this is an open discussion forum. keep it clean. personal attacks on private citizens will not be tolerated. you may discuss politics if you like but you may not rip or endorse specific local candidates.
Friday, February 22, 2008
clinton vs. obama....
in your opinion, which candidate won last night's debate?
55 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Since John Edwards left the race, Hillary has been pretty consistent in "winning" the debates. I have tried to understand Obama. I just don't see the fascination with his oratory or his message. I sincerely hope that I don't have to vote for him. Maybe something crazy will happen at the convention.
It's obvious, Clinton has more substance than Obama. It amazes me that so many voters are willing to vote their confidence in a man with so little experience. If voting on a speech, I, too, would vote for him, but there is so much more at stake here than oratory. Yes, his oratory along with more experience and substance would make for a good president. One ticket with both of them on it would make the best ticket.
I think Karl Marx edged them both. Obama has substance. He just does a better job of hiding his socialist ideals than does Hillary. How many democratic voters know that the evil Bush tax cuts actually gave tax breaks across the board, esp to the middle class? Of course, I doubt they have the desire to search for the truth that destroys their political philosophy. Then they would have to admit that W isn't pure evil. It's so much easier to blindly buy into the class warfare rhetorica and blame all your hardships and shortcomings on the evil rich.
They both have ideas that are almost identical and both equally impossible to provide fiscally. They are both in line with Socialism and have plans for government intervention in the free market. If congress allows their plans to take hold with little opposition we will be belly up in no time. Corporate Taxes and Profit Caps are a burden on the consumers and employees. Democrats have an economic platform that only the brain-dead and entitlement leeches could praise. I am unwilling to accept anyone that has to depend on government assistance as an equal to myself and I'll be damned if giving them more is going to solve anything. Obama is a complete joke with nothing more than a well oiled set of jaws. Hillary is the wife of the worst President that has ever been in the Oval Office, I believe this to be her only accomplishment- if you can call it that. Feel free to blast away at Bush but it will not change a single thing about the two losers running for the Welfare Championship Title of Democratic President. May God punish you all for stealing money from hard working citizens to fund your socialist programs that you created to comfort the lazy masses. Hopefully a revolution will find us at each others throats! I do not want to peacefully exist with you anymore.
The middle class is being overtaken by the lazy class, and that leads to a democrat in office. No sense trying to argue with them. A tax increase will not harm the lazy class because they are not paying into the system either. The wealthy is in power so you can bet laws will be written to protect them. Yes we are getting screwed again. It's up to the middle class to pay all the bills.
How does a person join the lazy class. I want to join because I'm getting tired of paying for it without getting anything in return.
1:14, Well said. Your contempt for these people is well warranted and way past due. Do any of you democrats understand the underlying philosophy of your political ideals? If so, will you please openly debate me on their validity. If not, will you please just admit that you are looking for a free handout....and not vote. Voting should not be used for personal gain at the expense of others. This is an open invitiation. I will check back later.
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic." - Benjamin Franklin We are closing in on the final days of the great experiment of America. It is easy to see if you step back and look at the whole picture.
Republicans are now Democrats and Democrats are now Socialists. The Constitution is being altered a little more every year and new Entitlements and Rights are being pulled out of thin air all in the name of a vote.
Consider this. How often do you hear our elected officials refer to our political system as a "democracy"? Our founding fathers warned extensively against a democracy, and acually loathed the idea - rightfully so. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.
I would like to take a poll of the LCCHS high school senior class to see how many of them can name the type of government system that runs our country. I'll give you a hint. Its not a democracy.
"Democracy is the first step on the path to socialism." -Karl Marx
obama untested, just like george w. bush......george w.: living proof that "never send a boy to do a mans job".......some folks look for answers, others just look for fights......democracts are just regular people informed on issues........canada, where a pack of smokes is ten bulks, and a heart transplant is free....john mccain's straight talk express should be called "pillow talk express".........republicans are opinionated; democrats are fact-seeking........
Sine you are so "fact" based, I have a question for you. Have you ever lived in Canada? I have! The health care sucks. If you are diagnosed with Cancer A doctor will book your nexy appointment for six months down the road. The few doctors that they have are over booked. Thats why so many canadians come to America and pay cash for health care. Dont wish for something that you know nothing about.
6:40PM you suck with your ignorant opinion. No other president has faced what George W went through on 9/11. He had the guts to retaliate. The American people backed him until the candy ass liberals saw that it would take a while to finish the job. Now its my turn. I would trade one George Bush for all you candy ass liberals. I don't think you are fit to be an American. What will you do when the sh-- really hits the fan?
Bush couldn't have been any worse. The Republican party of old has been overwhelmed by a fringe group of money grabbing power brokers hell bent on world domination. The word "liberal" to many who use this site has become a racial tag that is used to demean and beat down political conversation and opposing views.
I chose you because it seemed as if the rest of the democratic supporters on this blog are just throwing out empty buzz words and making unwarranted personal attacks based on assumptions and generalizations.
To the rest of you.I was born and raised in barnesville. If you want to call me a redneck, then that is your opinion; and, well, some of the best people I know are rednecks, so fine by me. But if you want to believe I am gullible or ignorant, then I ask you join in on our discussion and dazzle me with your Northernly, liberal intellect.
I have always been quick to admit George Bush's shortcomings. Namely, the growth of the federal government, illegal immigration, our public school system and the bankrupt social security system, to name a few. However, the liberal solutions to these problems are to grow government more, grant amnesty to illegals, and raise taxes to fund their wealth redistribution retirement system.
I agree with you about the republican party. Very few of them know what fiscal conservatism and free market enterprise is. However, I do not use the word liberal to stifle political discussion, but can we please call it what it is. Liberal, progressive, democratic, and the like, are just a smokescreen for the socialist movement. If you support it, that is fine. I would love to have an open forum to discuss the philosophies behind all of them. I don't believe that a philosophical difference is a bad thing, unless it is poorly founded. If you truly believe in the systems you support, then you should be able to defend it in an open and polite discussion.
If it's political conversation and opposing views you want, I believe you will find both with me.
I would to start by saying the entire liberal philosophy is based on and cannot work without the government's monopoly on the use of force in otherwise rational dealings.
And to show my true sincerity, I would like you to fire the first question or to choose the first topic.
i believe both the liberals and the conservatives want the government to be in charge of some things......the only difference is what are those things.....as a liberal, i believe one of those things is health care.....if they can be in charge of schools, fire and police forces, road progams, water programs, defense, irs, and etc,,,,,,then they should be able to handle health care also......now if some of the conservatives choose to continue with their own insurance, or if they want to pay for their care out of their own pockets, so be it.......most people on hmo's now end up seeing nurse practiciners and P.A.'s instead of doctors
i usually don't use bad language but you liberals bring it out. all yall ever want is for someone else to be in charge of your problems while yall stand with your hand out for more. yall are to sorry and lazy to stand on your own 2 feet.
you can toss and call me whatever name you want but i know the type of people America would be better off without.
if yall want all the social programs so bad then why don't yall move to a country that has them. just travel north.
you see, a lot of us prefer smaller government keeping thier nose wher it belongs. yall want government to manage all your affairs, even giving you a free pay handout once a month because you to sorry to earn it.
Now we are getting somewhere. Both parties def want control. You are right that both parties want to conrol certain aspects of our lives. Each party wants to control what it deems important, and leave the rest to the people. Their is some genious and idiocy in both ideals.
I believe that the economy should be a total free market enterprise system and we should be free to make personal choices without being persuaded by a Christian psudo-theocracy.
