Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, August 22, 2009

Ignore the no’s

August 22, 2009

Advertisement

To the editor:

Dolph Simons’ Aug. 15 Saturday Column clearly exposes reasons our country has problems. The divide between “haves” (Republicans) and “have-nots” (Democrats) couldn’t be clearer.

The Republican Party is shrinking. Their solutions to problems are exactly what caused a near economic collapse and millions of “have-nots” denied affordable health care.

Republicans were invited to participate in “change.” They chose to block solutions with “no” attitudes. Republicans had eight years to improve our country. They chose the status quo. Bipartisanship doesn’t work when the only compromise is “do it our way.” It’s time to move on without the “no’s” and get on with improving our country. Republicans will be “shut out” because they choose not to be positive participants in change. Major changes are necessary to prevent another economic collapse and to offer adequate health care to everyone — not just the wealthy.

Yes, we need to regulate compensation for top executives. The Republican idea of private business is out of control. Costs aren’t contained or lowered with insurance companies and top executives operating without limits. It’s not government takeover; it’s “parental control” when “juvenile” is either incapable or unwilling to exercise self-control.

How often does Obama need to tell Republicans government doesn’t want to run banks, auto industries or hospitals before they “get it”? Self-control would have kept government out of business. It’s very clear that’s not their intention. Let the public be damned — create as much profit as you can get away with.

Comments

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

We may have the right to regulate obscene pay BUT we do not need legislators protecting and promoting the most expensive health insurance program in the world. AND consumers should not be forced to continue with the most expensive medical insurance in the world.

I vote Medicare Insurance for All HR 676.

The insurance industry is full of crooks and liars aka white collar criminals! Only people who believe in profits from injury,cancer and other illness are insensitive profiteers. Medicare Insurance for All does not have millionaire CEO's,advertising budgets, shareholders, a $100,000,000 anti reform budget and does not contribute tons of corrupt dough to political campaigns.

====================================================

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

The report was part of a multi-pronged assault on the credibility of private insurers by Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.). It came at a time when Rockefeller, President Obama and others are seeking to offer a public alternative to private health plans as part of broad health-care reform legislation. Health insurers are doing everything they can to block the public option.

At a committee hearing yesterday, three health-care specialists testified that insurers go to great lengths to avoid responsibility for sick people, use deliberately incomprehensible documents to mislead consumers about their benefits, and sell "junk" policies that do not cover needed care. Rockefeller said he was exploring "why consumers get such a raw deal from their insurance companies."

The star witness at the hearing was a former public relations executive for major health insurers whose testimony boiled down to this: Don't trust the insurers.

"The industry and its backers are using fear tactics, as they did in 1994, to tar a transparent and accountable -- publicly accountable -- health-care option," said Wendell Potter, who until early last year was vice president for corporate communications at the big insurer Cigna.

Potter said he worries "that the industry's charm offensive, which is the most visible part of duplicitous and well-financed PR and lobbying campaigns, may well shape reform in a way that benefits Wall Street far more than average Americans."

Insurers make paperwork confusing because "they realize that people will just simply give up and not pursue it" if they think they have been shortchanged, Potter said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062401636.html

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

An important concern is why in the world is are so many members of congress protecting the most expensive medical insurance in the world?

Then pretend as though they are doing us a favor .

And why is the industry blowing $1.4 million health care dollars a say to defeat any type of reform?

That same $1.4 million dollars a day would provide 519 families of four excellent Medicare Insurance each day the campaign continues. After 31 days that becomes over 16,000 families robbed of HR 676 Medicare Insurance.

Why have the special interest legislators avoided discussing Medicare Insurance for All in depth and in public view?

Why do they want to throw it away without in depth discussion? HR 676 has 87 co sponsors in the house.

What is the world is the medical insurance industry afraid of?

The public deserves discussion of the options especially the most fiscally responsible and comprehensive coverage that has come our way in the last 50 years....HR 676.

Interesting reading on the matter:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_34/b4144089895459.htm

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/healthcare.html

http://www.healthcare-now.org/hr-676/

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

HR 676 could save mountains of tax dollars for city,state and federal governments.

HR 676 is the one that would be best for large and small business plus individuals. It is by far the most practical and comprehensive AND the best bang for the buck. It should be amended to allow for the choice to be HR 676 or one from the industry. Let the people make the choice.

HR 676 has been been around for years therefore has been tuned up and refined. No matter what number is attached in the end this is what consumers and business should go for.

Why use Medicare? It eliminates reinventing the wheel therefore saves a big bundle of money and time = efficient use of existing resources.

Medicare is in place therefore it is ready to roll which is convenient.

The only major change necessary is reimbursement numbers which the author and the 87 cosigners are perfectly aware.

The USA needs to STOP being be the most expensive insurance/health care of the industrialized nations if americans want jobs back.

HR 676 Medicare for All insurance coverage is key to creating new wealth for america. The most expensive health insurance in the world is not the answer for keeping business costs down and keeping our cost of living somewhat in check.

Consider the USA as the only major industrial nation that does not provide health insurance/health coverage for its' people.

Do we want Toyota manufacturing leaving the USA and heading for Canada?

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

Smart Medical Insurance Improves Our Quality of Life And Our Wallets!

How many of the vocal minority out there supporting the most expensive medical insurance in the world are employees and/or shareholders?

How many are receiving corrupt campaign dollars?

Some of our reps on all sides of the aisle say “Let's slow down a bit”. I say consumers have been waiting for more than 60 years for fiscal responsible medical insurance how much slower can it go?

What could possibly be more american? Providing americans with the choice of National Health Insurance. HR 676 is the only equitable approach that includes all of us.

HR 676 would cover every person for all necessary medical care including: long term care such that cancer demands prescription drugs hospital surgical outpatient services primary and preventive care emergency services dental mental health home health physical therapy rehabilitation (including for substance abuse) vision care hearing services including hearing aids chiropractic durable medical equipment palliative care long term care.

A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 in payroll tax for all health care costs.

HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. HR 676 would save hundreds of billions annually by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private health insurance industry and HMOs.

Let's move all of the following into the program bringing those tax dollars with them. • everyone on social security and their dependents • all disabled veterans • all Iraq/Afghanistan veterans • all government employees • all currently uninsured

Are Americans ready for HR 676? Of course they are.

Not only that HR 676 makes all Americans more employable. And encourages small business ventures. Now opportunity knocks. Now we're talking long term wealth building for americans by way of long term employment. YES for small business.

