MaCain Liberal?

[SeansBlueXJ]

I have seen it said here quite a few times that McCain is "too liberal" etc. Can someone explain how they see this? Granted he is not some very hardcore extreem right, mid-west christan conservative, but I would say he carries the party line pretty well and is nowhere neare liberal so someone explain please?:huh:

Edit: I noticed I miss-spelled McCain in my title, but I had already hit submit... one of the 2 seconds too late things.

[JrTxJ]

Edit: your edit beat me to it!

[kdailey4315]

If you look at his voting record you will see that he has voted against Republicans more than voting with them. The only places where I see him to be conservative are his gun laws and views on the military. For a while he was in favor of an open border with Mexico. That is definitely liberal to me.

[JrTxJ]

If you look at his voting record you will see that he has voted against Republicans more than voting with them. The only places where I see him to be conservative are his gun laws and views on the military. For a while he was in favor of an open border with Mexico. That is definitely liberal to me.

yet according to NObama last night, he has voted 90% the same as Bush?!

[SeansBlueXJ]

Yeah sorry about that, see my edit that I was in the middle of when you posted. And all due respect back, while I dont necessairly want to see Obama win, I think he very well may be the next president. Personally I think I wont vote for either.

[kdailey4315]

yet according to NObama last night, he has voted 90% the same as Bush?!
Sorry as soon as I hear/see "according to Obama" my bullshit detector goes off and I don't listen to it or read it. :D

[XJEEPER]

If you are comparing traditional Conservative VS Liberal views and aligning them with Republicans VS Democrats, then I would agree that McCain is liberal.

That being said, our other choice (Obama) what I consider a Socialist in ideology. I watched his speach last night and I'm even more convinced that his goal is to promote a Socialist agenda. Obama committed to many things last night, but I've yet to hear any details on how he will accomplish these. I'm anxiously awaiting a head to head debate between Obama and McCain, to see how each of them address, in detail, the tough issues that we are facing as a nation.

The part of Obama's speech about how much of the nation is struggling to pay their mortgage, having to sell their vehicles, rampant bankrupcy and foreclosures and many who can't find a job.......pure bullcrap. The majority that are experincing these issues are feeling the effects of poor finacial choices and mis-management of their money.......living outside of their means.

I'm in what I would consider the middle-class from an income perspective and I've increased my earnings every year for the last 10 years. This year my income will be double what it was 6 years ago.

I have a home with close to $100,000 in equity in it, which I did not gamble with by taking out a sub-prime 2nd at 125% loan/value and buy lots of toys that I can't afford.

We the People really need to put the Legislative Branch of our government under the microscope. Nothing will get their attention like a mass firing. They need to know that American citizens are pissed and their jobs are on the line.

They need to be held accountable for their actions and inaction to represent the will of the People that the were elected to represent. We need to stop blaming the President for everything and look at those who are getting their palms greased by the lobbyists and special interest groups.

McCain is definitely not my ideal choice for President, but I'll take 4 years with him over Obama. BTW, I'm Independant.

[JohnJohn]

Obama said he will cut taxes for 95% of all Americans. However he forgot to mention that of that 95% only 20% of them actually PAY taxes after the shuffle.

[Boatwrench]

For a while he was in favor of an open border with Mexico. That is definitely liberal to me.

Actually, not true.
While "liberals" are in favor of an open border it is more for human rights and for poor oppressed people to escape the poverty they live in seeking a better life here in the US. and if you have ever been to some of those shit hole 3rd world countries, other than the drunken fiesta resorts you would understand why they want to come here.

McCain is in favor of an open border because he wants a free market, that's conservative talk for "cheap labor" force. He doesn't really care about working families as (ok this next part is 2nd hand) at a DHL facility that was threaten with closing putting working Americans on the employment rolls he stated something along the line of it's not an issue in a free market.

Oh and the military thing, do you know we have fewer carrier battle groups than at anytime since before WWII. McCain supported the decommissioning of the last carrier (Kitty or Kennedy?) WITHOUT authorizing building a new carrier. McCain also has cut veteran's benefits.

What has me scratching my head is why he selected a union member to be his running mate.

[Boatwrench]

We the People really need to put the Legislative Branch of our government under the microscope. Nothing will get their attention like a mass firing. They need to know that American citizens are pissed and their jobs are on the line.

They need to be held accountable for their actions and inaction to represent the will of the People that the were elected to represent. We need to stop blaming the President for everything and look at those who are getting their palms greased by the lobbyists and special interest groups.


I'm thinking of voting for Cindy Sheehan to send Representative Nancy Pelosi a message. Nancy's not bringing any money or jobs into San Francisco, she said she was going to impeach President Bush and bring the troops home, and she hasn't delivered. (before you flame out, I am NOT advocating those positions, they are examples.) REP Pelosi has been a hollow representative, no results from being at the capitol. Cindy Sheehan won't accomplish anything either, but it will surely send a message to all incumbents that they should start doing a better job of doing the bidding of the citizens they represent.

About blaming the President, he is suppose to be the leader, the CEO of the US, the reason it's called the Executive Branch. To be a true leader means to be held accountable for the good and the bad.

[GSequoia]

To be a true leader means to be held accountable for the good and the bad.

:confused:

But all the bad stuff is Clinton's fault, remember :D

[8Mud]

If you look at his voting record you will see that he has voted against Republicans more than voting with them. The only places where I see him to be conservative are his gun laws and views on the military. For a while he was in favor of an open border with Mexico. That is definitely liberal to me.

