportive of illegal immigrants in providing social spending.

[doublem]

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

If I were to take a guess, welfare recipients and illegal immigrants make up two of the smallest voting blocks.... maybe 1% and 0% respectively of the total voting population.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... yers-hook/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Illegals don't need to vote to glom onto federal social programs including heathcare. It also isn't much of a secret that the far left is very supportive of illegal immigrants in providing social spending.

They also pay about 7 billion into S.S.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/busin ... 83&ei=5090" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[MWB]

all of those pieces of legislation are designed to redistribute wealth from the achievers and producers to liberal voting block (union members, welfare recipients, illegal immigrants)

If I were to take a guess, welfare recipients and illegal immigrants make up two of the smallest voting blocks.... maybe 1% and 0% respectively of the total voting population.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... yers-hook/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Illegals don't need to vote to glom onto federal social programs including heathcare. It also isn't much of a secret that the far left is very supportive of illegal immigrants in providing social spending.

My point was in response to pitt saying that illegals are part of a voting block when they really aren't.

[Geezer]

If I were to take a guess, welfare recipients and illegal immigrants make up two of the smallest voting blocks.... maybe 1% and 0% respectively of the total voting population.[/quote]
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... yers-hook/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Illegals don't need to vote to glom onto federal social programs including heathcare. It also isn't much of a secret that the far left is very supportive of illegal immigrants in providing social spending.[/quote]

My point was in response to pitt saying that illegals are part of a voting block when they really aren't.

[/quote]
I agree with you on that point.

[cs6687]

Question, how do the illegal aliens vote?

ask acorn. then ask them how dead people voted and how more people voted for Al Franken in some districts than there were registered voters.

Al Franken did what Gov. Tracy did in "Black Sheep"?

[Ron`]

So union members don't produce anything and aren't achievers? I'm sure many of them would be happy to hear that.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/11 ... rkers-sit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

every time a union contract comes up it is less work more pay. unions in manufacturing are the worst offenders. the ones who have to deal with the end client (like truck drivers for instance) are much more in tuned to the cost structures a business faces.

in michigan their lawmakers are trying to raise the minimum wage to $10 per hour. so few people work for minimum wage (mostly kids in jobs like wendys or blockbuster) so that wont be helping many families put food on the table. what it WILL do is provide a kickback for union members who's contracts are tied to minimum wage increases.

and if raising minimum wage will help create a middle class, why not raise it to $50 an hour??

I'm not sure what union you are talking about but I can tell you my union has averaged less then the national average wage increase for the last four years. Our contributions to health care have steadily risen over the contract. Prior to that we took a complete wage freeze for 3 years and increased health care contributions. You cast a wide net when you make such statements about unions.

We fully understand the economic conditions and expect to likely give more on the next upcoming negotiations to stay employed and off the entitlement list.

[Tomas]

I was just asked to participate in an advisory round-table discussion for one (reasonably top) US politician. He requested our opinions on a variety of economic topics - and healthcare is the one I know the least about. I always have the option to stay silent, but I suspect that the whole discussion has the potential to turn into a conservative love-fest. And because my friends know that I have no problem with acting as the devil's advocate (I think that the main benefit of similar discussions is to hear both sides of every story), I have one simple request:

Could somebody point me to website(s) that make a convincing (preferably, supported by the actual cost/benefit estimates) case FOR the universal government-sponsored healthcare reform? (Especially if those sites talk about how much it would cost to hire all those governmental employees running after old people and forcing them to choose how to DIE. )

Once again for people with reading comprehension problems: FOR the universal government-sponsored healthcare reform...

Thanks!!

[DelPen]

Tomas, the best thing to check would be how much money things that could be prevented end up costing in the end like heart disease and cancer pre-screenings, things like that. If you can make a case that the cost to treat those diseases well after they become a problem cost a lot more than making it so people can get tests and early treatment to prevent these from escelating to a serious stage then that would be a great way to persue this as a positive. If you are also going to look at GDP of health care costs comapred to countires that have "socialized" medicine make sure to remove defense spending because the US spends a ton of money to defnd the entire world, not just this country. If the numbers are still skewed where the US is still higher then go that route too.