Employers should not be forced to pay up. There are enough tax dollars available in the USA to cover the cost easily: *60% of insured are covered with OUR tax dollars = a big slice of the pie = $1.2 trillion(will actually cover all of us under HR 676)

*Cut subsidies going to very wealthy industries = Another sizeable slice of the pie. Let's get them off welfare!

*Instead use those tax dollars carefully for attracting NEW industry, NEW jobs while at time creating new wealth locally and across the nation.

What a great way to bring OUR tax dollars home by funding OUR own medical insurance with OUR own money.

jaywalker 5 years, 4 months ago

Something stinks.........must be this LTE.

And does Merrill actually believe anyone (that's visited this site for more than a week) reads his Hijacker Manifesto's?

BigPrune 5 years, 4 months ago

I don't think the LTE writer is correct in his assumption that the Republican Party is shrinking. Last thing I read was the majority of Americans have become conservative, due to Obama's Socialist agenda.

The Cash for Clunker program is a perfect example as to why the United States Government needs to stay out of healthcare and Cash for Clunker was a minor promotion in comparison.

A simple solution would be for the larger civic organizations, like the Chamber of Commerce to pool their members and buy healthcare in bulk, but as it stands today that is against the law. Imagine the millions already and the millions more who would become members.

labmonkey 5 years, 4 months ago

1) This LTE talks about self control, of which this congress and President have shown very little.

2) By listening to the no's (which are a majority of the American people), the Republicans are going to gain many seats in the House and Senate in 2010...much sooner than if the Democrats would have shown restraint in their spending. The Democrats fail to realize that they weren't elected in....the Republicans who became corrupt were elected out, and if they fail to listen to the American people and show some restraint, the same will happen to them also.

labmonkey 5 years, 4 months ago

And Merrill....seriousily, why not post an original thought every once in awhile instead of your frantic cutting and pasting. You are wearing my mouse wheel (along with about everyone else's here).

I think we should all start flagging you for SPAM.

commuter 5 years, 4 months ago

Merrill:

Maybe you should spend less time cutting and pasting your same information and spend more of your money to help people get healthcare. If I wanted healthcare and couldn't afford it, I would greatly appreciate you spending YOUR own money on it because I wouldn't expect the government to take of me.

But knowing you, I know you want put your money where your mouth or fingers are because you are afraid risking any of your money on what you think is a great idea but you are willing to push for tax dollars to be spent on your projects.

GardenMomma 5 years, 4 months ago

Labmonkey,

Merrill is wearing out my mouse wheel too, but it's much funnier to think of him covered in little mouse wheels! Thanks for the chuckle.

normal_entire_route 5 years, 4 months ago

For goodness sake...taking away rights? Is it so hard to drive the speed limit or is the right to drive "as fast as I want to" taken away really been cramping your style all that much? Is the loss of the right to drive without a seatbelt that much a problem for you? Is the loss of the "right" to take down the financial system in this country due to the greed of a few that unreasonable? What kind of solutions to our societies current and future problems does this position of fear of loss of rights actually offer us? Or is it just the same old, "no" answer we've been hearing for years?

tomatogrower 5 years, 4 months ago

Pilgrim2 (Anonymous) says…

merrill (Anonymous) says…

A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 in payroll tax for all health care costs.


And once again we will ask, were those figures put together by the same folks who estimated the costs of the Cash for Clunkers program, Richard? The same guys who said there wouldn't have to be a middle class tax increase to pay for “health care reform?”


I'd have to pay $2700 in payroll taxes for health care? Bring it on. For my family of four I'm paying more than $8000 a year! They would have to be really far off to get even close to what it's costing now. And it isn't even great insurance. We still have plenty of out of pocket expense.

At least, though, you are arguing real issues, not the lies about death panels and Obama wanting euthanasia. I would argue that most radical conservatives on this forum are for euthanasia. They don't want any poor or lower middle class people getting health care. They just want them to die. Say no to that woman who checks you out the grocery store. She can be replaced. The "no" party has gone too far.

jayhawklawrence 5 years, 4 months ago

Most Americans have been repulsed by the attitudes of Republicans and their right wing representatives over the last 20 years; a party that has lost so much credibility that politics appears more of a soap opera than reality.

The problem I have is that I know there are also forces at work in the Democratic Party that do not have my best interests at heart. I worry about people in power who don't understand the concerns of small businessmen; who have no clue what it takes to make a successful business in today's world.

I worry about manufacturing in this country because almost everyone I see on television that appears as an expert, isn't.

I have been in manufacturing my entire life and traveled the country and parts of the world. I see that Republicans AND Democrats have not served us well. Those who gave up jobs to China without lifting a hand to help have no business leading or advising our country on anything. They teach a philosophy of failure based on foolish notions.

I worry about the damage that all these partisan political games and bogus debates has on everyday Americans. Much of our economic problems are psychological; created by fear induced by self centered politicians and talk show hosts who get paid to argue and upset the public.

Today, the ordinary citizen in every country is gaining power because of the internet. Information is being made available to everyone in the world. I think this is the great unknown in today's world and the real game changer. We are discovering that people in every country have similar concerns and interests. It is undermining the status quo of today's politics and I am looking forward to reforming our political parties and giving the power back to the ordinary citizens.

thubbard76 5 years, 4 months ago

For all of this talk about "no's", it seems to me that screaming louder alone doesn't make you a majority. We have a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress. Those people were put in office by the people of the United States by a majority (I'm not interested in arguing Electoral College business at this point). We have legally elected officials attempting to govern in a way that represents the beliefs that got them elected to begin with and now we're surprised?!

I'll say again, screaming alone doesn't make you a majority, and when your side is represented by members claiming that we should "let the immigrants die" and calling our officials Nazis, your side really is adding nothing of value. Grow up, get informed on your own, and be ready to defend your side in a way that is fitting for an adult. Read all of the material available to you and then be willing to discuss this in a CIVIL way. Hysterics will get you nowhere, and will ultimately hurt your cause no matter what side you are on.

Tony Kisner 5 years, 4 months ago

I want to figure out how the "haves" got theirs, was it magic? Stuff falling out of the sky? Control over the means of capital?

I know Nancy Pelosi is a big time "haves" how did that happen?

smarty_pants 5 years, 4 months ago

Editor: Please correct your grammar on the title of the letter: Plural for no is either "nos" or "noes"--there is no possessive nor is the word a contraction, so it should not have an apostrophe.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

My tax dollars paying for my medical insurance is my money.