The open border with Mexico was actually a progression of what Regan started, a North American co prosperity sphere. Loosen up the borders and bootstrap our southern neighbors into a position where they won't want to immigrate to the north. And at the same time encourage industry and management to immigrate to Mexico, export knowhow. It may have actually worked out if people were willing to give it a chance. It was no sooner partially implemented and people starting chipping away at the process, both Republicans and Democrats..
One of Americas strengths has always been market share and a very large consumer market. America is a sizable percentage of many countries GNP. Three hundred and sixty million people under one moderately functional government, A government that wields a very large hammer in world affairs, both politically and economically.
Conservative doesn't necessarily mean non progressive, it means they tend to stick to tried and proved formulas.
The European union is in the process of doing what Regan envisioned for North America. They now outnumber the US in population and GDP.
I really can't see how a static America or a shrinking America is going to keep it's place in world events.
McCain tends to represent the majority in his views, the views of the people who elected him, not the views of his party. He is also politician enough to get things done, even when he is moving against the flow (party lines). Pragmatic pops to mind as a one word definition.
We are in a war and people expect things to proceed as usual, the economy not to be affected and to not have to sacrifice anything in the process.
The neo body politic reminds me of the old saying about mushrooms, keep them in the dark and feed them manure. People are complaining about the amount and quality of the manure, while the house burns down.

[Clean Racing]

I'm thinking of voting for Cindy Sheehan to send Representative Nancy Pelosi a message.


Now We californian's or whats left of them should also get rid of Boxer and Fienstein.

[Ecomike]

If you look at his voting record you will see that he has voted against Republicans more than voting with them.

Can you back that claim up with unbiased references?

[Ecomike]

If you are comparing traditional Conservative VS Liberal views and aligning them with Republicans VS Democrats, then I would agree that McCain is liberal.

That being said, our other choice (Obama) what I consider a Socialist in ideology. I watched his speach last night and I'm even more convinced that his goal is to promote a Socialist agenda. Obama committed to many things last night, but I've yet to hear any details on how he will accomplish these. I'm anxiously awaiting a head to head debate between Obama and McCain, to see how each of them address, in detail, the tough issues that we are facing as a nation.

The part of Obama's speech about how much of the nation is struggling to pay their mortgage, having to sell their vehicles, rampant bankrupcy and foreclosures and many who can't find a job.......pure bullcrap. The majority that are experincing these issues are feeling the effects of poor finacial choices and mis-management of their money.......living outside of their means.

I'm in what I would consider the middle-class from an income perspective and I've increased my earnings every year for the last 10 years. This year my income will be double what it was 6 years ago.

I have a home with close to $100,000 in equity in it, which I did not gamble with by taking out a sub-prime 2nd at 125% loan/value and buy lots of toys that I can't afford.

We the People really need to put the Legislative Branch of our government under the microscope. Nothing will get their attention like a mass firing. They need to know that American citizens are pissed and their jobs are on the line.

They need to be held accountable for their actions and inaction to represent the will of the People that the were elected to represent. We need to stop blaming the President for everything and look at those who are getting their palms greased by the lobbyists and special interest groups.

McCain is definitely not my ideal choice for President, but I'll take 4 years with him over Obama. BTW, I'm Independant.

While I agree with parts of what you said above, you might want to recheck that home equity you think you still have. Several parts of the country have seen housing price drops as much as 50% from their recent peaks. I live in Houston, where the housing market is still stable, I already lived through the last bubble burst in the 1980s here when ALL the real estate, banks and most businesses went belly up. During that time the Republicans did nothing to help us get back on our feet. California, and New York banks basically bought Texas at a back door auction for $1.00 in the early to mid 80's. It has taken me 25 years to get back on my feet. Even if your housing market is still OK, like mine is right now, if we don't help stop the hemoraging (sp?) in that market, it will spill over into the rest of the economy, which is already happening (credit crunch) and turn it into a world wide recession that will eventually hurt all of us.

[Ecomike]

Actually, not true.
While "liberals" are in favor of an open border it is more for human rights and for poor oppressed people to escape the poverty they live in seeking a better life here in the US. and if you have ever been to some of those shit hole 3rd world countries, other than the drunken fiesta resorts you would understand why they want to come here.

McCain is in favor of an open border because he wants a free market, that's conservative talk for "cheap labor" force. He doesn't really care about working families as (ok this next part is 2nd hand) at a DHL facility that was threaten with closing putting working Americans on the employment rolls he stated something along the line of it's not an issue in a free market.

Oh and the military thing, do you know we have fewer carrier battle groups than at anytime since before WWII. McCain supported the decommissioning of the last carrier (Kitty or Kennedy?) WITHOUT authorizing building a new carrier. McCain also has cut veteran's benefits.

Not disagreeing with you, but can you post some proof of that! Might help wake up some of these NAXJA hard heads here! One of the things Obama has said repeatedly is that unlike the recent Republican administration and Congress, he has and will increase funding for Veterans benefits so that they can get the medical care they need and that they were promised.

What has me scratching my head is why he selected a union member to be his running mate.

Nothing baffling about that, it was a pure get the Union, pro gun lobby, uncomitted female get the vote, political distraction. But I agree, nothing about his VP choice makes much sense. Just a desperate, last minute, snap politcal decision move, in my opinion, which shows what he might do under other deperate circumstances if elected, should he find himself in desperate circumstances as our president, which scares the hell out of me!:eek:

She has no real credible credentials for being the Commander in Chief, except for being a city council women and mayor of a huge city of something like 6,600 people. And Governor of vast snow and ice covered, sparsly populated state for kless than 2 years. My God, is that best he could find as his runner up left in the Republican party?

Forget for a minute that she claims to be a Republican, and ask yourself if you can really picture her as the Comander in Chief as we face a new Russian (Soviet) threat?

