JETBLACK530I

who here pays for their house? How about a nice two story with 3 bed 2 baths house for only $90 A MONTH? Not likely. I know someone who does. A single mother with three kids from two different dads. Doesn't work. just sits on her ass at her beautiful house and gets high. Our taxes pay for the rest of that house bill i.e. lights, water, and gas all payed for by you and me. So we work twice as hard to make ends meet, to pay our bills, and feed our families all at the same time as supporting the families who just sit there doing nothing better for themselves.

And about free healthcare. Does everyone know that 80% of all healthcare cases are fully paid for by the government? There are several different programs such as mediCal, medicaid, and several county hospitals and clinics who treat the sick for little to no pay.

If someone decides to buy coke and shoot up rather than research and utilize the resources that us working americans struggle to provide for them, then there really isn't anyone else to blame.


I have attached an article from 9-30-1999. amazing read

ObD

I say again, Jimmy Carter II. Some of the people on this forum who voted for change will lose their E60's.

"Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Finally, they have no one to blame but themselves. Generation Entitled ?, I'm laughing at you.

lightfytr

I really like this thread because of all the differing opinions as well as the different angles we are viewing the issues plaguing this country.

The truth we should all be able to admit is that if in this small forum we have so many different positions, imagine our nation as well as the politicians we elected.

It doesnt matter who you voted for and it doesnt matter who would have come in office, generally speaking. The reality is that any elected president would have wanted to "try" and fix this economy. The fact is that if we were to have both sides come together on a stimulus I would have become a monk. It hasnt happen nor did/do I expect it to. We can all throw out stats about the exception to the rule. I do not believe nor do I want to believe that the benefits we provide to those in unfortunate situations are abused as a norm. There are crooks in office (look what happen this week), there are crooks in corporations (Enron), and I am sure there are crooks receiving welfare. There is a little bad everywhere, does that mean you punish them all? No. As a military guy with no intentions of retiring before 2014 I think my E60 is safe. Some dont realize but for me, I am in the military because I care about helping others. You know what one of the first things I ask fellow leaders in the Army as they move up? "Who else have you helped move up like you did". I am/would be willing to sacrifice what I enjoy so that others can enjoy life's fruits as well.

swajames

Well, to your first point, I'd be willing to bet that thanks to those who did vote for change it will be far, far fewer than it would have been had the the status quo been maintained.

Now to your wider point about change. Frankly I have far more faith in Obama's ability to get the country out of the current mess than I would have had in McCain's. Far more. He is already showing that he means business. The prior guy, on the other hand, poured somewhere between $3 trillion and $4 trillion in taxpayer dollars right down the crapper on a war that's cost America and far too many military families over 4,000 brave troops, never mind the simply appalling human cost in civilian casualties. That's money the country can't and could never afford. And now the country is paying the price. McCain really didn't inspire confidence that he'd do things any differently to the prior guy, and the country voted accordingly - and it made the best choice it could. It's as really simple as that - because they were the only two choices you had. Unless you've got a better idea on what those who voted for change should have done.

DRANGED

My favorite quote in regards to health care, "If you think health care is expensive now, wait till it's free."

Here is the problem. Can anyone name something that government does better or cheaper than the private sector? That's right, there isn't anything that gov't does better or cheaper than the private sector!!!

When you offer a product for free or subsidized by the gov't you create a false demand for said product. The false demand for this product increases the price of said product and the cost to the gov't increases. Gov't is forced to impose price controls and rationing on the product to try to control the cost and false demand for the product.