The problem I have with turning over health care to our government based on your premise that they control other social economies, is that they do so poorly and wastefuly. Medicare itself has ballooned out of control and is now bankrupt, as is Social Security. I believe the government should control police, fire, and defense, in inderectly the IRS, if that is how they fund said programs. However, our public school system is broken and perpetually sliding down in the world rankings, in spite of record spending and the gov't's monopoly on water has hindered free market solutions to the problems such as the current drought.
These are secondary to my main reason for opposing socialized medicine, and that reason is that it's not economically feasible without my taxes and I don't believe anyone's health besides my own are my responsibility, and consequently, I shouldn't be paying for it....but I digress.
If I want to opt out of the government's health plan, will I have to go to a private hospital, much like we have private schools? If I opt out, do I still have to pay? Why would Dr's work for the government and be forced to offer their services for what ever price the gov't deems appropriate instead of starting a private practice and charge what my services are worth on a free market with rational and informed participants?
And you forgot to ask me a question.
PS. Whoever said "canada, where a pack of smokes is ten bucks, and a heart transplant is free" can please give me their definition of "free". Just because the money doesn't come out of your pocket at that very instant, doesn't make it free.
i am old enough to remember that every body down here said that medicare either wouldnt work or it would kill the u.s. medical system and drive doctors out....they predicted that most drs wouldnt accept it and the medicare pts would get bad healthcare.......alot of people said that if it became law, they would refuse it when they got to be 65.......well it does work, it hadnt ruined our healthcare system, and it hasnt drove away the doctors.....and i dont know anyone personally that has refused it,,,,,unless they had state or federal ins......national healthcare plan would be just like medicare, except everybody would be eligible to join.....would decrease cost for all, and would help hospital(would decrease the uninsured coming to the e.r.) and help the doctors......have you noticed that the american medical assoc. has been running ads saying we need universal coverage......wake up folks, its coming,,,,we need to jump on the band wagon or we are to be left behind.......30 years ago, we wouldnt have thought that people would be seeing non physicians (p.a.'s and nurse practiciners) for their healthcare providers,,,,,and we woudnt have thought that the american people would stand for insurance companies teling doctors what treatment and how many days a patient can stay in hospital.....but it is happening today........dont yall trust the government to make decisions better than some insurance company
to answer your question about opting out of government health insurance, yes, anyone that wants to pay his own medical fees can do it, or it someone want to get personal insurance on his own, that is fine......but i believe the majority of the population would opt to take the medicare for everyone.......the problem i see with individual insurance for a person or family is that the price is so different, not only for age, race, history, but for location.....when you apply for insurance, they wont quote you a price until they know your zip..............suppose you had a cafe, and when someone came in you charged them for the buffett not only by their age, but according to their zip code, their weight, their race, and their line of work.....and then if that cafe refused service to at 20% of the people that showed up ....the government would have a fit, they wouldnt allow it.....but they are allowing insurance companies to refuse insurance to some....and allowing them to charge differnt amounts......if twin bothers aged 40, both with same history applied for insurance in same zip code, but in different counties, their insurance would cost different amount......that aint right.....if walmart charged everybody a different price for the same pair of shoes, there might be a riot.....
the replublicans are the closest thing in history to communist pigs. bush has allowed the bankers and others through lack of regulartory supervision to screw this county up. hillary and bill clinton had a big hand in costing america jobs with nafta. bush made it all worse. now we are really screwed. there are very few good paying jobs and the imports are killing us. bush let the banks make all kinds of stupid loans to people that bill and hillary screwed out of jobs. now we are really in a mess.
this is why obama will probaly take it over. we cant afford another lying stealing clinton or another mccain parrot of communist bush leting his party members wring the last dime out of americans.
im afraid we are heading for doom with this bush/clinton/bush/clinton crooked lying creepy stealing from the working middle class crowd.
You are right. Bush appears to be communist. He dictated us into a war in Iraq while letting the family and friends fleece the middle class. The Clinton's aren't any better.
We are indeed in trouble if we continue what the Clintons and Bushes have done to us all.
Everybody wants to point fingers and lay blame and whine. The fault belongs to the people. The people allowed all this to continue. The people are not united in a cause. Government has everyone brainwashed and pitted against each other through a different party. One person alone is not going to change the problems this country has but, this political race sure has almost every one of you convinced that it will. My how easily you can be had. This country is supposed to be by the people for the people but, the people have forgot that and now look for some one person economic savior. That's exactly what our current group of governmental leadership wants; to keep all of you in the dark and pitted against each other while they take everything you have and will ever have. We have the power. We have forgot how to use it. The fault is our own. Not Bush, not Clinton.
did anyone see the 20/20 show friday night where abc hired teenage white actors to act like criminals and destroy a car in daytime in front of people walking past them....nobody called 911 to report the vandals.......then they hired 3 black teenagers to do the same thing, and every single person who saw them called 911 to report the criminals...........and this wasnt even in the south......think about this real hard and you will see that america is not going to vote for a black as president.........so far alot of democracts have crossed over to vote for mccain to assure that he is the republican nominee.....and enough republicans have crossed over to vote for obama to make sure clinton didnt get the nomination........but believe me, the republicans will vote for mccain......but most of the white democracts will either not vote or will vote for mccain......there will be some states that obama will have recieved more votes in the primary than he will in the general election.......there will not be a single state that went republican in 2004 that will go democract......
Will one of you give me your definition of communism, please. It is more than a buzzword to be used against those with whom you disagree.
"The Bushes are the closest thing in history to a communist pig." Sure the communist weren't the closest thing in history to a communist pig?
Do you know anyone that has been turned away by a hospital? You do know that they cannot refuse treatment to anyone, right?
I understand your argument about the buffet, but let us compare apples to apples. Do you pay the same in car insurance as someone with a poor driving record (bad health)? Can you get car insurance on a wrecked car (pre-existing condition)? Of course not because it costs more for the company to insure the bad drivers.
The facts are that a buffet has determined the average profit margin they want to make and price the meal accordingly. Over time, the law of large numbers cancels out the heavy eaters and the light eaters. It is a decision made by the buffet and the customers; the government isn't forcing me to eat at said buffet, nor are they dictating the price the buffet can charge.
The insurance companies need your zip code because of cost of living differences. I currently live in atlanta. A teeth cleaning up here is roughly $300 whereas it is $80 in Barnesville. The price of the actual procedures have to be factored in to the price of insurance. That was simple enough.
And the answer to your question is and emphatic NO! I don't trust the government to make decisions about my health. Just as I don't trust them to make decisions about my children's education or my retirement. Government is not designed to efficiently provide services outside of their original functions. That is why we are broke as a country. We have our government running far more functions of society than for which it was intended. We need to cut these back, not expand them into a field that comprises roughly 15% of our national economy.
You say that you are sure I would be able to opt out. However, in HillaryCare of 1993, it would have been illegal for me to seek private health care and for a DR to provide me with it. And if I do opt out for better coverage, do I still have to pay?
I am by no means endorsing the healthcare system in this country. But I believe less, not more, government intervention is needed. I am a 25 yr old single male, I should be able to get health insurance without paying for accidental pregnancy coverage. I should be able to purchase health insurance with before tax dollars, just like employers that provide health insurance for their employees. I should be able to see a PA and get a prescription for a cold. It doesn't take 10 yrs of medical school to diagnose a sore throat and prescribe a Z-pack. These are all laws our government has made that drive up the costs of health insurance to the individual. And both parties want power. And a great way to get power is to control someone's access to their life's neccesities. And the more laws they pass to drive up the costs of healthcare, and the more they demonize the health insurance companies, the closer they come to their ultimate goal.