[Darky]

She has no real credible credentials for being the Commander in Chief, except for being a city council women and mayor of a huge city of something like 6,600 people. And Governor of vast snow and ice covered, sparsly populated state for kless than 2 years. My God, is that best he could find as his runner up left in the Republican party?

Forget for a minute that she claims to be a Republican, and ask yourself if you can really picture her as the Comander in Chief as we face a new Russian (Soviet) threat?
Whatever her credentials or lack thereof, she's second in line. McCain would have to die or get impeached for her to be Commander in Chief. Obama doesn't have much more experience and he would be the Commander in Chief if elected.

[XJEEPER]

While I agree with parts of what you said above, you might want to recheck that home equity you think you still have.

No need to recheck it, Mike. It's accurate based on current market values and comparisons of recent sales in the my area. Thanks for feeling you need to question the accuracy of my data.

Still makes my point accurate, the folks that choose to live within their means, with little or 0 consumer debt will be just fine.........I'm still angry that Congress is making me pay for the others that got themselves upside down on their mortgages/2nds.

BTW, I like what you said about the 80's economy being in the crapper, which is great reason to learn from them and not to elect another Jimmy Carter.

[Ecomike]

Whatever her credentials or lack thereof, she's second in line. McCain would have to die or get impeached for her to be Commander in Chief. Obama doesn't have much more experience and he would be the Commander in Chief if elected.

So you think McCain is going to be in good enough health to make it to his 80th birthday during the next 8 years? Hasn't he had malignant skin cancer several times already? That tells me he is a ticking cancer time bomb, having had skin cancer that many times already.

I was having a hard enough time visualizing Hilliary as the President, even with all of her experience. Interesting to note, that if McCain wins, and then croaks by some natural cause, we would have 2 women, house wives, in line for direct succesion to the Presidents office!:(

[Ecomike]

No need to recheck it, Mike. It's accurate based on current market values and comparisons of recent sales in the my area. Thanks for feeling you need to question the accuracy of my data.

Still makes my point accurate, the folks that choose to live within their means, with little or 0 consumer debt will be just fine.........I'm still angry that Congress is making me pay for the others that got themselves upside down on their mortgages/2nds.

BTW, I like what you said about the 80's economy being in the crapper, which is great reason to learn from them and not to elect another RONALD REAGAN.

There I correct it for you! Reagan was the man with the plan from 1981 to 1989.

[EMSJEEP]

Bring in the republicans to finish out the war on terror...then...8 years from now let the dem's take care of the economic cleanup....

Interesting to think about: Obama's VP is an older rich white man...how many toothless, inbred, middle-american rednecks are gonna vote for Obama with the intention of assassinating him to put a younger-than-McCain white male in control?

The Dem's constant references to McCain being too old and ready to die to be president have alienated every older, white, powerful male supporter in the country...the people who really control elections...

[red91]

Reagan did the same thing in the 1980's with legal changes that allowed a joint R & D effort that combined the best private public and academic reasearch efforts under one roof in Austin Texas that led to US domination of the computer revolution that brought us out of the 80's depression and into the internet computer economy of the 90's. It was to a great extent responsible for the prosperity of the 90's.





BTW, I like what you said about the 80's economy being in the crapper, which is great reason to learn from them and not to elect another Jimmy Carter..


But then you change XJEEPER's post to read like this changing Jimmy Carter for Ronald Regean.

"BTW, I like what you said about the 80's economy being in the crapper, which is great reason to learn from them and not to elect another RONALD REAGAN."



So....

Was Regean at fault, or the hero because he cannot be both.

[Mstrkage]

I'm voting for McCain because at least he has a plan, even if it changes once or twice. O'Bama preaches change and revitalizing the government and such but his talk rarely has any substance to it.
I'll also choose McCain because I wish to keep my firearms and it isn't that hard to find out where O'Bama and Biden stand on gun rights.
And why does everyone put the sole blame on a president for the economy? Honestly aren't they just the head of the executive branch? And like stated earlier, what about people spending outsid their limit, not the presidents fault!

[EMSJEEP]

well I'm pretty sure roving squads of liberals aren't going to march through the streets collecting firearms you have already purchased and own legally...on the same note...buy anything you really want now, because they can do something about that...

[XJEEPER]

.


But then you change XJEEPER's post to read like this changing Jimmy Carter for Ronald Regean.

"BTW, I like what you said about the 80's economy being in the crapper, which is great reason to learn from them and not to elect another RONALD REAGAN."



So....

Was Regean at fault, or the hero because he cannot be both.


I expect no less from Mike, he's too predictable. It took Reagan two terms to turn around the mess that Carter's administration created. Anyone who defends the actions of Jimmy Carter should be charged with Treason.........

[red91]

I expect no less from Mike, he's too predictable. It took Reagan two terms to turn around the mess that Carter's administration created. Anyone who defends the actions of Jimmy Carter should be charged with Treason.........

then on the other side of the coin....clinton took alot of credit for the excellent economy Reagan left behind.

[Ecomike]

No need to recheck it, Mike. It's accurate based on current market values and comparisons of recent sales in the my area. Thanks for feeling you need to question the accuracy of my data.

Still makes my point accurate, the folks that choose to live within their means, with little or 0 consumer debt will be just fine.........I'm still angry that Congress is making me pay for the others that got themselves upside down on their mortgages/2nds.

The way I see it we are stuck paying that tab whether we bail them (who ever them is) out or let them sink. Either way it is going to cost us a bunch, a cost we should not of had to worry about had Washington been on their feet and doing their job of regulating interstate commerce the last 27 years!

