Bad news for the gop

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Surfer Joe, May 28, 2013.

  1. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't think moving factories to China is a good idea.

    But you want to blame private companies for bad GOVERNMENT policy.

    Instead of forcing an unpopular government takeover of the private healthcare system Obama could have spent the last five years doing something positive like saving American factory jobs.

    But he didn't.
     
  2. MisterMet

    MisterMet New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2013
    Messages:
    1,130
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Look up how much money existed 50 years ago and compare it to today. I think you will see that there is a lot more today. That is because wealth is created and there is no limit to how much we can create. If some guy stashes a $100 bill in his underwear drawer it does not limit my ability to go out a make a $100. And why on Earth would the 1.3t in income be in the hands of the middle class if the guy didn't have it in some off shore acct? a) you think the guy with the off shore bank account had no business earning that kind of money - so the money would not exist. or b) you know what, i have no idea what (b) could be - help me out here.


    Whoa, sorry for the whacky reply format, I hope you can see my responses that are tucked into you orig message. my bad, no clue how this works
     
  3. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Great.

    I did no such thing.

    The US health care system was a total disaster with costs spiraling out of control and 50 million Americans without coverage. We should have just made Medicare universal for everyone but that was politically unfeasible so Obama did what he could. It was way past due.

    Obama tried to create more jobs but was blocked by obstructionist Republicans who want the economy to falter for their political purposes.

    The Tea Party should have worked with Obama to create more jobs.

    But they didn't.
     
  4. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was not a disaster for most Americans.

    I have excellent health insurance and healthcare.

    So do about 280-300 million others.

    But there are the 30-50 million who do have a problem.

    What you and Obama have done is ruin the health system for 300 million so that you can throw money at the remaining 50 million who you hope will be obama voters for life.
     
  5. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is not a bigger increase than the 1980s, not even close.

    Spending was $2,729 billion in 2007 and $3540 billion last year. That is a 30% increase over 5 years, though over the past 3 years the increase has only been $23 billion, 0.6%.

    By way of contrast, the spending increase from 1980 to 1985, an equivalent 5 year period, was 60%. Twice as much.

    Which goes a long way in explaining why this recovery is not as robust as the one in the early 1980s, among the other reasons I posted.

    I did not say I thought spending should have increased 25% over the past three years. I was comparing govt spending in our recovery with an equivalent period of time in the 1980s recovery, which explains in part why the recovery is slower now.

    Unfortunately, because of the fiscal irresponsibility of some of our recent presidents, along with this recovery we already had a very high debt, unlike the 1980s recovery, which started with the lowest proportional debt since WWII.

    So because of those constraints, we could not spend like they did in the 1980s. However, we could have had small increases (maybe 2% a year) over the past three years which would have still decreased spending proportionate to GDP but provided some extra stimulation to the economy. That spending could have been offset by higher taxes against the richest.

    It absolutely does limit it. If the guy spent the $100 on you instead of sticking it in his drawer, you'd have $100 more income, you'd spend most that $100 which would increase someone else's income, and the economy would be producing more because of it.

    Because the portion of the nation's income that goes to the 99% has fallen from over 90% in 1979 to less than 80% today. With a gross national income of about $13.5 trillion, that equates to about $1.3 trillion less going to the 99%, who would spend proportionately more of it.

    Not what I said. What is "bad" is when so much more of our nation's income and wealth is going to so few, who stick it in offshore bank accounts as opposed to spending it in the economy where it would drive a robust recovery. The $100 bill in the drawer is doing nothing to help the economy grow.

    No problem. To quote text, highlight the text, and then click the little quote balloon (on the right edge of the icons). Or put the text between "[ quote ]" and "[ /quote ]" (but with no spaces)
     
  6. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good for you.

    Baseless claim. Prove it.

    That is a lot with a problem.

    I disagree. The system was (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up to begin with and needed an drastic change long ago.
     
  7. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Baseless claim.

    Prove it.

    Every day more people wake up to what a bad idea ObamaCare was.

    Now we find that some American workers are going to have their existing healthcare plans taxed at 40% by ObamaCare.

    What a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing mess.
     
  8. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    50 million Americans without health care insurance and skyrocking costs and premiums. Per capita costs twice that of most European nations with worse health statistics.

    FUBAR.
     
  9. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I just told you may healthcare was great.

    And affordable.

    You have given us your opinion that the needs of 50 million trump the 300 million who already had healthcare taken care of but that is not proof.

    It's just your opinion.
     