When John Conyers of HR 676 speaks of preventive health care he speaks in terms of education and what we can do for ourselves. Some people keep bringing up free health care. NOT John Conyers the author of HR 676. That is ludicrous.

John Conyers HR 676 author talks real life affordable which is what an employable USA needs. The USA needs to STOP being the most expensive health insurance/health coverage in the world. That distinct honor is killing our economy.

HR 676 is the one that would be best for large and small business plus individuals. It is by far the most practical and comprehensive AND the best bang for the buck. It should be amended to allow for the choice to be HR 676 or one from the industry. Let the people make the choice.

HR 676 has been been around for years therefore has been tuned up and refined. No matter what number is attached in the end this is what consumers and business should go for.

Why use Medicare? It eliminates reinventing the wheel therefore saves a big bundle of money and time = efficient use of existing resources. Medicare is in place therefore it is ready to roll which is convenient. The only major change necessary is reimbursement numbers which the author and the 87 cosigners are perfectly aware.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

We as consumers have the right to another form of medical insurance instead of being forced to deal with dishonest medical insurance companies and dishonest legislators who are protecting this industry.

Here's the deal. Why are the media, blue dogs, repubs and their loud mouth rebel rousers coming out against medical insurance reform?

Are they truly concerned about wait times? No way we've been making medical appointments for 70 years or more. We have been waiting at least 50 years for fiscally responsible,fiscally conservative,practical and comprehensive medical insurance. So the wait thing is nothing but crap.

Are they truly concerned about cost? Hell no! The USA has been plagued with high cost for at least 30 years so that obviously is not their concern.

Are they concerned about government take over? The government has been involved for at least 70 years. The med insurance industry is receiving at least $1.2 trillion medical insurance tax dollars as we speak. Nope that is not a real concern just more crap.

What the hell are they concerned about?

*Shareholders only give a damn about dividends that which includes many legislators which prevents legislators from remaining objective.

*Legislators against reform and on all sides of the aisle are concerned about corrupt special interest campaign money pure and simple.

*Repubs only concern is having enough corrupt money to win upcoming elections so they can come back and wreck our economy further.

*The media would just hate to lose all of those healthcare advertising dollars and they are just loving all of the money spent because of the insurance reform campaign.

In a nutshell it is all about money money money which is to say consumers and taxpayers are being taken for fools.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

Taxpayers have rights as to how WE want our tax dollars spent. We did not send legislators to Washington to become corrupt critters. They are NOT giving taxpayers what WE want.

Instead legislators are giving taxpayers what they want to protect THEIR investments and THEIR corrupt source of campaign money.

There is $1.2 trillion of OUR tax dollars spent to cover a wide variety of government employees. According to what I read this is 60% of the insured.

That same $1.2 trillion would cover all in the USA under HR 676. This makes dollars and sense. There is no need to raise taxes. Obviously the money is in the treasury somewhere.

People this is a no brainer and it is a way to bring your tax dollars home.

There is no logical reason to continue supporting the most expensive medical insurance program in the world aka scam.

HR 676 would remove a ton of corruption from our health care industry. Let's clean it up while at the same time improving our quality of life and our bank accounts. YES!

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

The Me-First, Screw-Everyone-Else Crowd With 22,000 of their fellow countrymen dying annually for lack of health insurance, this group is using the argot of fairness and morality to hide its real motive: selfish greed.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4722/the_me-first_screw-everyone-else_crowd/

Why do politicians and many on this board fear allowing citizen taxpayers the choice of HR 676? There is simply no legitimate position against allowing we taxpayers the choice of putting tax dollars back in our pockets through HR 676. Let's rise up and demand the choice..... legislators stand aside and get out of the way!

Senate Report Finds Insurers Wrongfully Charged Consumers Billions http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062401636.html ============================================ The U.S. health insurance system is typically characterized as a largely private-sector system, so it may come as a surprise that more than 60% of the $2 trillion annual U.S. health insurance bill is paid through taxes which comes to $1.2 trillion. $1.2 trillion is a sweet gravy train for the industry. http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2008/0508harrison.html ============================================

Let's rise up and demand the choice..... legislators stand aside and get out of the way!

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

merrill (automoton) says…

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

[insert link to ideological misinformation here]

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

"The divide between “haves” (Republicans) and “have-nots” (Democrats) couldn’t be clearer."

I suppose the LTE writer really believes the $750,000,000 raised by Barack Obama for the 2008 lection came from school children's pennies, old ladies' sewing money, and the tin cups of beggars on the street?

jonas_opines 5 years, 4 months ago

"Those who gave up jobs to China without lifting a hand to help have no business leading or advising our country on anything."

Why would that imposition on the free market be any better than any other one?

staff04 5 years, 4 months ago

Cash for Clunker=Health care reform? Stupid Fox News talking point regurgitated.

"Republicans will be “shut out” because they choose not to be positive participants in change."

With regards to health care reform, the assertion that Republicans choose not to be positive participants couldn't possibly be more accurate.

TheYetiSpeaks 5 years, 4 months ago

I'm so tired of reading these "Republicans are holding up our change" crap LTE's. I could give a fig about either party but I can't stand the whole blame game these two play. I was to understand that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority. I'm not really sure what that means except there are more of them than Republicans. I also notice these jackasses like to vote along with their fellow party members most of the time instead of listening to their constituents. So tell me again, who's fault is it that you can't get this legislation through? What do you expect when we elect a President from your party who could barely be bothered to VOTE when he was in Congress. Stop complaining about the other party and fix yourselves. That goes for Repubs too.

FreshAirFanatic 5 years, 4 months ago

Amen Yeti. Many of them from both sides will be looking for employment after Nov 2010.

Hey LJWorld. How about you do a story on the health care debate from the Haskel student prospective. Since many Native Americans already receive health "care" from the Fed Gov't, let's get their opinion. What's summer like on the reservation? Is there any money left for 4th quarter medical problems? What happens when 2 emergencies occur, but there is only enough money left to treat 1?

jayhawklawrence 5 years, 4 months ago

jonas-opines:

says:

"Why would that imposition on the free market be any better than any other one?"

And you assume that it is a free market?

I seriously doubt that China Inc. cares about your idea of a free market, just that you continue to believe in the myth and they keep gobbling up US companies.

jayhawklawrence 5 years, 4 months ago

jonas-opines:

I think your comment was a very fair one and I didn't mean to sound prickly in my response but the arguments that we see in the media have been stacked against US manufacturers for so long that you start to be a little jaded.

I will tell you this.

Americans can compete with anyone in the world if the playing field is level and the same rules applied.