Many people are going to be stupid and greedy, that is why we need better regulation of the financial industries, to keep this sh*t from happing.
By the way, in case you had not noticed, some people who have been fiscally conservative have still lost their jobs are struggling with a house payment on a house that is no longer selling for what they bought it for. Some of them were wealthy, some of them were Veterans, it is not all subprime stuff anymore.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/26/real_estate/Case_Shiller_home_price_report/index.htm?postversion=2008082609

"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- National U.S. home prices fell a record 15.4% in the second quarter compared with last year, according to a report released Tuesday.
The latest S&P/Case-Shiller national home price index is down 18.2% from its peak in the second quarter of 2006, and there are no signs that the pace of home-price declines is easing. The second-quarter loss was even larger than the record 14.2% drop posted in the first three months of 2008.
Both the Case-Shiller 10-city index (down 17%) and 20-city index (down 15.9%) also posted record year-over-year losses in the second quarter."



"And with mortgage loans difficult for many home buyers to obtain and foreclosure rates (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/25/real_estate/foreclosure_figures_up_again/index.htm?postversion=2008072908) still rising, inventories of homes for sale (http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/25/news/economy/existing_home_sales/index.htm?postversion=2008082514) continue to expand, depressing home prices. There is now an 11.2 month supply of existing homes on the market.
"The inventory problem has not been solved," said Larson.
Peter Schiff, president and chief global strategist at Euro Pacific Capital, said the market is only about halfway to its bottom. In 2005, he predicted the then-coming bust would cut 30% off national home prices.
Losses will continue because there has been no fundamental change in markets, he said. Despite abundant foreclosure sales, inventories are still growing and lending availability is still shrinking.
And, people are not inclined to buy in a falling market. They wait for it to hit bottom. "If prices fall another 20%, that's the time to buy," said Schiff."
"The worst performing city in the index was Las Vegas, where prices plunged 28.6% year-over-year, followed by Miami, down 28.3%, and Phoenix, down 27.9%."



"...cited San Francisco, where the price of inexpensive homes has fallen more than 40% from the peak, while moderate priced homes were off 30%,"



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cshpi-peak.svg

[Ecomike]

.


But then you change XJEEPER's post to read like this changing Jimmy Carter for Ronald Regean.

"BTW, I like what you said about the 80's economy being in the crapper, which is great reason to learn from them and not to elect another RONALD REAGAN."



So....

Was Regean at fault, or the hero because he cannot be both.

He was both. His R & D plan efforts in the mid 1980's helped, along with democratic policies in the 1990's that expanded the internet. The combination spark the 1990's internet computer economic expansion. Unfortunately he was so busy fighting inflation in the 80's that many of us starved to death (figure of speech), went broke, lost everything, during the 80's waiting for the positive results of one of the good things he did.

[Ecomike]

I expect no less from Mike, he's too predictable. It took Reagan two terms to turn around the mess that Carter's administration created. Anyone who defends the actions of Jimmy Carter should be charged with Treason.........
Actually the inflation problem was inherited by Carter from Ford, who inherited it from Nixon, do you remember the Nixon wage and price freezes by executive order? And of course Nixon inherited inflation and the Vietnam war that started the inflation spiral from LBJ. Another presidential mistake from Texas.

Interesting how history repeats itself. I learned the other day that LBJ sole sourced all the overseas contracts for Vietnam to Brown & Root (Now Haliburton), just like Bush Cheney did with Haliburton for Iraq. Now that waste of my tax dollars, not having competitive bids, is what should be called treason.

[Ecomike]

I expect no less from Mike, he's too predictable.
I'm not the only one that is predictable around here!:laugh3:

[Ecomike]

then on the other side of the coin....clinton took alot of credit for the excellent economy Reagan left behind.

Actually Bush Senior cleaned up the Reagan finacial mess after Reagan left office, and left a decent situation behind for Clinton to build from. Bush Senior was too afraid to help the economy along his last year, when the economy needed a boost and it cost Bush Senior a second term. Clinton started a policy of moving the R&D operations from the national labs that were being mothballed by Bush policy when the Soviet Union collapsed, so Clinton created a path for private enterprise to work with the national labs to move high tech from the national labs out into the street to stimulate the economy that was heading downhill during and after the end of the Gulf War.
Bush was actually the one that raised taxes to try and balance the federal budget again. He came close, but Clinton finished the job Bush Senior started.

In some ways, Bush Senior was one of the best presidents we had. Unfortunatley his son ruined the family name and legacy.

[Boatwrench]

Not disagreeing with you, but can you post some proof of that!

Which part?

[ECKSJAY]

well I'm pretty sure roving squads of liberals aren't going to march through the streets collecting firearms you have already purchased and own legally...on the same note...buy anything you really want now, because they can do something about that...

What firearms? Oh, the ones I bought that were destroyed in that fire? Yeah, that sucked. ;)

:read: :shhh:

[Ecomike]

Which part?

This part:

"Oh and the military thing, do you know we have fewer carrier battle groups than at anytime since before WWII. McCain supported the decommissioning of the last carrier (Kitty or Kennedy?) WITHOUT authorizing building a new carrier. McCain also has cut veteran's benefits."
Thanks.

[red91]

your right mike...so on the other side of the coin, how many servicemen and women did Clinton put out on the streets with all of the base closures?

[ECKSJAY]

your right mike...so on the other side of the coin, how many servicemen and women did Clinton betray when he lied about his affair?

And this too.

;)

[red91]

She has no real credible credentials for being the Commander in Chief, except for being a city council women and mayor of a huge city of something like 6,600 people. And Governor of vast snow and ice covered, sparsly populated state for kless than 2 years. My God, is that best he could find as his runner up left in the Republican party?

Forget for a minute that she claims to be a Republican, and ask yourself if you can really picture her as the Comander in Chief as we face a new Russian (Soviet) threat?