Lets say I am gov't and health care is an Ipod. I start giving away $200 Ipods(healthcare) for free and pay for the downloading of music(healthcare). Keep in mind I am buying these Ipods from Apple for $200 and music downloads are $1. Suddenly everyone wants an Ipod, people who never needed an Ipod now want one. These same people start downloading music at an exponential rate. I have now created a FALSE DEMAND for Ipods/downloads because I am giving it away for free or at a cost the is being held low due to subsidies.
Supply can't keep up with Ipod demand, driving up the cost of Ipods and downloads. Ipods now cost $400 and downloads are $2 because of this FALSE DEMAND that I have created. I have to raise taxes on my citizens and start rationing Ipods/downloads because I cannot afford the cost to give everyone Ipods/downloads. I now impose price controls on Apple and force them to sell me the Ipod for $50 dollars and downloads for $.50 in an attempt to control costs. Now the people who really need Ipods can't get one because of this FALSE DEMAND or they are forced to wait an extended period of time until one becomes available. Apple no longer wants to make Ipods because it is no longer profitable for them because I have forced them to make them for $50. People are paying exorbitant taxes to pay for this Ipod program, they no longer want to work because no matter how long or hard they work, I take all of their $$ to pay for Ipods and downloads. There is no longer anyone to tax because there is no incentive to work because Gov't takes all of your money to pay for Ipods and downloads. Eventually there is no one left to tax/no one left to pay for these programs.

Does everyone now understand why universal health care and socialism don't and can't work?

Gov't drives up the cost of everything it touches. The current rate of growth of gov't is unsustainable!! Gov't IS the problem, it is not and will never be the answer.

The people of the US are a good people, we the people are the answer. Allow people to keep more of their taxes. CUT TAXES for those who actually pay taxes. Trust the people to do the right thing with their money, they have always done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future if we allow them the opportunity. Charities should provide for the less fortunate, not gov't. Neighbors should help neighbors, not Gov't. Families should help family, Friends should help friends not Gov't.

Look around our country at the states that are flourishing and that have no budget shortfalls. They have limited gov't, low taxes, Little or no corporate tax. In contrast, look at the states that are failing ie California, MN...insert your failing state. They have huge gov't spending, giant social programs, high taxes, high corporate tax rates.

America can't make socialism work. Socialism has never worked. AMERICAN SOCIALISM will fail just like America's attempts at Social programs fail. We do not have one social program that is sustainable in this country.



"When all the objectives of government include the achievement of equality - other than equality before the law - that government poses a threat to liberty." Margaret Thatcher

sixcard

Great comments, Dranged

garylewa

Spot On!!!!!

rogerj

DRANGED, Great post! I don't propose that healthcare be free, but there has to be a way to make it accessible. I do not know the solution but I definitely agree that Socialism is NOT the answer.

swajames

There are a couple of flaws in the argument. Firstly, we already have all of the constituents and component ingredients in John's healthcare recipe available to us today - but they haven't resulted in a healthcare system any more viable than the alternatives. The second is more challenging and is the primary flaw John's usually impeccable thinking. John argues that government involvement generally drives the cost of a given commodity up. That's typically true. It's also true that the will of the free market will typically drive the cost of that same given commodity down. That's not, however what we've seen in healthcare. The reasons are many, but boil down to two: a system managed by insurance companies rather than by doctors, and the ability to profit. Profit is, of course, no bad thing - but it can be when it creates an artificial market, and when it's profit taken at the expense of care.

An example - say my physician bills $2500 for care. My insurer has a negotiated rate of $1000. The physician accepts $1000, and the $1500 excess is written off per the terms of the contract between the two. My doctor is happy, I am happy. If, however, I did not have an insurer, the physician is billing and trying to collect $2500. He's under no obligation to cut me same break he cuts the insurer (as I as an individual have no collective bargaining power). I, therefore, have to pay significantly more than the effective market rate. The stories of this happening are legion. This is compounded because in any given healthcare transaction you may have multiple providers, all charging for their respective element. For one surgical procedure you may pay charges to your physician, a surgeon, an anaesthetist, the hospital where the procedure is performed. Your insurer manages the process. At each stage, you have a profit motive and ultimately cumulative profit.

The net result is this. The free market is driving the cost of care up, and not down as it creates opportunity for profit from a captive audience who have nowhere else to go to get the same result. Government provided care is not free, there is clearly a cost and it is borne by taxpayers, but the starting point is a model that tries to get as much as possible for a fixed budget and this is more likely to drive cost down.

solrac6262

hahaha shit man I'm in can I get pregnant ??? I pay a lot of tax's instead of getting refund I have to pay. so my hard working profit goes to pay tax..