However, our system is broken and you are right that socialized medicine is coming. It is inevitable. The american people are just not prepared, or willing, to take responsibility for themselves and their lives. We have become a nation of complacency. Sure, we talk about freedom, and how we love freedom; but we won't accept the responsbility that comes with it.
what freedom are you talking about......you are not free to drive a car without insurance...not free to ride motorcycle without a helmut....not free to ride in car without seat belt....not free to build house without permits.....not free to send kids to a school in a different school zone.....if you have an HMO insurance, you are free to go to hospital of choice.....not free to burn trash on your property at certain times....not free to water yard...............now i am not saying that most of these are not good things, but dont say we a free to do as we please......so maybe one of the things that we need to add to the long list is national health insurance......by the way, if everyone had full health insurance, then car insurance would decrease because you wouldnt have to come health coverage on your car insurance.....
and why would having national health insurance make us a commuist country....canada, england, and most of the other countries with national health insurance are not communist....
Did I ever say that national healthcare would turn us into a communist country? I was just asking if the bloggers calling bush and clinton commies, know what communism is?
However, all those countries named are a European style of Socialist.
Of course you're not free to do as you please. You can't kill someone if you please. I'm not advocating a lawless chaos.
I am talking about the freedom and responsiblity to live your life so long as you don't impose on other's rights.
Car insurance is required to pay for the other person's property if you damage it.
In some states you are free to ride a motorcycle sans helmet. (But I say if you wreck and can't afford to fix your skull, it shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to cover your bill)
Same goes for seatbelt.
I think you should be able to build without a permit, and that just comes from the government's property tax issues.
Our school system is terrible. The government has a monopoly on poor education, due to lack of competition, and you want to do the same with health care.
Burning Trash could get out of control and damage other's property due to your negligence....hence the burn permit.
Watering your yard is a temporary ban bc of the drought. If the free market was at work, you could water your yard, but it would cost you. Once again, gov't is the problem, not the solution.
Regardless, we are getting off topic. You didn't answer my questions. If I opt out of the national healthcare sytem, will I have to pay? Do you know anyone in this country that can't receive medical care? (Not insurance, but the actual care) Give me one good reason why you want the government deciding when, where, and how you receive healthcare. Don't you think you and your Dr could make that decission better?
I see the good old rhetoric by the drug companies and medical business has taken hold. The political machine relies on people not being able to use common sense.
The United States is one of the only countries in the world without a national health care program. National programs work very well in Australia, England, Canada, and other places.
I've worked hard all my life, I currently have two high paying full time jobs, and I can barely afford medical for myself. I lost vision in my left eye in a concussion accident many years ago because I was too far away from help to get medical treatment, and so now any policy I get will not cover my good eye!
I could easily lose everything I've worked my whole life for just by having an accident or illness or to keep my vision.
On the other hand an illegal alien can easily get free medical in the USA. I could pay hundreds of thousands for what they get for free.
Only an absolute fool would think the system we have works.
Another point is the Clintons. People better listen close to McCain and Clinton. They both, just like Bush, lie and distort facts. This is what gets us into trouble at home and around the world. I communicate with people all over the world on a daily basis, and the world’s opinion of the USA is at an all time low.
The whole process disgusts me. We can't afford another four years of lies and distortion, and Hillary and McCain are masters of deceit. We have very limited choices. It’s always to pick the lesser of the evils. Fortunately none are as stupid as Bush, so we probably won’t do worse.
I've sent money to Obama. It's the first time in my life I've ever done something like that. There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that a Republican will win, and I'll be damned before I let that lying witch Hillary get in office.
I totally agree with you that our healthcare system is broken. However, people from Canada and England come here for necessary procedures. At least those that can afford it. Dr's offices in FL are booked all winter long by Canadian snow birds. If it works so well, why are they coming here? There are months long lines in these countries to get necessary procedures. This is because government is not designed to run a healthcare system, like they aren't designed to run a school or a retirement system.
The government is running up the cost of your health insurance. Why do i get health insurance through my employer with before tax dollars, yet you have to pay with after tax dollars? Assuming your high salary puts you in the top tax bracket, you are at a 30-35% disadvantage already.
I think I am using common sense. I think common sense tells me that I don't want some beauracrat deciding I can't get a prostate screening because of a government budget. I think common sense tells me that if I have an early stage of fightable cancer, I want to be able to attack it ASAP, not when a nameless, faceless government agency decides I finally need it more than my neighbor.
Lets take two cases. Patient A has late stage prostate cancer and his chances of survival are 20%. Patient B caught his prostate cancer in an early stage and his chance of survival is 80%. Which one does your all knowing government put in the front of the line? Is patient A up the proverbial creek, or does patient B have to wait until A dies. Time is not something either has to waste. The last thing they need is your government going around in circles.
In our current system, if patient B wants treatment now, he can find it. He may have to sell his house, car, and business, but he will be alive and able to start over. He won't have to sit around wondering if he kissed the right beauracratic asses to get him pushed to the front of the line.
Do you like the pollitical machine? Why would you want to give it any more power? Once they control your access to healthcare, it is pretty easy for them to control the rest of your life and your vote.
Nader is in the race now as an independent. So if you are tired of all the bull s--- from all these so called leader-wanta-b s, cast your vote for Ralph Nader and lets all try an in-between.
medicare works now......lets just simply expand medicare to cover all people over 50, then in 5 yrs expand it to all over 40 yr old...then in 10 yrs expand it to all over 30.....and so on til it covers all.......but if you have insurance and like it better and want to keep....then keep it...
I do not believe that the people who are voting for Obama are really his supporters. I feel that the republicans are setting him up for failure, because they feel that he does not have a chance against McCain. As soon as it is time to vote they are going to jump parties.
Liberleft, medicare is bankrupt. It did not and cannot fiscally work. Medicare spending has ballooned out of control. It tripled from 2000 to 2005 alone. Not that I am trumpeting the republicans spending, but after watching the some of the democratic debates, does "economically feasible" ever cross the mind of liberals?
Also, I have yet to get an answer to my question. If I opt out of your government medicare system and choose to keep my own coverage, will I still have to pay the associated taxes?
no doubt about it....10% of the votes in wisconsin democrat primary identified themselves as republicans.....but it is o k because alot of democracts have crossed over to vote for mccain.....we realized 2 years ago that the democracts couldnt win the presidential election and so we started to plan to try to elect the most liberal republican.....that was suppose to be rudy, but we never got a chance to vote for him.....so mccain is our replacement.........funny that republicans help elect our primary winner and we help elect their primary winner......how else can you explain so many democratic votes in red states.....more democract votes in ark, tenn, ala, and mo. than republican votes in primaries......and everyone knows there aint that many dems in those states....
The Republicans, thanks to that idiot George Bush, haven't got a chance in hell of winning the nation. We are all done.
The only choice is do we get Hillary or Obama.
Hillary is such a liar and such a part of the failed policies of the past Clinton presidency I'd sure hate to see her get elected. So it looks like I'm stuck voting for Obama or Nader.
medicare is a godsend.....it has worked for years and will continue to work for years to come, unless the republicans try to turn it into an h m o .......
Speaking of healthcare and medicare...Why does it seem that so many people in dire health end up spending every last cent on health care, assets included.