Yes...because she know's how this shit works, and has already had front line experience with it and the men and women who operate it.






Alaska is the first line of defense in our missile interceptor defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks. It’s on permanent active duty, unlike other Guard units.

As governor of Alaska, Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified material may rival even Biden's.

She's also the commander in chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security's counterterrorism plans.

Palin is privy to military and intelligence secrets that are vital to the entire country's defense. Given Alaska's proximity to Russia, she may have security clearances we don't even know about.

According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets.

She can be entrusted with our national security, because she already is.







Yeah she has it going on Mike.

Refute this if you can.

[Tom R.]

To add to red's post...

The presidency is an executive position and it's vastly preferred that candidates have executive experience. Palin has it, Obama does not. This is significant because an execuative makes decisions, leads, manages, governs, takes responsibility etc. A senator does none of these. This is common knowledge within political circles and intelligent people recognize it.

What's absurd is hearing Obama supporters suggest that she doesn't have enough experience. Her overall political experience is only slightly less than Obama's, but it's in areas that really count. She has accomplished REAL CHANGE as an EXECUTIVE, not just empty words from someone who doesn't vote in Congress often. Let each of their records speak for themselves.

[Boatwrench]

Still looking for the carrier battle group item, in the mean time here's some reading.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00111

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00098

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00041

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00376

These were just the easy ones that didn't require much research.

[Ecomike]

Still looking for the carrier battle group item, in the mean time here's some reading.


http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00041



These were just the easy ones that didn't require much research.

The one you posted that I recopied above seems to be the only one with CLEAR party line divisions on the vote, and a clear veterans medical benefits funding only objective (tied to corporate tax loop hole closure to fund the proposed increased veterans benefits) focus on the amendment, but I have not read the entire text of the original bill. On the surface it looks to be a clear indication that Republicans will vote to save major corporate tax loop holes rather than fund Veterans medical care.

To be fair to the Republicans, it does not say that don't support veterans medical care improvements, only that given a choice they would vote for corporate tax loop holes rather than for increased veterans medical help which indicates where their true loyalties lay, Big business and big oil.

The other three seem a bit more vague, and harder to draw any clear conclusions from. One of the other 4 has funding even for the kitchen sink (speaking figuratively) and or no real clear party line vote divisions.

But that one seems to make one of my points that Republicans are bit too pro-Big business and really not serious enough about taking care of the medical needs of veterans with long term disabilities.

[Boatwrench]

McCain also has cut veteran's benefits.

I wasn't talking all Republican's or votes along party lines, just McCain's record. You are right he will opt for big business over vets, because even though he is a vet, he comes from big money, not the average GI family that may need to rely on veteran's benefits.

[XJEEPER]

Actually the inflation problem was inherited by Carter from Ford, who inherited it from Nixon, do you remember the Nixon wage and price freezes by executive order? And of course Nixon inherited inflation and the Vietnam war that started the inflation spiral from LBJ. Another presidential mistake from Texas.

Interesting how history repeats itself. I learned the other day that LBJ sole sourced all the overseas contracts for Vietnam to Brown & Root (Now Haliburton), just like Bush Cheney did with Haliburton for Iraq. Now that waste of my tax dollars, not having competitive bids, is what should be called treason.

Perhaps you can go back a little further in your research and provide so historical data on what adminstration created income taxes, Welfare and Social Security? Then you can dig even deeper and find out why our founding fathers, through inspiration from God, formed this country and drafted our Constitution? Then, when you're done with that historical research, explain why our ancestors came to this continent in the first place. I don't give a rip if you have an D or R next to your party status, what I care about is loss of freedom and God-given rights.

[Ecomike]

To add to red's post...

The presidency is an executive position and it's vastly preferred that candidates have executive experience. Palin has it, Obama does not. This is significant because an execuative makes decisions, leads, manages, governs, takes responsibility etc. A senator does none of these. This is common knowledge within political circles and intelligent people recognize it.

What's absurd is hearing Obama supporters suggest that she doesn't have enough experience. Her overall political experience is only slightly less than Obama's, but it's in areas that really count. She has accomplished REAL CHANGE as an EXECUTIVE, not just empty words from someone who doesn't vote in Congress often. Let each of their records speak for themselves.

While I don't disagree with many of your points above, may I point out that LBJ was a US Senator, and he got more done with Congress during his administration, as he set the current record (with the possible exception of GWB) for promoting and getting his legislative agenda passed by congress, during his presidency. I make this comment in regard to the current political stalemate, and posturing that has been going on Washington recently. Not saying LBJ was saint, he wasn't, but he was a Senator first and not a governor or mayor.

I suspect we are going to have a Democrat controlled congress and legislature for the next 2 to 4 years. If you want congress to get anything done next year, a democrat in the white house would help. If you want very little to get done in Washington the next 2 to 4 years then a Republican president would help. I could argue the advantages of either one.

One philosphy is the less Washington can do, due to political insider bikering, the less damage they can due to us. On the other hand if we want major changes in important US policies that have serious affects on our daily lives, a freindly to Congress White House would be better.

I doubt Palin would be very freindly to a democrat controlled Congress, resulting in gridlock in Washington. From what I have read here, it appears most NAXJA members would prefer gridlock, so for them Palin would be a great strategic choice, but that is not my preference right now. There are major issues that Washington needs to address with out further delay, and the democrats represent my position on most of those issues.

[Ecomike]

Perhaps you can go back a little further in your research and provide so historical data on what adminstration created income taxes, Welfare and Social Security? Then you can dig even deeper and find out why our founding fathers, through inspiration from God, formed this country and drafted our Constitution? Then, when you're done with that historical research, explain why our ancestors came to this continent in the first place.