It is no brag, just fact.

I wish I had the time to give you hundreds of examples, but I don't. I am going to spend my day riding my bike and working out.

Next time you hear somebody say we can't compete with China, you should know you are looking at a stupid person. If they are your professor, change classes. You won't learn anything.

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

Tom: "I can't wait until about a year or so from now when things are at best stagnant ..."

On the day before Obama was inaugurated, Jan. 19, 2009, the Dow Jones closed at 8,281.22.

Friday, the Dow closed at 9,505.96.

"... do yourselves a big favor and start dealing with your denial issues now."

Stagnant? Sorry, but who exactly here has denial issues?

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

merrill (Anonymous) says…

"My tax dollars paying for my medical insurance is my money."

So let's take the middle man out and not use tax money, merrill. Then your money can pay for your healthcare without MY money being part of the equation at all.

Oh, wait, that's the part that YOU are afraid of, isn't it - really having to pay your own way for once.

"Taxpayers have rights as to how WE want our tax dollars spent. We did not send legislators to Washington to become corrupt critters. They are NOT giving taxpayers what WE want."

Another ideologue-moron who can't read polls. If this bill goes down to defeat, merrill, for once the folks in Washington did do what the people (at least the people outside Looneyville) wanted them to do.

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 5 years, 4 months ago

'twould appear that those with denial issues are the ones who were denied in the last election.

( It just follows. )

jonas_opines 5 years, 4 months ago

"Americans can compete with anyone in the world if the playing field is level and the same rules applied.

It is no brag, just fact."

That's not much incentive for anyone else to play fair, is it? We are the largest, most powerful, and really the most mature of the modern economies. Which gives us a huge natural advantage. Making the idea of a level playing field the big myth.

"I wish I had the time to give you hundreds of examples, but I don't. I am going to spend my day riding my bike and working out."

That's fine, then I won't worry so much about a response, and just hope that you see this.

"Next time you hear somebody say we can't compete with China, you should know you are looking at a stupid person. If they are your professor, change classes. You won't learn anything."

That would be an incredibly simplistic statement, yes. The same as putting it the other way around, but I didn't say it, and I haven't heard it by anyone who knows what they're talking about say it either. But we have to be honest with the situation as it stands, and it is not a level playing field, in a variety of different ways. Some that benefit us and some that benefit others. It will not become one either.

That doesn't mean we can't compete either. It just means that we have to pick our strategies with more care. Hell, a lot of people who Did outsource to China found that it has not provided them with much advantage or even savings, in the long run.

labmonkey 5 years, 4 months ago

Beatrice-

In 2007, W was saying the same thing about the Dow being 14000...so choose your arguments carefully (although from seeing most of your posts, you are a blind Obama follower).

labmonkey 5 years, 4 months ago

Tom-

If the Republican Party has leaders that think like you, we don't stand a chance in 2010.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 4 months ago

Facists Neoconservatives still control the former republican party. Which is to say “getting in the way” is their favorite tool. The only thing that changed is Bush and Cheney although they still are wandering about fear mongering.

The facist neoconservative fears are fairly substantial which is why they spend so much time and money burying the rest of us with their fear mongering. That same facists neoconservative party fears a few things which the majority of americans need to take back and shore up.

Keep in mind a prospering america can overcome fear mongering.

What is the opposing facists neoconservative party afraid of:

  • No more wars

  • A dramatically improved quality of life for all americans

  • HR 676 National Health Insurance for All which would bring about:

  • Many new jobs for americans across the board in the field of medicine and with medical institutions

  • New Industry thus new jobs thus new wealth for the USA

Which in turn would improve the quality of life for millions upon millions of households.

The most expensive medical insurance in the world consistently increases the cost of living across america. This needs to be curtailed.

The bottom line is we need at least 15 million jobs 8 million of which were lost due the in the last 4 years of the Bush mismangement of the economy.

The most expensive medical insurance in the world does not attract new industry,new jobs thus no new wealth for the middle class.

fuel_for_the_fire 5 years, 4 months ago

"most mature of the modern economies"!!!!

What does that mean, exactly?

Centerville 5 years, 4 months ago

Counting the days til Moore announces that he 'wants to spend more time with the family".

jonas_opines 5 years, 4 months ago

fuel_for_the_fire (Anonymous) says…

“most mature of the modern economies”!!!!

"What does that mean, exactly?"

Meaning that we've had the most time to develop without getting the @#$% pounded out of our manufacturing base and infrastructure during a massive war. Europe and the major players in Asia had to rebuild out of WWII, which of course spared us almost completely.

Jason Bailey 5 years, 4 months ago

Merrill: Are you a real person or just a robot that fishes for internet content with specific key words and then automatically publish a random article from your google database?

I'm seriously beginning to think either a) you have no life and just sit around waiting to post your War and Peace diatribes against whatever injustice you see or, b) you're a Google labs beta project that will soon be released to the public.

jonas_opines 5 years, 4 months ago

I think he's just a readily accessed archive.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"I like to go to pollingreport.com when I want to find out what people think."

You mean to find people who think like you, don't you, porchie?

Try these:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

Then browse around the other links from that page, and you might just find people are thinking this:

'A solid majority of unaffiliated voters are opposed to passing health care reform legislation with or without the public option.'

'Overall, when it comes to health care decisions, 51% fear the government more than private insurance companies while 41% hold the opposite view.'

'Most Americans support the concept of reform, but cost control is seen as the most important aspect of reform. Also, voters simply don’t believe the legislation will deliver the benefits that its advocates claim. Few believe it will increase patient choice or make health care affordable. In fact, most voters believe the passage of the current health care reform effort will lead to higher costs and lower quality of care.'

'The health care reform debate has helped push Obama’s job approval ratings in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll to new lows.'

Date 08/22/2009 Presidential Approval Index -10 Strongly Approve 29%
Strongly Disapprove 39%
Total Approve 49%
Total Disapprove 50%

Obama Governing as Bipartisan? 33%
GOPs acting Bipartisan? 24%
Dems acting Bipartisan? 20%

Or how about these:

Poll RCP Average Date 8/10 - 8/17 Right Direction 37.0
Wrong Track 58.5
Spread -21.5

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html

It also depends on how the question is asked, porchie:

'It also finds that about two-thirds (67%) of U.S. residents "strongly" or "somewhat" favor establishing a public health insurance option "similar to Medicare," with about 80% of Democrats, 60% of independents and 49% of Republicans in favor of such a plan. However, according to the poll, when those who support a public plan are told that it could cause the government to have an unfair advantage over private insurers, overall support for the public option decreases to 32% in favor and 59% opposed. When supporters are told that public plans would be the first step toward a single-payer system, overall support for a public plan is 41% in favor and 50% opposed. The poll also found that when asked if they support "requiring employers to offer health insurance to their workers or pay money into a government fund," 71% support the concept, but when supporters are presented with a one-sided argument that the mandate could cause some job losses, support falls to 27% and 65% say they would be against it (Kaiser Family Foundation release, 4/23).'