My grandfather was in an assisted living facility for the last year or so before he had to move into the nursing home part (he was 93 and it was only temporary until my Aunt could receive the training necessary to have him in their home) Every few months he got a notice that his monthly 'rent' was increasing by $100 or more. His rent started out at $1500 for a one bedroom, his entire apartment was not more then 25x30, that included kitchen, bathroom, walls even. I have seen on news shows where someone younger having a longterm terminal illness actually had to be divorced from his wife so that their lifetime of savings and hardworked for assets could be divided for her to have SOMETHING to live on/in. Honestly they were looking at loosing everything and she would have to live out the rest of her life (she looked to be in her 50s) with what? Her kids? Begging for a hand out from the system? This was a middle class family, they had insurance. They worked hard all their life to have something to leave their kids, At the very least to live independently in their old age.
You folks don't think government intervention with medical assistance programs doesn't have something to do with this? If I understand correctly isn't it Medicare that hires people to dig and look for peoples assets to make sure they don't hide anything and all they have is paid in before medicare starts paying anything on the bills?
Perhaps someone with a parent in this type of situation can enlighten me on how this works?
The problem lies with the costs. No other industry could survive if it didn't adjust the price of its good or service to the customer's ability to pay. In the healthcare industry, the end user, the patient, is not seeing the money leave their pockets, therefore doesn't know what they are paying for healthcare. This applies to the medical research and development companies, all the way down to the single Dr.'s office. This is an inherent problem of having a third party pays system, whether that third party is a government or a private health insurance company.
I think we need private health savings account. You could fund them with after tax dollars and all interest could grow tax free, much like a roth IRA. Most people run into serious health problems later in life. If they start saving at a young age, the savings would have grown exponentially by the time they need them. If your grandfather started funding a private account at the age of 21 and put $2-3,ooo into low risk type investments, assuming a modest return of 6-7%, he would have probably had money left over after paying his qualified medical expenses. And the good part, it is his account. There is no government official or health insurance executive making the decisions on whether or not the procedure is worth the money; because the short and not-so-sweet of it is, his life has no worth to them. Only him and his family can make that call, and they are much better equipped to determine the worth of your grandfather's life than is someone who has never met him.
That is something the government could enact today to enable people to start saving, but that would take away their vote buying leverage.
where you gonna get a 7% return this year.....stock market has averaged 2% PER YEAR since bush became president.....also if you do a health account, it will be like a roth account and grow tax free........however if some crazy person happens to implement the fairtax., you will be screwed....cause you will still be taxed when you spent......the roth, the medical savings accounts, and the tax free municipal bonds will all be devastated by the fair tax.....
Once again Liberleft, you look like a Jackass. Please, Please, Please do your homework on the FairTax. I know that debating you on this issue will go nowhere considering I don't speak Jackassanese. Get book, open book, read book, don't make stupid statements. You did not take into account the fact that you are laboring tax free, saving tax free, investing tax free, and REMOVING the embedded taxes which are being paid by people with Roth IRAs everyday under our current tax code on every purchase.
fairtax4me
Rev Run, I would favor a health savings account that grows tax free BUT I would like to see it invested with PRE-tax dollars. I believe that is the idea being pushed and it makes a whole lot more sense to me. There should be no punishment for investing OR cashing out an investment but especially in this case. This should also go untouched by the Estate Tax (or even considered wealth for that matter) upon death leaving your grandchildren a head start on health savings, children or your spouse with more.
dow was at 10,650 when george w, took over......7 years later it has risen only 2000 points or less than 20%.....divide that 20% by 7 yrs and you get less than 3% increase yearly under the george w.........under clinton it went from the 3000's to the 10,650......that is 17% per year......if you want to make money and help the poor, vote democract
I don't think presidents have much control over the economy. In a perfect world they wouldn't have any control. The economy under clinton rode the .com bubble, just as the economy under bush rode the housing bubble. The difference is that when bush took office, he had the .com bust, and the market plunge brought on by 9/11. Regardless, anyone with any sense will tell you that an 8% return is very normal for a long term investment. Outside of left vs right bs, a health savings account is a great way to enable people to pay for their own healthcare and indirectly, control costs. As long as the government or health insurance companies are cutting the checks, there is no need to shop for better prices or to seek alternative measures and live healthier lives.
Liberleft, I have two simple questions. What problem does the left have with people taking responsibility and paying for their own healthcare? And, by what philosophy can you support your claim that I should pay for someone's healthcare other than my own?
Fairtax, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You have to either fund it with after tax dollars and let it grow tax free, or you have to fund it with before tax dollars and get taxed on the withdrawals. Tax rates are going to have to go up to support the wonderful burden on us youngsters known as the baby boomers, so it is better to pay taxes on that money now and have the interest grow tax free.
dont have a problem with a person paying for his own healthcare,,,,i have a problem with insurance companies refusing insurance to certain people, or charging some people more than others, or by insuring people but with exceptions or with waiting periods of 6 mo to a year......in fla. insurance co started not insuring homes and condos that were on the beach front...so the state and federal government started to underwrite those insurance policies.....and no one minds that happening, but heaven forbid that the government insuring people for their health.....so to sum it up, the state can make you have car insurance, and can guarantee you insurance on your beach home, but no it cant help you find insurance for your health......man, what a concept
This is a much more civil discussion than the one about barack obama's middle name, which to me doesn't matter one bit. I want to thank all of you for keeping it civil. Car insurance just isn't a good comparison. Car insurance is only required for liability coverage, which effects damaging someone else's property. Your bad health cannot damage my property, which is why the state doesn't require you have health insurance.
All insurance is based on different pay rates for different customers, and their ability to refuse to cover certain people. Does it suck for those people? Yes. But even car insurance companies couldn't function by charging everyone the same amounts. That is why your premiums go up when you get a ticket or have a wreck. That is why premiums are higher for certain groups of people based on statistics. That is why premiums are more if you are insuring a Mercedez compared to a Chevy. I am 25 yrs old, never had any medical issues, don't smoke, and exercise regularly. By your premises, I should pay the same for health insurance as a 60 yr old smoker that has had 3 strokes, a bypass surgery, and cancer.
And you aren't supporting the government helping people FIND health insurance. You are supporting raising our taxes to fund everyone's healthcare. You are choosing government over free market solutions.
And you didn't answer my second question? By what premise can you claim that it is my responsibility to pay for someone else's health?
you shouldnt care about helping someone paid for their health....you dont mind paying to help the iraq people build their country......you dont mind paying to keep the national parks clean and operating.....dont mind paying for all the highways across the country.....dont mind paying for a farmer in iowa growing corn...or south ga growing peanuts.....you dont mind your property tax paying for county services to the non property owners......in american we spread the wealth around, except for healthcare,,,,its not christian-like
That's where you're wrong. Yes. I do mind paying for all that. I especially mind paying for farm subsidies and corporate welfare. I don't mind as much paying for national defense, infastructure, and i will even say I don't mind about the parks, though I think private economies could do it better. These all are group efforts and not individual responsibilities. That's why we need to repeal the income tax. Liberals take it as a free for all for any entitlement program they can think of.
You still didn't answer the question. Why is it my responsibility to pay for someone else's healthcare, and by what premise can you support the government stealing my money to do so?
55 comments:
Since John Edwards left the race, Hillary has been pretty consistent in "winning" the debates. I have tried to understand Obama. I just don't see the fascination with his oratory or his message. I sincerely hope that I don't have to vote for him. Maybe something crazy will happen at the convention.
It's obvious, Clinton has more substance than Obama. It amazes me that so many voters are willing to vote their confidence in a man with so little experience. If voting on a speech, I, too, would vote for him, but there is so much more at stake here than oratory. Yes, his oratory along with more experience and substance would make for a good president. One ticket with both of them on it would make the best ticket.