  10. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know what you just told me. You tell me lots of things that are bull(*)(*)(*)(*).
     
  11. northwinds

    northwinds Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    6,103
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I have a tip for you: KKKers don't much like the Republicans.....and you do know about Robert Byrd.....don't you......LMAO at you

    - - - Updated - - -

    I have a tip for you: KKKers don't much like the Republicans.....and you do know about Robert Byrd.....don't you......LMAO at you
     
  12. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It may sound like bull (*)(*)(*)(*) to deadbeat Obama voters who are now going to get free healthcare at my expense but it sure ain't bs to the rest of us who are paying the bills.
     
  13. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You figured they voted for Obama? LMAO

    - - - Updated - - -

    It's bull(*)(*)(*)(*) to anyone whose been paying skyrocketing health care bills over the past 20 years.
     
  14. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just because Obama voters are dumb does not entitle them to take it out on the 300 million who did get it right.
     
  15. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just because Tea Parties are deluded does not entitle them to take it out on the 300 million who did get it right.

    Baseless opinionating is fun and easy. And for many passes as actual thought and argument.
     
  16. Trumanp

    Trumanp Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,011
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Not asking for amounts, but do you pay your premium out of pocket, or does an employer pay for a large portion of the premium?

    There's a big difference, I've been involved over the years in some of this, and the costs to employers have been skyrocketing, while they have had to push higher deductables and copays back onto the employees.

    My brother has a high risk plan through where he works, or did until some of the recent Obamacare changes, due to his kid having a birth defect. He paid considerably more for a plan that was substantially worse than my own (and when I say worse, he had a much higher deductable, and pretty strict limits on payout totals per member of his plan.) I'd hardly call that a good model.

    It's pretty subjective, depending on who you are talking to, but I detest insurance companies, as every time I file a claim for something, even if it was pre-approved through the hospital as an emergency (my daughter was initially diagnosed with an infected appendix, turned out to be a benign cyst on her ovary, and was fortunately detected through a CT scan) I still end up fighting with them because they wanted to argue it was a pre-existing condition. The same thing with my oldest boy, he had to have emergency surgery at 2 weeks old, and they tried to call that pre-existing.

    Private industry is too focused on attempting to disprove every claim, even when all the prior steps for pre-approval are followed.

    And then having to fight with them to get them to cover it every time gets a bit old.

    Add to the fact that many people have life time disabilities, chronic illness, the elderly, etc... that no insurance company would ever cover and you have a glaring hole in the system that leaves the people who most need health care unable to get it.

    A national pool, or insurance system is the most fair way to handle this, because sure as anything at some point we all will need some type of care, be it when we get sick, or just plain get old. I see nothing wrong with the currently healthy paying into a pool that someday they will certainly need to pull from at a later date.

     
  17. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    republicans can't stand that the economy is improving despite their best efforts to keep that from happening
     
  18. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do pay a premium and I do have a co-pay.

    And I have great healthcare.


    Fair for who?

    The 50 million who will pay nothing and get better health insurance or the 300 million who will pay more and get less healthcare?
     
  19. Trumanp

    Trumanp Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,011
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That's the thing though, the stories about reduced quality, and higher costs with a national system are of course floated by those who would automatically oppose such a system, but when you look at nations who have national systems, the amounts paid into said system and how effective each one is, the best bang for the buck falls into a national system rather than individual health care insurance plans.

    It's sort of fundamental, when you take middle men out of the equation costs go down. Right now there are at least 2-3 more layers in the health care payment system than there needs to be, and it's costing us all more than it should. Couple that with how hospitals are required to provide emergency care regardless of insurance/ability to pay, and the lawyers who chase every ambulance and you have the recipe that has led to American Health Care costing much more than it should.

     
  20. Mac-7

    Mac-7 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    86,664
    Likes Received:
    17,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
     
  21. Trumanp

    Trumanp Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    2,011
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well, those are all good reasons why I don't care for Obama's solution, and I doubt we're going to agree on alternatives.

    I don't like how this is structured at all, it's got some good angles, but has some seriously screwed up ones as well.

    Health Care reform is badly needed, note I said is needed, not was needed, because I don't fully believe this will solve some of the biggest problems like Tort Reform which does had a significant amount to health care costs, of course I think too many things are being decided at the court levels, when I think the courts should be the check against abuse, not a quasi-legislature by itself.

     
  22. Consmike

    Consmike New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    45,042
    Likes Received:
    487
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The economy still sucks and Obama has 4 big scandals. ARe you serious? lmao
     

Share This Page