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/147455.php

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says…

"On the day before Obama was inaugurated, Jan. 19, 2009, the Dow Jones closed at 8,281.22.

"Friday, the Dow closed at 9,505.96."

Feel free to demonstrate your expertise in economics and tell us all how that was caused by anything Obama did, bea dearie.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"It's called “current events”. Learn to pay attention to it."

Take your own advice:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/august_2009/39_blame_obama_policies_for_bad_economy

'Again this month, a Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 39% say the bad economy is caused more by Obama’s policies, but 55% blame President Bush.'

'In May, 62% blamed Bush more, while 27% thought Obama’s policies were at fault.'

Doesn't sound too much like time is on his side, porchie.

Also:

'Sixty percent (60%) of voters say they trust their own judgment on economic issues more than the president’s.'

'Just six percent (6%) of voters now think their taxes will go down during the Obama years, while 42% expect them to go up. This is the first time since last November’s election that the number expecting a tax cut has fallen to single digits. Seventy percent (70%) say government spending will increase during the Obama years.'

'Seventy-one percent (71%) say the president’s policies have increased the size of the federal deficit.'

'Seventy-six percent (76%) say it is at least somewhat likely taxes will have to be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of the health care reform plan proposed by the president and congressional Democrats, but 54% think middle class tax cuts are more important than new spending on health care.'

In other words, while the economy is indeed rebounding, not too many people other than the blind, fawning Baracolytes like you give the president much credit for it. And when you look back at the exit polls from November, porchie, and see that far and away the biggest issue for voters was the economy, the fact that fewer and fewer people trust the president's economic policy doesn't bode well for him in 2012, does it?

hsr0601 5 years, 4 months ago

The savings via removing wastes turn into limit to medical access, rationing, tax raise, and deficit etc via the irresponsible lies.

Unlike high fuel price and mortgage rate in recent years as the roots of great recession and bankruptcy of middle class, the severity in the high cost of health premiums has come to light lately. Similarly, in an attempt to hide these painful corruptions & wastes, the greed allies struggle to turn the savings via removing these wastes into limit to medical access, rationing, tax raise, and deficit etc.

By contrast, not to mention a wide range of consumer protection, this promising reform takes initiatives in more primary care docs and improved long-term care. Unnecessarily, hope should not be replaced with fear, just like people don't have to fear quitting drug.

Equation & the flower of this reform !

$1.042trillion (cost of reform) + $245bn (cost to reflect annual pay raise of docs) = $1.287bn (actual cost of reform).

$583bn (the revenue package) + $80bn (doughnut hole) + $155bn (savings from hospitals) + $167bn (ending the unnecessary subsidies for insurers) + $277bn (ending medical fraud, a minimum of 3% , the combined Medicare and Medicaid cost of $923.5bn per year, as of July,) = $1.257trillion + the tax code on the wealthiest more reduced than originally proposed = why not ? (except for a magic pill, an outcome-based payment reform & IT effects and so forth).

Additionally, the last thing to expect, no e-medial record, is happening now in the sector requiring the best accuracy in terms of dealing with human lives, which leads to a shocking portion of risk-carrying duplicate tests, fatal errors and deaths, as a consequence, these cause a vicious circle, about $100bn worth of litigations and even more profits via unnecessary procedures for hospitals .

Clearly, the American style innovation, outcome-based payment reform, could speed up the adoption of IT system, under this package, docs' pay is dependant upon patient's outcome, no intervention, wastes, frequent readmissions, low-quality are allowed later on.

It is firmly believed with the preventive care program in operation, this innovation could change the world just like GM Volt ( the release of BYD's earlier appearance in America and the ambitious plan of Germany for 1million of EV by 2020 etc supports it).

camper 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty, I am not so sure I blame the recession on Bush. These are the two things I believe most responsible for the catastrophy:

1) Rising fuel costs (the 1st dominoe to fall). 2) The housing debacle (the 2nd).

In my view, the SEC is the one institution most blameworthy. They did absolutely nothing to put a clamp on or prevent this absurd consolidation and trading of home mortgage assets. Ironic that the SEC was created as a result of the depression, but unfortunately are largely responsible for the current recession.

Albeit, Bush was steering the ship for eight years, and involving the US in two wars was an utter mistake. He also was not really proactive on anything from the economy, energy strategy, or health care reform. But if he did anything right during his term it was the final days of his administration when he went against his own ideaology and helped prevent the financial industry from going into a total collapse.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"Oh, you mean non-Republicans, non-Democrats….. yep, that's a deal breaker. Real big demographic there, uh huh….

"(laughter)

"Were you hoping readers wouldn't read that qualifier?"

No, you moron. See, most people who read these message boards are just a little more intelligent than you (not saying much, granted), and they understand what that 'qualifier' means. The reasons Rasmussen specifically mentioned that block (and I chose to cite it) are: 1) unaffiliated voters are those that don't have the blinders attached and don't blindly follow the party leadership from either side, and 2) unaffiliated voters are the ones that decide elections. If you were even slightly informed, you might know that the bullet-proof majority in the Senate depends on a certain Senator who was forced out of the Democratic party and was elected as an independent - from a state where independents outnumber the registered voters from either party.

I won't indulge in returning your mindless 'laughter' though. I find it incredibly sad. I have a hard time trying to determine whether you're really serious, mentally ill, or writing your posts as a joke - even without the frequent mindless maniacal laughter. I find it very difficult to believe that anyone capable of even turning on a computer could be so stupid.

"Health care reform has been a top-five concern of the public for a long time."

Too bad it wasn't much of a factor in the election, child.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/exit.polls/

"The economy was the top issue in the election among 62 percent of voters questioned in exit polls on Tuesday."

"Health care and terrorism were tied at 9 percent as the issue voters were most concerned about, according to the exit polling."

"Misrepresent much? Or has Rasmussen lost its objectivity?"

Lordie but you're a mindless buffoon. Can you even read polls, let alone make your uneducated and childish attempts at 'interpreting' them?