I think Karl Marx edged them both. Obama has substance. He just does a better job of hiding his socialist ideals than does Hillary. How many democratic voters know that the evil Bush tax cuts actually gave tax breaks across the board, esp to the middle class? Of course, I doubt they have the desire to search for the truth that destroys their political philosophy. Then they would have to admit that W isn't pure evil. It's so much easier to blindly buy into the class warfare rhetorica and blame all your hardships and shortcomings on the evil rich.
They both have ideas that are almost identical and both equally impossible to provide fiscally. They are both in line with Socialism and have plans for government intervention in the free market. If congress allows their plans to take hold with little opposition we will be belly up in no time.
Corporate Taxes and Profit Caps are a burden on the consumers and employees.
Democrats have an economic platform that only the brain-dead and entitlement leeches could praise.
I am unwilling to accept anyone that has to depend on government assistance as an equal to myself and I'll be damned if giving them more is going to solve anything.
Obama is a complete joke with nothing more than a well oiled set of jaws.
Hillary is the wife of the worst President that has ever been in the Oval Office, I believe this to be her only accomplishment- if you can call it that.
Feel free to blast away at Bush but it will not change a single thing about the two losers running for the Welfare Championship Title of Democratic President.
May God punish you all for stealing money from hard working citizens to fund your socialist programs that you created to comfort the lazy masses.
Hopefully a revolution will find us at each others throats!
I do not want to peacefully exist with you anymore.
1:14 why don't you just move. You have that god given right as well
Everyone doesn't have the luxury of having wheels, and a tag on their house.
The middle class is being overtaken by the lazy class, and that leads to a democrat in office. No sense trying to argue with them. A tax increase will not harm the lazy class because they are not paying into the system either. The wealthy is in power so you can bet laws will be written to protect them. Yes we are getting screwed again. It's up to the middle class to pay all the bills.
How does a person join the lazy class. I want to join because I'm getting tired of paying for it without getting anything in return.
P.S. I forgot. Are ya'll really all that stupid to believe Hildabeast and Ole'bamma.
I know! McCain is not worth much either. He's just a liberal pretending to be a conserative.
1:14, Well said. Your contempt for these people is well warranted and way past due.
Do any of you democrats understand the underlying philosophy of your political ideals? If so, will you please openly debate me on their validity. If not, will you please just admit that you are looking for a free handout....and not vote. Voting should not be used for personal gain at the expense of others. This is an open invitiation. I will check back later.
-God is love
Rev Run
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic."
- Benjamin Franklin
We are closing in on the final days of the great experiment of America. It is easy to see if you step back and look at the whole picture.
Republicans are now Democrats and Democrats are now Socialists.
The Constitution is being altered a little more every year and new Entitlements and Rights are being pulled out of thin air all in the name of a vote.
fairtax4me
Consider this. How often do you hear our elected officials refer to our political system as a "democracy"? Our founding fathers warned extensively against a democracy, and acually loathed the idea - rightfully so. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.
I would like to take a poll of the LCCHS high school senior class to see how many of them can name the type of government system that runs our country.
I'll give you a hint. Its not a democracy.
"Democracy is the first step on the path to socialism."
-Karl Marx
obama untested, just like george w. bush......george w.: living proof that "never send a boy to do a mans job".......some folks look for answers, others just look for fights......democracts are just regular people informed on issues........canada, where a pack of smokes is ten bulks, and a heart transplant is free....john mccain's straight talk express should be called "pillow talk express".........republicans are opinionated; democrats are fact-seeking........
Anon 6:40
Sine you are so "fact" based, I have a question for you. Have you ever lived in Canada? I have! The health care sucks. If you are diagnosed with Cancer A doctor will book your nexy appointment for six months down the road. The few doctors that they have are over booked. Thats why so many canadians come to America and pay cash for health care. Dont wish for something that you know nothing about.
6:40PM you suck with your ignorant opinion. No other president has faced what George W went through on 9/11. He had the guts to retaliate. The American people backed him until the candy ass liberals saw that it would take a while to finish the job. Now its my turn. I would trade one George Bush for all you candy ass liberals. I don't think you are fit to be an American. What will you do when the sh-- really hits the fan?
TYPO - TYPO
That's wouldn't trade.
Bush couldn't have been any worse. The Republican party of old has been overwhelmed by a fringe group of money grabbing power brokers hell bent on world domination. The word "liberal" to many who use this site has become a racial tag that is used to demean and beat down political conversation and opposing views.
Anon 4:35 AM
I chose you because it seemed as if the rest of the democratic supporters on this blog are just throwing out empty buzz words and making unwarranted personal attacks based on assumptions and generalizations.
To the rest of you.I was born and raised in barnesville. If you want to call me a redneck, then that is your opinion; and, well, some of the best people I know are rednecks, so fine by me. But if you want to believe I am gullible or ignorant, then I ask you join in on our discussion and dazzle me with your Northernly, liberal intellect.
I have always been quick to admit George Bush's shortcomings. Namely, the growth of the federal government, illegal immigration, our public school system and the bankrupt social security system, to name a few. However, the liberal solutions to these problems are to grow government more, grant amnesty to illegals, and raise taxes to fund their wealth redistribution retirement system.
I agree with you about the republican party. Very few of them know what fiscal conservatism and free market enterprise is. However, I do not use the word liberal to stifle political discussion, but can we please call it what it is. Liberal, progressive, democratic, and the like, are just a smokescreen for the socialist movement. If you support it, that is fine. I would love to have an open forum to discuss the philosophies behind all of them. I don't believe that a philosophical difference is a bad thing, unless it is poorly founded. If you truly believe in the systems you support, then you should be able to defend it in an open and polite discussion.
If it's political conversation and opposing views you want, I believe you will find both with me.
I would to start by saying the entire liberal philosophy is based on and cannot work without the government's monopoly on the use of force in otherwise rational dealings.
And to show my true sincerity, I would like you to fire the first question or to choose the first topic.
i believe both the liberals and the conservatives want the government to be in charge of some things......the only difference is what are those things.....as a liberal, i believe one of those things is health care.....if they can be in charge of schools, fire and police forces, road progams, water programs, defense, irs, and etc,,,,,,then they should be able to handle health care also......now if some of the conservatives choose to continue with their own insurance, or if they want to pay for their care out of their own pockets, so be it.......most people on hmo's now end up seeing nurse practiciners and P.A.'s instead of doctors
i usually don't use bad language but you liberals bring it out. all yall ever want is for someone else to be in charge of your problems while yall stand with your hand out for more. yall are to sorry and lazy to stand on your own 2 feet.
you can toss and call me whatever name you want but i know the type of people America would be better off without.
if yall want all the social programs so bad then why don't yall move to a country that has them. just travel north.
you see, a lot of us prefer smaller government keeping thier nose wher it belongs. yall want government to manage all your affairs, even giving you a free pay handout once a month because you to sorry to earn it.
Now we are getting somewhere. Both parties def want control. You are right that both parties want to conrol certain aspects of our lives. Each party wants to control what it deems important, and leave the rest to the people. Their is some genious and idiocy in both ideals.
I believe that the economy should be a total free market enterprise system and we should be free to make personal choices without being persuaded by a Christian psudo-theocracy.
The problem I have with turning over health care to our government based on your premise that they control other social economies, is that they do so poorly and wastefuly. Medicare itself has ballooned out of control and is now bankrupt, as is Social Security. I believe the government should control police, fire, and defense, in inderectly the IRS, if that is how they fund said programs. However, our public school system is broken and perpetually sliding down in the world rankings, in spite of record spending and the gov't's monopoly on water has hindered free market solutions to the problems such as the current drought.