Already been there done that. Thanks for the suggestion, might be fun to do it again! LOL. IIRC A. Lincoln started income taxes and floated the first US green back paper currency to fund the Civil war.

I don't give a rip if you have an D or R next to your party status, what I care about is loss of freedom and God-given rights.

No argument there!:cheers:

We just disagree on how best to do that.

[Ecomike]

I wasn't talking all Republican's or votes along party lines, just McCain's record. You are right he will opt for big business over vets, because even though he is a vet, he comes from big money, not the average GI family that may need to rely on veteran's benefits.

Now I see your point on those posts. Good Points!

I read an email a while back shortly after McCain made it clear that he was apposed to any kind of additional national health care help for those who fall through the cracks of our current system. Something I know a good deal about, as I went through it with my family when my step daughter had to have brain surgery at 3 years old for a brain tumor in 1981.

But back to McCain. The email noted that McCain has had continuous US government paid for health insurance his entire life. First as the sibling of a Navy officer, then while in the Navy, then while in Congress. He has no problem with using and voting to fund his own government paid for heath care / insurance, but to hell with the little guy and gal sturgling to survive at minimum wage with no health insurance. Walmart comes to mind.

[Boatwrench]

IIRC A. Lincoln started income taxes and floated the first US green back paper currency to fund the Civil war. .

President Lincoln may have started a form of income taxes but the 26th Amendment to The Constitution ratified February 3, 1913 solified it.

"The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration."

[Ecomike]

President Lincoln may have started a form of income taxes but the 26th Amendment to The Constitution ratified February 3, 1913 solified it.

"The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration."

"The Civil War income tax was the first tax paid on individual incomes by residents ... Lincoln also appointed a collector and an assessor for each district." ...
www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1986/winter/civil-war-tax-records.html

The Great Tax Wars - From Lincoln to T.R. to Wilson - How the ... (http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/winter03/review04.shtml.htm)

The Great Tax Wars: From Lincoln to T.R. to Wilson: How the Income Tax Transformed ... Prior to the Civil War, the U.S. government did not tax incomes; ...
www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/winter03/review04.shtml.htm -
AS AMERICAN AS … INCOME TAX (http://civilwarstudies.org/articles/Vol_4/incometax.htm)

In addition to an income tax to support the Civil War, ... It was another war, World War I, which prompted the overhaul of Mr. Lincoln’s tax system. ...
civilwarstudies.org/articles/Vol_4/incometax.htm
This Day in History 1861: Lincoln imposes first federal income tax (http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=50716)

On this day in 1861, Lincoln imposes the first federal income tax by signing the Revenue Act. Strapped for cash with which to pursue the Civil War, ...
www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=50716
But this such a taxing subject, LOL, lets move on to something thats fun!:laugh3:

[XJEEPER]

Something I know a good deal about, as I went through it with my family when my step daughter had to have brain surgery at 3 years old for a brain tumor in 1981.

So, where does it say in the Constitution that it's the government's responsibilty to provide for the health and welfare for your family? Are you a gerbil, or a man? When the government provides everything for you, your freedoms are gone.. It's happening a little at a time. I'll bet you had choices and options when the tumor was discovered.........say goodbye to those if the government runs healthcare. BTW, how did things turn out for your stepdaugther?

[XJEEPER]

"The Civil War income tax was the first tax paid on individual incomes by residents ... Lincoln also appointed a collector and an assessor for each district." ...
www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1986/winter/ (http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1986/winter/)civil-war-tax-records.html

The Great Tax Wars - From Lincoln to T.R. to Wilson - How the ... (http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/winter03/review04.shtml.htm)

The Great Tax Wars: From Lincoln to T.R. to Wilson: How the Income Tax Transformed ... Prior to the Civil War, the U.S. government did not tax incomes; ...
www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/winter03/review04.shtml.htm (http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/winter03/review04.shtml.htm) -
AS AMERICAN AS … INCOME TAX (http://civilwarstudies.org/articles/Vol_4/incometax.htm)

In addition to an income tax to support the Civil War, ... It was another war, World War I, which prompted the overhaul of Mr. Lincoln’s tax system. ...
civilwarstudies.org/articles/Vol_4/incometax.htm
This Day in History 1861: Lincoln imposes first federal income tax (http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=50716)

On this day in 1861, Lincoln imposes the first federal income tax by signing the Revenue Act. Strapped for cash with which to pursue the Civil War, ...
www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=50716 (http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=50716)But this such a taxing subject, LOL, lets move on to something thats fun!:laugh3:

Taxes funded the Civil War, which ended slavery, which was awesome.........so all taxes must be good?

Try "Taxation without representation"..........use your vast computer skills to dig deeper.

[karstic]

There are major issues that Washington needs to address with out further delay, and the democrats represent my position on most of those issues.

Care to voice what are those major issues?

[Boatwrench]

Care to voice what are those major issues?

National Health Care. It is with our country's ability to make it work. It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce.

[Boatwrench]

National Health Care. It is with our country's ability to make it work. It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce.

Wow double post!

[karstic]

National Health Care. It is with our country's ability to make it work. It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce.

Do you really think so? I have little faith in our governmet to make such a potentially large bureaucratic agency work, let alone work well.

You want to promote health in this country? Get rid of the farm subsidies that make corn and corn based junk foods so damn cheap. So many of this country's health problems can be attributed to poor diet and lack of physical activity. But then again where does personal responsibility come into play...

It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce.

I agree with this part.

[XJEEPER]

National Health Care. It is with our country's ability to make it work. It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce.

You may have a more convincing arguement, if you can provide the name of 1 government-run program that functions efficiently and is better than a like program, run by a private entity.