I cited polls from three different sources, little one, to show you that it isn't just an isolated anomaly. Rasmussen's is a daily tracking poll, and if you were capable of understanding numbers bigger than what you can count without taking off your shoes, you would have seen that the 'index' is based on the '"strongly" approve/disapprove. That might account for the discrepancy, to anyone with functioning neurons. I strongly suggest you take your own advice and "Stop smoking dope so early in the morning." Crack kills, porchie. And while your posts are certainly amusing in their naivite, you embarass yourself badly every time you touch a keyboard, and watching your continual self-immolation is facinating but horrifying - because unfortunately uninformed morons are allowed to vote.

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

notajay: "Feel free to demonstrate your expertise in economics and tell us all how that was caused by anything Obama did, bea dearie."

I don't claim to have expertise in economics, and the "dearie" is condescending. Oh, and condescending means to talk down to.

Anyway, my point about where the Dow was before Obama took office and where it is today was to counter Tom's statement that a year from now things would still be stagnant. We actually aren't stagnant -- a good thing, by the way. There are some strong signs that things are improving. I wasn't saying it was just Obama's doing that things are improving, but he is the person in the White House now so he might as well get some of the credit. If the Dow was now at 5000, don't you believe he would be getting the blame?

Perhaps the improving economy is proof that the Stimulus Package is actually working. Now, why don't you show us your obvious economic expertise and prove that Obama has nothing to do with the improving economy.

Or would you just prefer to give the credit to Bush?

camper 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty, good point(s). Man there are so many variables when it comes to economics. Kind of like an automobile (another construction with a lot of moving parts to consider).

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says…

"There are some strong signs that things are improving."

And plenty that we're not - it depends (as always) on who you listen to. It does seem like a lot of those who claim things are getting better are the same ones who said they understimated how bad it was before.

"If the Dow was now at 5000, don't you believe he would be getting the blame?"

Um - no. As a matter of fact, most people (although by an ever-shrinking percentage) still believe our current economic circumstances are more the fault of Obama's predecessor than of Obama. I've always found you to be one of the sharper ones on these message boards, bea. Reading the posts on these forums, can you seriously say, with a straight face, that people would have blamed Obama if the stock market continued to tank?

"Now, why don't you show us your obvious economic expertise and prove that Obama has nothing to do with the improving economy."

A convenient if specious argument, bea. Especially when one considers the null hypothesis can not be proven.

But since you want a lesson in basic economics:

The price of stock has very little to do with any intrinsic value. I.e., while it is very slightly influenced by a corporation's asset base, financial strength, etc., the only real factor that sets the price of a stock is what someone else is willing to pay for it. It's entirely possible for a company to be in the red and still have a high stock value - investors aren't so much looking for dividends as they are the profit from re-selling the stock. At some point people were going to start investing again, with or without the stimulus package. The lower the stock value dropped, the more certain that was going to happen. And to an extent, the same forces are at work in the housing market. Why did the house I used to own in Connecticut sell for twice what we paid for it just two years after we bought it? Because that's what someone was willing to pay for it - and because we bought it at a greatly reduced price during a time of depressed home values. People still need houses, and investors will always be looking for places to make money - the economy would have corrected itself no matter what happened.

Stu Clark 5 years, 4 months ago

The easy way to control executive pay excesses referred to in the LTE is through the maximum marginal tax rate in our progressive income tax system. It's currently 35% on AGIs over $312K. The historical peak was 94%/$200K in 1944.

I wouldn't mind a $200M salary plus bonus if I knew that a large part of the last $150M was collected in taxes.

Of course, this would be unacceptable to the Grover Norquists out there.

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

notajay: "Reading the posts on these forums, can you seriously say, with a straight face, that people would have blamed Obama if the stock market continued to tank?"

You can't be serious.

Given that my initial post here was in response to exactly this type of comment where claims of a continuing "stagnant" economy would Obama's fault, then yes, I can state with absolute certainty that if the stock market had continued to tank there would be a large number of people here who would blame Obama. Did you not read any of the comments back around March in relation to the economy? Yes, most rational people recognize that the economy was in the tank before Obama took office. However, there are still plenty who began to blame him for everything wrong with the world the exact moment he was sworn in. It is absolutely impossible to please some people.

Regarding your "economic lesson," I will give it all it rightly deserves -- Duh!

Seriously. Elementary at best.

The rising Dow is, however, an indication that things may well be improving, as I wrote earlier. We clearly aren't out of the tank yet, not by a long shot, but we are not "stagnant" and there is no reason why we should imagine we will be in a year, which is, again, the point I argued against in the first place.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

"nota, regarding the price of stocks, actually they are continuing to go down when measured against a stable money—remember the dollar is losing value. So while a stock may go from $100 a share to $101 it can actually be worth less in real currency."

Well, it was a lesson in basic economics, liberty, and that's a whole 'nother lesson. The only point I was trying to get across was that the stock market is the penultimate example of a market economy - a share of stock quite often has no more intrinsic value than the paper it's printed on, yet can increase (or decrease) in value solely based on what someone's willing to pay for it vs. what someone else is willing to part with it for. (And the housing market is a close second as an illustrative example.)


beatrice (Anonymous) says…

"Given that my initial post here was in response to exactly this type of comment where claims of a continuing “stagnant” economy would Obama's fault, then yes, I can state with absolute certainty that if the stock market had continued to tank there would be a large number of people here who would blame Obama."

And somehow you managed to skip over the posts of the fawning Baracolytes who will blame his predecessor no matter what? As far as your claim goes, bea, that explains the polls how, again?

"Seriously. Elementary at best."

When I taught economics, I realized I had to teach at the level of the students, bea. And as you gave no indication that you understood those basic concepts, well ...

"The rising Dow is, however, an indication that things may well be improving, as I wrote earlier."

Wanna' give that one a little more thought? The rising stock market and home values is one of the major reasons for the collapse in the first place. If you truly understood that 'elementary' lesson in economics, bea, you'd realize that both the stock market and the housing market are bubbles which not only can burst at any time, but are destined to do so from time-to-time. Both of them rely on trading at a value far in excess of anything based in reality (did you learn anything from the past couple of years' volatility in the oil market, bea?). The fact that the stock market and home values are going back up might be a good sign - or it could be the harbinger of a future, and larger, disaster.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"Thanks for the all the angry ad hominem but simple acknowledgment that Rasmussen Reports is far off base in evaluating Obama's approval rating with the public would have sufficed."