These are secondary to my main reason for opposing socialized medicine, and that reason is that it's not economically feasible without my taxes and I don't believe anyone's health besides my own are my responsibility, and consequently, I shouldn't be paying for it....but I digress.
If I want to opt out of the government's health plan, will I have to go to a private hospital, much like we have private schools? If I opt out, do I still have to pay? Why would Dr's work for the government and be forced to offer their services for what ever price the gov't deems appropriate instead of starting a private practice and charge what my services are worth on a free market with rational and informed participants?
And you forgot to ask me a question.
PS. Whoever said "canada, where a pack of smokes is ten bucks, and a heart transplant is free" can please give me their definition of "free". Just because the money doesn't come out of your pocket at that very instant, doesn't make it free.
PSS. My comments were meant for Anonymous 11:53.
i am old enough to remember that every body down here said that medicare either wouldnt work or it would kill the u.s. medical system and drive doctors out....they predicted that most drs wouldnt accept it and the medicare pts would get bad healthcare.......alot of people said that if it became law, they would refuse it when they got to be 65.......well it does work, it hadnt ruined our healthcare system, and it hasnt drove away the doctors.....and i dont know anyone personally that has refused it,,,,,unless they had state or federal ins......national healthcare plan would be just like medicare, except everybody would be eligible to join.....would decrease cost for all, and would help hospital(would decrease the uninsured coming to the e.r.) and help the doctors......have you noticed that the american medical assoc. has been running ads saying we need universal coverage......wake up folks, its coming,,,,we need to jump on the band wagon or we are to be left behind.......30 years ago, we wouldnt have thought that people would be seeing non physicians (p.a.'s and nurse practiciners) for their healthcare providers,,,,,and we woudnt have thought that the american people would stand for insurance companies teling doctors what treatment and how many days a patient can stay in hospital.....but it is happening today........dont yall trust the government to make decisions better than some insurance company
to answer your question about opting out of government health insurance, yes, anyone that wants to pay his own medical fees can do it, or it someone want to get personal insurance on his own, that is fine......but i believe the majority of the population would opt to take the medicare for everyone.......the problem i see with individual insurance for a person or family is that the price is so different, not only for age, race, history, but for location.....when you apply for insurance, they wont quote you a price until they know your zip..............suppose you had a cafe, and when someone came in you charged them for the buffett not only by their age, but according to their zip code, their weight, their race, and their line of work.....and then if that cafe refused service to at 20% of the people that showed up ....the government would have a fit, they wouldnt allow it.....but they are allowing insurance companies to refuse insurance to some....and allowing them to charge differnt amounts......if twin bothers aged 40, both with same history applied for insurance in same zip code, but in different counties, their insurance would cost different amount......that aint right.....if walmart charged everybody a different price for the same pair of shoes, there might be a riot.....
the replublicans are the closest thing in history to communist pigs. bush has allowed the bankers and others through lack of regulartory supervision to screw this county up. hillary and bill clinton had a big hand in costing america jobs with nafta. bush made it all worse. now we are really screwed. there are very few good paying jobs and the imports are killing us. bush let the banks make all kinds of stupid loans to people that bill and hillary screwed out of jobs. now we are really in a mess.
this is why obama will probaly take it over. we cant afford another lying stealing clinton or another mccain parrot of communist bush leting his party members wring the last dime out of americans.
im afraid we are heading for doom with this bush/clinton/bush/clinton crooked lying creepy stealing from the working middle class crowd.
You are right. Bush appears to be communist. He dictated us into a war in Iraq while letting the family and friends fleece the middle class. The Clinton's aren't any better.
We are indeed in trouble if we continue what the Clintons and Bushes have done to us all.
Everybody wants to point fingers and lay blame and whine. The fault belongs to the people. The people allowed all this to continue. The people are not united in a cause. Government has everyone brainwashed and pitted against each other through a different party.
One person alone is not going to change the problems this country has but, this political race sure has almost every one of you convinced that it will. My how easily you can be had.
This country is supposed to be by the people for the people but, the people have forgot that and now look for some one person economic savior. That's exactly what our current group of governmental leadership wants; to keep all of you in the dark and pitted against each other while they take everything you have and will ever have.
We have the power. We have forgot how to use it. The fault is our own. Not Bush, not Clinton.
did anyone see the 20/20 show friday night where abc hired teenage white actors to act like criminals and destroy a car in daytime in front of people walking past them....nobody called 911 to report the vandals.......then they hired 3 black teenagers to do the same thing, and every single person who saw them called 911 to report the criminals...........and this wasnt even in the south......think about this real hard and you will see that america is not going to vote for a black as president.........so far alot of democracts have crossed over to vote for mccain to assure that he is the republican nominee.....and enough republicans have crossed over to vote for obama to make sure clinton didnt get the nomination........but believe me, the republicans will vote for mccain......but most of the white democracts will either not vote or will vote for mccain......there will be some states that obama will have recieved more votes in the primary than he will in the general election.......there will not be a single state that went republican in 2004 that will go democract......
I agree with the comments about Bush and the Clintons. Those two families are destroying America.
Clinton backed NAFTA and Bush signed the other bad trade deals. Hillary is a big fat liar like George W (worthless) and her liar hubby Bill.
We all pay the price for those liars we keep supporting.
Will one of you give me your definition of communism, please. It is more than a buzzword to be used against those with whom you disagree.
"The Bushes are the closest thing in history to a communist pig." Sure the communist weren't the closest thing in history to a communist pig?
Do you know anyone that has been turned away by a hospital? You do know that they cannot refuse treatment to anyone, right?
I understand your argument about the buffet, but let us compare apples to apples. Do you pay the same in car insurance as someone with a poor driving record (bad health)? Can you get car insurance on a wrecked car (pre-existing condition)? Of course not because it costs more for the company to insure the bad drivers.
The facts are that a buffet has determined the average profit margin they want to make and price the meal accordingly. Over time, the law of large numbers cancels out the heavy eaters and the light eaters. It is a decision made by the buffet and the customers; the government isn't forcing me to eat at said buffet, nor are they dictating the price the buffet can charge.
The insurance companies need your zip code because of cost of living differences. I currently live in atlanta. A teeth cleaning up here is roughly $300 whereas it is $80 in Barnesville. The price of the actual procedures have to be factored in to the price of insurance. That was simple enough.
And the answer to your question is and emphatic NO! I don't trust the government to make decisions about my health. Just as I don't trust them to make decisions about my children's education or my retirement. Government is not designed to efficiently provide services outside of their original functions. That is why we are broke as a country. We have our government running far more functions of society than for which it was intended. We need to cut these back, not expand them into a field that comprises roughly 15% of our national economy.
You say that you are sure I would be able to opt out. However, in HillaryCare of 1993, it would have been illegal for me to seek private health care and for a DR to provide me with it. And if I do opt out for better coverage, do I still have to pay?
I am by no means endorsing the healthcare system in this country. But I believe less, not more, government intervention is needed. I am a 25 yr old single male, I should be able to get health insurance without paying for accidental pregnancy coverage. I should be able to purchase health insurance with before tax dollars, just like employers that provide health insurance for their employees. I should be able to see a PA and get a prescription for a cold. It doesn't take 10 yrs of medical school to diagnose a sore throat and prescribe a Z-pack. These are all laws our government has made that drive up the costs of health insurance to the individual. And both parties want power. And a great way to get power is to control someone's access to their life's neccesities. And the more laws they pass to drive up the costs of healthcare, and the more they demonize the health insurance companies, the closer they come to their ultimate goal.