[JohnJohn]

You may have a more convincing arguement, if you can provide the name of 1 government-run program that functions efficiently and is better than a like program, run by a private entity.


Post Office. I agree with you, but you asked.

[Boatwrench]

You may have a more convincing arguement, if you can provide the name of 1 government-run program that functions efficiently and is better than a like program, run by a private entity.

US Coast Guard.

How about two: US Public Health Service

How about three: NASA

Yes most government run programs have the potential to become bloated bureaucratic nightmares. I don't even care if it is privatized ala the military's Tri-Care medical for dependents, but let's take care of our fellow countrymen.

[JohnJohn]

US Coast Guard.
US Public Health Service
NASA


Please the name publicly run entity that corresponds to each?

[Boatwrench]

Please the name publicly run entity that corresponds to each?

Ok maybe I didn't undersatnd the question. I listed efficiently run government agencies that do not necessarily have a private run competitor like the post office who has UPS/FedEx/DHL.

Is CDC private or Government?

[JohnJohn]

You may have a more convincing argument, if you can provide the name of 1 government-run program that functions efficiently and is better than a like program, run by a private entity.

Seems clear...?

If examples are to be posted by your rules...then Congress would qualify. :wave1:

If all government agencies were run like the Post Office I would be more likely to be a liberal. However I doubt nurses in a government run health care system will be "going postal" on their doctors for coming down hard on them for inefficient work. :D

[Tom R.]

National Health Care. It is with our country's ability to make it work. It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce.
I agree we have problems with health care, namely the affordibility of it.

Historically, our government is incapable of efficiently and effectively running programs. Is it impossible? No, but it's still a major hurdle to overcome.

The second issue. How do we overcome the problems of socialized medicine? It's no joke when people must wait weeks, even months, for necessary surgery. I'm also not crazy with the idea of some bureaucrat denying the authorization for a procedure because it costs too much, despite the expert opinion of a doctor. Yes, I know that some of this happens now, but it will only get much worse if we institute socialized medicine like any of the current systems in use today.

[DrMoab]

I'm sorry, I do not want my health care run like NASA.

I've read some horror stories from that agency. Not to mention the fact they are still using the same computer system for the shuttles that they used in the late 70's. Sure they may work for the shuttle but I don't want to go into the mid 21st century using 20th century medical technology.

[Boatwrench]

John-John,
NASA has a private competitor. Google has offered a cash reward for a private company to put someone on the moon, some have taken on the challenge and are trying...and unless you are a conspiracy theorist, only NASA has been successful.

USCG, I'll stand by this one. There are several salvage companies that will tow in your broken boat (for a fee) but only respond if the weather is good. 1st hand knowledge of this, is the CG more effiecient?

My major point about health care is that it seems to me that the majority (not all) people against National Health Care have some form of employer provided health care and quickly fall back on two items:
1. I don't want the government to provide my health care.
2. The Constitution doesn't quarantee health care for everyone.

Even with national health care there will be alternatives. Example, there is a public education system and some of us chose to send our kids to private or parochial schools. There will be a government health system and there will be those who can opt for a private or employer provided insurance health care.

[JohnJohn]

John-John,
NASA has a private competitor. Google has offered a cash reward for a private company to put someone on the moon, some have taken on the challenge and are trying...and unless you are a conspiracy theorist, only NASA has been successful.

USCG, I'll stand by this one. There are several salvage companies that will tow in your broken boat (for a fee) but only respond if the weather is good. 1st hand knowledge of this, is the CG more effiecient?

Google is not providing the same service NASA does. Comparing the two is quite asinine. Calling the USCG solely a salvage company also is quite funny. Let's forget those two points and discuss your topic of National Heathcare. The point that is trying to be made to you is that government is inefficient in it's design. I sited one place were it is efficient, the Post Office. However I believe that to be the only place it's efficient.

My major point about health care is that it seems to me that the majority (not all) people against National Health Care have some form of employer provided health care and quickly fall back on two items:
1. I don't want the government to provide my health care.
2. The Constitution doesn't quarantee health care for everyone.

Even with national health care there will be alternatives. Example, there is a public education system and some of us chose to send our kids to private or parochial schools. There will be a government health system and there will be those who can opt for a private or employer provided insurance health care.

Others believe having a National Healthcare system would slow care and most would not get the level of service they receive now. I also believe this to be true, however the argument is debatable and no resolution will come from soft, or debatable "facts". I prefer to point out the dollars and cents.

What will suffer long term from a National Heathcare program is research. Right now the market controls research. US pharmaceutical companies are frantically searching for "miracle drugs". Solutions for today's super diseases. Not because they want to cure Cancer, Heart Disease or HIV. It's because they want to make huge money. For example, what company makes Viagra? Pfizer...you know this because when the drug first came out investors in Pfizer made huge money on them in the stock market. Pfizer had found a solution to a "problem" and was/is getting rewarded. They could sell Viagra for pretty much what the market would bare.

Now if drug manufactures had to sell drugs at a cut rate to a National Heathcare system don't you think they will make less money? The answer is yes. That's what is happening in Canada. Drugs are cheaper there because of Canada's National Heathcare system. The trickle down effect is that the US market is funding the research for the world.

Capitalism breeds ideas and innovation. No matter what industry. Heathcare, drug research, the automobile, the cotton gin, the telephone. Free markets are why we live in the greatest country on the face of this planet. The United States has done more for human beings than any other society before us. This fact is not because we all conformed, it's not because we redispursed wealth or offered social programs to those who don't earn it. It's because we have the opportunity. The opportunity to be rewarded for hard work, for creating new ideas.

Heathcare is a reward, not a right.

[Ironmen77]

There will be a government health system and there will be those who can opt for a private or employer provided insurance health care.