Angry, porchie? You seem to be under the extremely labored assumption that I could give a s**t what idiots think. As far as ad hominem, perhaps if you knew what that term meant? Ask mommy next time you go upstairs.

Also, as far as my earlier mentioned dilemma at figuring out your posts - if you seriously believe that Rasmussen is biased because they don't paint as rosy a picture of the president's popularity as the Washington Post, ABC, and NBC, then you truly are an idiot of unimaginable magnitude.

Again, porchie, just keep telling yourself people are laughing with you. No matter how many times you're urged to stop embarassing yourself, each time you touch the keyboard you just keep piling on the evidence for those 'ad hominem' attacks.

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

nota, you taught economics? Did they fire you for attempting to condescend to your students or something?

Again, while I do not claim to be an expert on economics as you so clearly claim to be, the answer to your question is: No. I do not want to give a little more thought to suggesting that the rising Dow is an indication that things may well be improving. It simply is. It shows that people are investing and people are spending their money on stocks with less fear that they will lose their money as they have been in the recent past. When you look at the overall picture represented by the current Dow numbers, it is an indication that things may well be improving.

And it is the rapidly sinking home values that led to the market collapse, not rising home values. Dearie, are you sure you taught economics, or were you just a grader for someone who did teach the class? (See, isn't trying to belittle each other fun?)

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty, I haven't skipped over your posts, just haven't responded. I appreciate what you are saying, but from what I can tell you are missing a major point within your own argument.

Yes, if a dollar is worth less than it was, then we have all lost money. However, to argue that a rising stock market is actually losing money is not correct. Which would you rather have, stocks that you purchased for a certain dollar amount and the value of the stocks rise, or the original cash? Would you rather have stocks valued at $110 that you purchased for $100, or the original $100? The $110 might not be worth what $110 dollars were before inflation, but it is still worth more than the $100 you haven't invested. Money just sitting there is what is losing value.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says…

"And it is the rapidly sinking home values that led to the market collapse, not rising home values. Dearie, are you sure you taught economics, or were you just a grader for someone who did teach the class? (See, isn't trying to belittle each other fun?)"

Ah, dearie, it's so hard NOT being condescending towards you. I'll give you credit for being a little ahead of the curve laid out by porchie, eddie, merrill, etc., but then, as I mentioned, that isn't saying a whole heck of a lot.

Since you admittedly don't know a lot about economics, bea, dearie, let's talk about something you might know something about.

Ever been in an elevator, bea?

How does an elevator 'rapidly sink' without 'rising' first?

"I do not want to give a little more thought to suggesting that the rising Dow is an indication that things may well be improving. It simply is."

I don't even have to respond to that one, bea. Even I am not capable of making that statement look any worse, or any more illustrative of how you make your decisions. Brilliant analysis, as always.


edjayhawk (Anonymous) says…

"Right on porch person. Touche!"

Um, wow, eddie. Great choice of an ally you pick to reinforce your position on the issue.

You two go to the same kindergarten or something?

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

You have more patience than I do, Liberty.

Eileen Jones 5 years, 4 months ago

As a co-wage earner in a household with a six-figure income I resent the description of Democrats as "have-nots."

Wanting this country to be good for everybody does not require one to be a "have-not" but it sure seems rare for a Republican to care about anything but their own individual pocketbook.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

Liberty_One,

"I know how to read newspaper articles that say that the stock market is bullish and housing sales are up right now. That's my entire point. The economy is coming back and Obama's at the helm. The market is responding to leadership, something they didn't get from Bush. What someone said last year is irrelevant."

I see we can add post hoc ergo propter hoc to the list of logical fallacies that our poor porchdweller is completely clueless about.

Actually, what was said last year by some economists, porchie, was that the economy showed signs of recovery even before Obama took office. All that was left was the housing market to pick up, and that was an inevitability, since people still have to have houses. And all that was required for that to happen was a freeing up of credit - Obama bailed out his buddies in the UAW, it was Bush who gave the money to the financial institutions - which was another inevitability, since sooner or later banks had to start lending again, because that's how they make money.

Your ignorance continues to give a new definition to the word irrelevant, little one.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"You attempted to ad hominem the author of the Bloomberg story"

Then says

"garnished with some latin for flavor because you haven't been doing so well and some latin will provide a facade of intelligence lacking in your content."

Just brilliant, buffoon. Just frikkin' brilliant. Then again, since you obviously don't know what 'ad hominem' means, why would anyone have expected you to know that it's Latin?

It's not my job to teach fools, and as the saying goes you can't teach a pig to sing, but what the heck, here goes. 'Ad hominem,' porchie, means essentially 'against the man.' I.e., an argument against the arguer rather than his argument. Liberty's arguments, and my own, were not ad hominem, as they did contain logical points and facts (in addition to pointing out your immeasurable deficiencies). You can find perfect examples of ad hominems in your own posts, devoid of any content other than insults.

'Post hoc ergo propter hoc' is another of the logical fallacies. It means 'after this therefore because of this,' as in your fawning and blind belief that if the economy recovers after Obama became president, it must be because Obama is president. And by the way, porchie: It wasn't Liberty who threw out that term, it was me. Try to keep straight who you're responding to. I know it must be difficult what with all the voices and all, but try - again, it just might make you look marginally less of an idiot. (I doubt it - that ship has pretty much already sailed, and sunk. But what the heck, at this point you really have absolutely nothing else to lose.)

One wonders if the (laughter) is really something you're sitting there at your keyboard doing. You really, really should get back on your meds, porchie. You couldn't embarass yourself any more if you were a verified user (since, I'm pretty sure, anyone that knows you expects nothing more from your pathetic attempts to make a point).

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"We all know what “ad hominem” and “post hoc ergo propter hoc” mean. What I can't understand is how you two morons continue to think that's an adequate answer to the undeniable evidence that housing sales are up and the stock market is up, as reported in Bloomberg."

When you say "we," porchie, how many of the voices are you referring to? It was pretty plain that you had no idea what either meant. Perhaps if you had known, you would have seen that the argument you were trying to make had nothing to do with Bloomberg. It wasn't the fact that housing and the stock market are up, porchie. Those things, as has been said numerous times already, would have happened regardless. It's your insistence that the stock and housing markets are up because of anything your Messiah did.

"Liberty_One also made it an effort to try and claim I didn't know simple words like “crime”, “invective”, “correlation”, etc on another thread. That worked real well."

Like I said, you can't teach a pig to sing, porchie.