However, our system is broken and you are right that socialized medicine is coming. It is inevitable. The american people are just not prepared, or willing, to take responsibility for themselves and their lives. We have become a nation of complacency. Sure, we talk about freedom, and how we love freedom; but we won't accept the responsbility that comes with it.
what freedom are you talking about......you are not free to drive a car without insurance...not free to ride motorcycle without a helmut....not free to ride in car without seat belt....not free to build house without permits.....not free to send kids to a school in a different school zone.....if you have an HMO insurance, you are free to go to hospital of choice.....not free to burn trash on your property at certain times....not free to water yard...............now i am not saying that most of these are not good things, but dont say we a free to do as we please......so maybe one of the things that we need to add to the long list is national health insurance......by the way, if everyone had full health insurance, then car insurance would decrease because you wouldnt have to come health coverage on your car insurance.....
and why would having national health insurance make us a commuist country....canada, england, and most of the other countries with national health insurance are not communist....
Did I ever say that national healthcare would turn us into a communist country? I was just asking if the bloggers calling bush and clinton commies, know what communism is?
However, all those countries named are a European style of Socialist.
Of course you're not free to do as you please. You can't kill someone if you please. I'm not advocating a lawless chaos.
I am talking about the freedom and responsiblity to live your life so long as you don't impose on other's rights.
Car insurance is required to pay for the other person's property if you damage it.
In some states you are free to ride a motorcycle sans helmet. (But I say if you wreck and can't afford to fix your skull, it shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to cover your bill)
Same goes for seatbelt.
I think you should be able to build without a permit, and that just comes from the government's property tax issues.
Our school system is terrible. The government has a monopoly on poor education, due to lack of competition, and you want to do the same with health care.
Burning Trash could get out of control and damage other's property due to your negligence....hence the burn permit.
Watering your yard is a temporary ban bc of the drought. If the free market was at work, you could water your yard, but it would cost you. Once again, gov't is the problem, not the solution.
Regardless, we are getting off topic. You didn't answer my questions. If I opt out of the national healthcare sytem, will I have to pay? Do you know anyone in this country that can't receive medical care? (Not insurance, but the actual care) Give me one good reason why you want the government deciding when, where, and how you receive healthcare. Don't you think you and your Dr could make that decission better?
I see the good old rhetoric by the drug companies and medical business has taken hold. The political machine relies on people not being able to use common sense.
The United States is one of the only countries in the world without a national health care program. National programs work very well in Australia, England, Canada, and other places.
I've worked hard all my life, I currently have two high paying full time jobs, and I can barely afford medical for myself. I lost vision in my left eye in a concussion accident many years ago because I was too far away from help to get medical treatment, and so now any policy I get will not cover my good eye!
I could easily lose everything I've worked my whole life for just by having an accident or illness or to keep my vision.
On the other hand an illegal alien can easily get free medical in the USA. I could pay hundreds of thousands for what they get for free.
Only an absolute fool would think the system we have works.
Another point is the Clintons. People better listen close to McCain and Clinton. They both, just like Bush, lie and distort facts. This is what gets us into trouble at home and around the world. I communicate with people all over the world on a daily basis, and the world’s opinion of the USA is at an all time low.
The whole process disgusts me. We can't afford another four years of lies and distortion, and Hillary and McCain are masters of deceit. We have very limited choices. It’s always to pick the lesser of the evils. Fortunately none are as stupid as Bush, so we probably won’t do worse.
I've sent money to Obama. It's the first time in my life I've ever done something like that. There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that a Republican will win, and I'll be damned before I let that lying witch Hillary get in office.
I totally agree with you that our healthcare system is broken. However, people from Canada and England come here for necessary procedures. At least those that can afford it. Dr's offices in FL are booked all winter long by Canadian snow birds. If it works so well, why are they coming here? There are months long lines in these countries to get necessary procedures. This is because government is not designed to run a healthcare system, like they aren't designed to run a school or a retirement system.
The government is running up the cost of your health insurance. Why do i get health insurance through my employer with before tax dollars, yet you have to pay with after tax dollars? Assuming your high salary puts you in the top tax bracket, you are at a 30-35% disadvantage already.
I think I am using common sense. I think common sense tells me that I don't want some beauracrat deciding I can't get a prostate screening because of a government budget. I think common sense tells me that if I have an early stage of fightable cancer, I want to be able to attack it ASAP, not when a nameless, faceless government agency decides I finally need it more than my neighbor.
Lets take two cases. Patient A has late stage prostate cancer and his chances of survival are 20%. Patient B caught his prostate cancer in an early stage and his chance of survival is 80%. Which one does your all knowing government put in the front of the line? Is patient A up the proverbial creek, or does patient B have to wait until A dies. Time is not something either has to waste. The last thing they need is your government going around in circles.
In our current system, if patient B wants treatment now, he can find it. He may have to sell his house, car, and business, but he will be alive and able to start over. He won't have to sit around wondering if he kissed the right beauracratic asses to get him pushed to the front of the line.
Do you like the pollitical machine? Why would you want to give it any more power? Once they control your access to healthcare, it is pretty easy for them to control the rest of your life and your vote.
Nader is in the race now as an independent. So if you are tired of all the bull s--- from all these so called leader-wanta-b s, cast your vote for Ralph Nader and lets all try an in-between.
medicare works now......lets just simply expand medicare to cover all people over 50, then in 5 yrs expand it to all over 40 yr old...then in 10 yrs expand it to all over 30.....and so on til it covers all.......but if you have insurance and like it better and want to keep....then keep it...
I do not believe that the people who are voting for Obama are really his supporters. I feel that the republicans are setting him up for failure, because they feel that he does not have a chance against McCain. As soon as it is time to vote they are going to jump parties.
Liberleft, medicare is bankrupt. It did not and cannot fiscally work. Medicare spending has ballooned out of control. It tripled from 2000 to 2005 alone. Not that I am trumpeting the republicans spending, but after watching the some of the democratic debates, does "economically feasible" ever cross the mind of liberals?
Also, I have yet to get an answer to my question. If I opt out of your government medicare system and choose to keep my own coverage, will I still have to pay the associated taxes?
no doubt about it....10% of the votes in wisconsin democrat primary identified themselves as republicans.....but it is o k because alot of democracts have crossed over to vote for mccain.....we realized 2 years ago that the democracts couldnt win the presidential election and so we started to plan to try to elect the most liberal republican.....that was suppose to be rudy, but we never got a chance to vote for him.....so mccain is our replacement.........funny that republicans help elect our primary winner and we help elect their primary winner......how else can you explain so many democratic votes in red states.....more democract votes in ark, tenn, ala, and mo. than republican votes in primaries......and everyone knows there aint that many dems in those states....
The Republicans, thanks to that idiot George Bush, haven't got a chance in hell of winning the nation. We are all done.
The only choice is do we get Hillary or Obama.
Hillary is such a liar and such a part of the failed policies of the past Clinton presidency I'd sure hate to see her get elected. So it looks like I'm stuck voting for Obama or Nader.
medicare is a godsend.....it has worked for years and will continue to work for years to come, unless the republicans try to turn it into an h m o .......
Speaking of healthcare and medicare...Why does it seem that so many people in dire health end up spending every last cent on health care, assets included.