You've already demonstrated your ignorance beyond reproof, child. Nothing Liberty or I could say could possibly make you look any more idiotic than your own words. Really, kid - get some help, and try shutting up gracefully before you make yourself look any worse, if that's still a possibility. It's mind boggling how anyone that's capable of finding the letters on the keyboard could actually believe he was winning any of his supposed arguments.

Oh, hey, though, porchtroll - here's a little question for you and the voices to dwell on for the night. I've asked this as an open question several times in the past, and even those government-plan proponents that still have a few functioning neurons have declined to tackle it.

What happens, porchie, when you turn over your healthcare to a government-run, taxpayer funded (or at least subsidized) agency, and:

1) There is another recession, and more people are in need of government funded care at the same time that tax dollars are drying up; or

2) The government changes; or

3) Both?

Try giving that some thought, child. Ask mommy and daddy next time they visit the basement.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

"... and you're too stupid to know any better."

Pretty much sums it up, Liberty. Methinks this is one particular troll we should stop feeding (although he just makes it so irresistable to call out sometimes!).

(Be.O fits nicely in that category, too.)

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

notajay, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a single man -- or, at best, an unhappily married man. Correct? So is it good for you to take out your pent-up frustrations you have over your mother/ex-wife/ex-girlfriend/dog-that-ran-off, in your sad attempts at personal insults towards me? Once the insipid attempts to be condescending begin, not only do I dismiss what you are posting, but it really just speaks more to your own insecurities than it does about anyone else.

So believe that the Dow going up is a terrible thing and a clear sign that the market is doomed. I'll still believe it a positive sign that suggests that we may be on the road to recovery.

Liberty, I see your point, but I don't agree. Not saving money and spending to maximize a dollar's worth as well as borrowing money to buy things you can't afford is what really led us to our current recession.

hsr0601 5 years, 4 months ago

Theme : The public health is a fundamental human right.

  1. When the public health is also one of commodity like a house, we come to a tragic conclusion : As to for-profit business, the more ill patients get, the more profits they make.

  2. Under the free market theory and the premise that the public health is also one of commodity like a house, if the demand decreases on a large scale, accordingly the price tends to reflect it, as in the case of house price, and it never happens for the price to spiral up. One step forward, in case the price is spiraling up, to be sure, the remaining clients should withdraw the contract or choose the other options. Sadly, no way-out other than the prohibitive ER is allowed in America. Therefore, the victims today and tomorrow deserve an overdue protection from non-profit Government.

  3. When some part of our body is ailing seriously, we are going to lose competitiveness, equally, when some part of a nation is ailing servery, it is going to loose competitiveness, too.

  4. Unlike the original financial concern over recovery from Catrina catastrophe, the recovery work is going smooth with no big problem, to my knowledge. The last thing to want would be for this health Catrina to be left untreated. And people need to bear in mind that the greedy insurers entered the ground of uncontrollable anti-trust via consolidation, when the public health is left with them, the size and scope of damage can not be compared with the difference between the estimate and result of this reform.

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty, I could have sworn your comments were to spend, not save, and to buy on credit, because the dollar will be worth less in the future. If you agree with me, then I guess you didn't say these things. I must have been mistaken.

However, I still think there are some good signs that things are starting to turn around.

beatrice 5 years, 4 months ago

Liberty, got it, and it does make some sense. Sort of.

However, I do have two problems with this idea. If we are talking about tangible goods rather than things with intrinsic value like a vacation, then the first issue is that when you purchase stuff now rather than saving money for later, won't the new items depreciate in value? Does the rate of inflation really offset the depreciation? Not on most goods.

If you didn't really need the new widget right now but are spending the money now because your money will be worth less in the future, what about the next time around when you have to replace the once new widget? You are suddenly buying something again that you otherwise wouldn't have needed to replace yet. You will always be paying more with future purchases for buying before you really needed to now. That doesn't seem economically wise to me.

The other problem, of course, is if you spend now in order to beat inflation, what about when you need to buy a big ticket item? Your $100 can go further today than it will tomorrow, no doubt, but if you need to spend $100 tomorrow but only have $2 because you spent it all already, then you are forced to purchase on credit. Suddenly you are paying an interest rate that likely exceeds inflation. Another losing proposition.

No, I'm going to advocate saving and investing wisely over just spending today.

Hope that all makes sense, even if you disagree.

notajayhawk 5 years, 4 months ago

beobachter (Anonymous) says…

"Liberty, Actually what scares me are those like you and nota who continually support programs that are not in your best interest. But if you want to continue to support everything the conservative elitist tell you, and believe all the lies Rush and his kind feed you, OK. We have freedom of speech in this country still, in spite of them. Just feel sorry for people who believe everything the right wing special interest groups tell them and lack the ability to think for themselves.."

So, something that's going to raise my taxes and lower the quality of healthcare is somehow in my best interests, Be.O? Brilliant, as always.

As I've mentioned many times, Be.O, my objections are based on my personal experience in the healthcare field. Your own opinion was spoon-fed to you by whom, again? Oh, yeah, your Messiah. FYI, it's called projection, Be.O - when you A$$ume that, because you're so easily lead by the nose and have never had an original thought in your life, other people must be as gullible as you are.


beatrice (Anonymous) says…

"notajay, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a single man — or, at best, an unhappily married man. Correct?"

See 'projection' as I explained it above, dearie. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you're a frustrated spinster who A$$umes others are as unhappy with their lives as you are? For myself, dearie, married (8 years, and quite happily) with two kids - three reasons I do not want this nightmare to become a reality.

"Once the insipid attempts to be condescending begin, not only do I dismiss what you are posting"

Darn, now how am I going to sleep tonight - bea doesn't read my posts [sniffle]. Somehow, however, you manage to reply to them...

"So believe that the Dow going up is a terrible thing and a clear sign that the market is doomed."

Still have that little reading comprehension problem, dearie? I believe I said 'The fact that the stock market and home values are going back up might be a good sign - or it could be the harbinger of a future, and larger, disaster.' Oh, wait, I did.


edjayhawk (Anonymous) says…

"See what I mean?"

Yes, I see exactly what you mean. Hence the comment.


porch_person (Anonymous) says…

"Or, at least, the “voices in my head” tell me that."

Admitting the problem is the first step to recovery, porchie. I'm proud of you.

"No one is avoiding any question."

Really, porchie? Musta' missed your answer to the question I posed you last night. But then, it would have required original though, not a wiki lookup, so I seriously doubted you were capable of answering (although it would have been hilarious to watch you try).

Commenting has been disabled for this item.