My grandfather was in an assisted living facility for the last year or so before he had to move into the nursing home part (he was 93 and it was only temporary until my Aunt could receive the training necessary to have him in their home) Every few months he got a notice that his monthly 'rent' was increasing by $100 or more. His rent started out at $1500 for a one bedroom, his entire apartment was not more then 25x30, that included kitchen, bathroom, walls even.
I have seen on news shows where someone younger having a longterm terminal illness actually had to be divorced from his wife so that their lifetime of savings and hardworked for assets could be divided for her to have SOMETHING to live on/in. Honestly they were looking at loosing everything and she would have to live out the rest of her life (she looked to be in her 50s) with what? Her kids? Begging for a hand out from the system? This was a middle class family, they had insurance. They worked hard all their life to have something to leave their kids, At the very least to live independently in their old age.
You folks don't think government intervention with medical assistance programs doesn't have something to do with this?
If I understand correctly isn't it Medicare that hires people to dig and look for peoples assets to make sure they don't hide anything and all they have is paid in before medicare starts paying anything on the bills?
Perhaps someone with a parent in this type of situation can enlighten me on how this works?
The problem lies with the costs. No other industry could survive if it didn't adjust the price of its good or service to the customer's ability to pay. In the healthcare industry, the end user, the patient, is not seeing the money leave their pockets, therefore doesn't know what they are paying for healthcare. This applies to the medical research and development companies, all the way down to the single Dr.'s office. This is an inherent problem of having a third party pays system, whether that third party is a government or a private health insurance company.
I think we need private health savings account. You could fund them with after tax dollars and all interest could grow tax free, much like a roth IRA. Most people run into serious health problems later in life. If they start saving at a young age, the savings would have grown exponentially by the time they need them. If your grandfather started funding a private account at the age of 21 and put $2-3,ooo into low risk type investments, assuming a modest return of 6-7%, he would have probably had money left over after paying his qualified medical expenses. And the good part, it is his account. There is no government official or health insurance executive making the decisions on whether or not the procedure is worth the money; because the short and not-so-sweet of it is, his life has no worth to them. Only him and his family can make that call, and they are much better equipped to determine the worth of your grandfather's life than is someone who has never met him.
That is something the government could enact today to enable people to start saving, but that would take away their vote buying leverage.
where you gonna get a 7% return this year.....stock market has averaged 2% PER YEAR since bush became president.....also if you do a health account, it will be like a roth account and grow tax free........however if some crazy person happens to implement the fairtax., you will be screwed....cause you will still be taxed when you spent......the roth, the medical savings accounts, and the tax free municipal bonds will all be devastated by the fair tax.....
5:48 I did 10.62% over the last 24 months. I did 1 little better than 16% last year. So what you invested in?
Once again Liberleft, you look like a Jackass.
Please, Please, Please do your homework on the FairTax.
I know that debating you on this issue will go nowhere considering I don't speak Jackassanese.
Get book, open book, read book, don't make stupid statements.
You did not take into account the fact that you are laboring tax free, saving tax free, investing tax free, and REMOVING the embedded taxes which are being paid by people with Roth IRAs everyday under our current tax code on every purchase.
fairtax4me
Rev Run,
I would favor a health savings account that grows tax free BUT I would like to see it invested with PRE-tax dollars. I believe that is the idea being pushed and it makes a whole lot more sense to me. There should be no punishment for investing OR cashing out an investment but especially in this case. This should also go untouched by the Estate Tax (or even considered wealth for that matter) upon death leaving your grandchildren a head start on health savings, children or your spouse with more.
802, liberleft has no clue about anything. He is a mocking bird for the looney left, nothing more. No true personal opinions in that skull.
fairtax4me
generosity, ethics, patience, effort, concentration, and wisdom........all are trait of the liberal left
dow was at 10,650 when george w, took over......7 years later it has risen only 2000 points or less than 20%.....divide that 20% by 7 yrs and you get less than 3% increase yearly under the george w.........under clinton it went from the 3000's to the 10,650......that is 17% per year......if you want to make money and help the poor, vote democract
I don't think presidents have much control over the economy. In a perfect world they wouldn't have any control. The economy under clinton rode the .com bubble, just as the economy under bush rode the housing bubble. The difference is that when bush took office, he had the .com bust, and the market plunge brought on by 9/11. Regardless, anyone with any sense will tell you that an 8% return is very normal for a long term investment. Outside of left vs right bs, a health savings account is a great way to enable people to pay for their own healthcare and indirectly, control costs. As long as the government or health insurance companies are cutting the checks, there is no need to shop for better prices or to seek alternative measures and live healthier lives.
Liberleft, I have two simple questions. What problem does the left have with people taking responsibility and paying for their own healthcare? And, by what philosophy can you support your claim that I should pay for someone's healthcare other than my own?
Fairtax, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You have to either fund it with after tax dollars and let it grow tax free, or you have to fund it with before tax dollars and get taxed on the withdrawals. Tax rates are going to have to go up to support the wonderful burden on us youngsters known as the baby boomers, so it is better to pay taxes on that money now and have the interest grow tax free.
5:57 PM they teach math at gordon. might i suggest that you get some.
dont have a problem with a person paying for his own healthcare,,,,i have a problem with insurance companies refusing insurance to certain people, or charging some people more than others, or by insuring people but with exceptions or with waiting periods of 6 mo to a year......in fla. insurance co started not insuring homes and condos that were on the beach front...so the state and federal government started to underwrite those insurance policies.....and no one minds that happening, but heaven forbid that the government insuring people for their health.....so to sum it up, the state can make you have car insurance, and can guarantee you insurance on your beach home, but no it cant help you find insurance for your health......man, what a concept
This is a much more civil discussion than the one about barack obama's middle name, which to me doesn't matter one bit. I want to thank all of you for keeping it civil.
Car insurance just isn't a good comparison. Car insurance is only required for liability coverage, which effects damaging someone else's property. Your bad health cannot damage my property, which is why the state doesn't require you have health insurance.
All insurance is based on different pay rates for different customers, and their ability to refuse to cover certain people. Does it suck for those people? Yes. But even car insurance companies couldn't function by charging everyone the same amounts. That is why your premiums go up when you get a ticket or have a wreck. That is why premiums are higher for certain groups of people based on statistics. That is why premiums are more if you are insuring a Mercedez compared to a Chevy. I am 25 yrs old, never had any medical issues, don't smoke, and exercise regularly. By your premises, I should pay the same for health insurance as a 60 yr old smoker that has had 3 strokes, a bypass surgery, and cancer.
And you aren't supporting the government helping people FIND health insurance. You are supporting raising our taxes to fund everyone's healthcare. You are choosing government over free market solutions.
And you didn't answer my second question? By what premise can you claim that it is my responsibility to pay for someone else's health?
you shouldnt care about helping someone paid for their health....you dont mind paying to help the iraq people build their country......you dont mind paying to keep the national parks clean and operating.....dont mind paying for all the highways across the country.....dont mind paying for a farmer in iowa growing corn...or south ga growing peanuts.....you dont mind your property tax paying for county services to the non property owners......in american we spread the wealth around, except for healthcare,,,,its not christian-like
That's where you're wrong. Yes. I do mind paying for all that. I especially mind paying for farm subsidies and corporate welfare. I don't mind as much paying for national defense, infastructure, and i will even say I don't mind about the parks, though I think private economies could do it better. These all are group efforts and not individual responsibilities. That's why we need to repeal the income tax. Liberals take it as a free for all for any entitlement program they can think of.
You still didn't answer the question. Why is it my responsibility to pay for someone else's healthcare, and by what premise can you support the government stealing my money to do so?
Post a Comment