How many employers do you think will be dumb enough to go through the expense and hassle to provide health care? When they can save money by letting the government take care of it.

[Ironmen77]

Google is not providing the same service NASA does. Comparing the two is quite asinine. Calling the USCG solely a salvage company also is quite funny. Let's forget those two points and discuss your topic of National Heathcare. The point that is trying to be made to you is that government is inefficient in it's design. I sited one place were it is efficient, the Post Office. However I believe that to be the only place it's efficient.



Others believe having a National Healthcare system would slow care and most would not get the level of service they receive now. I also believe this to be true, however the argument is debatable and no resolution will come from soft, or debatable "facts". I prefer to point out the dollars and cents.

What will suffer long term from a National Heathcare program is research. Right now the market controls research. US pharmaceutical companies are frantically searching for "miracle drugs". Solutions for today's super diseases. Not because they want to cure Cancer, Heart Disease or HIV. It's because they want to make huge money. For example, what company makes Viagra? Pfizer...you know this because when the drug first came out investors in Pfizer made huge money on them in the stock market. Pfizer had found a solution to a "problem" and was/is getting rewarded. They could sell Viagra for pretty much what the market would bare.

Now if drug manufactures had to sell drugs at a cut rate to a National Heathcare system don't you think they will make less money? The answer is yes. That's what is happening in Canada. Drugs are cheaper there because of Canada's National Heathcare system. The trickle down effect is that the US market is funding the research for the world.

Capitalism breeds ideas and innovation. No matter what industry. Heathcare, drug research, the automobile, the cotton gin, the telephone. Free markets are why we live in the greatest country on the face of this planet. The United States has done more for human beings than any other society before us. This fact is not because we all conformed, it's not because we redispursed wealth or offered social programs to those who don't earn it. It's because we have the opportunity. The opportunity to be rewarded for hard work, for creating new ideas.

Heathcare is a reward, not a right.


:patriot: Freedom! :patriot:

[SeansBlueXJ]

Free market, so from what I understand earlier in this thread, the same reason the "Liberal McCain" wanted an open border with Mexico. To "free market" our jobs south. Nice.

[JohnJohn]

Free market, so from what I understand earlier in this thread, the same reason the "Liberal McCain" wanted an open border with Mexico. To "free market" our jobs south. Nice.

Heck I thought he was for securing the border and amnesty for those who were already here.

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/68db8157-d301-4e22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm

[SeansBlueXJ]

Heck I thought he was for securing the border and amnesty for those who were already here.

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/68db8157-d301-4e22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm

Then I guess that proves even further that there are as many conflicting points on each candidate as there are people here that adhere to each viewpoint. And we wonder why people are fed up with the govt and feel useless and don't bother voting. :dunno:

[Deadman 94 xj]

Then I guess that proves even further that there are as many conflicting points on each candidate as there are people here that adhere to each viewpoint. And we wonder why people are fed up with the govt and feel useless and don't bother voting. :dunno:

Just pay attention to the facts. You'll do fine :eyes:
:laugh:

[Boatwrench]

Calling the USCG solely a salvage company
I didn't, but a large piece of the CG is still dedicated to SAR and perorms it quite well. Also Aids to Navigation, there are private aids that are not maintained as effeiecently as those by the CG.

Drugs are cheaper there because of Canada's National Heathcare system
and because the FDA here has many safeguards in place that requires more time consuming test and evaluations than other countries. The drug companies luanch products in many other countries waiting for FDA approval here.

Capitalism breeds ideas and innovation
Yes. So why can't some innovated person make it work? I believe, and I stated...It is with our country's ability to make it work

The United States has done more for human beings than any other society before us. This fact is not because we all conformed, it's not because we redispursed wealth or offered social programs to those who don't earn it. It's because we have the opportunity. The opportunity to be rewarded for hard work, for creating new ideas.

Heathcare is a reward, not a right.


So as a business owner (correct?) you disagree with the following statement:It is within our country's best interest economically to have available a healthy workforce

and support free trade, NAFTA, giving up USA soveriegnty witht he free trade corridor?

[JohnJohn]

CG: Treasure hunters do SAR also. Lets just say the CG does a lot of things. IMHO each one of those things is done better by someone in the private sector.

DRUGS: Agreed, they are released other places faster. However you did not rebut the issue of the pricing of those drugs and how it relates to the research. France gets some HIV treatments we don't. They have a more laxed FDA(?). Probably because it's less efficient than ours...in a way proving my point that socialized medicine is not better. However we have not defined better either.

INNOVATIVE PEOPLE: No where in history has an innovative person been paid more money to do a government job than a private one. They can make more money doing in the private sector. That's why Martin Marrieta(sp) is full of EX-NASA and Military people. It's why good teachers move to the private sector. When governments run industry they fail or they toss $ after $ at the program until it fails. Why would this suddenly change with socialized medicine?

HEALTHY WORKFORCE: Your statement assumes that government would do a better job of keeping them healthy...and I don't think that's true. I don't want to have to rely on the government to keep my employees healthy and coming to work. It's not job of government to keep me or my employees healthy.

Everyone does not know what's best for everyone. I know what's best for me no else does. Loose the ego and realize you don't know what's best for the homeless, the jobless, the countryless, and the lazy

[Ecomike]

John-John,
NASA has a private competitor. Google has offered a cash reward for a private company to put someone on the moon, some have taken on the challenge and are trying...and unless you are a conspiracy theorist, only NASA has been successful.

USCG, I'll stand by this one. There are several salvage companies that will tow in your broken boat (for a fee) but only respond if the weather is good. 1st hand knowledge of this, is the CG more effiecient?

My major point about health care is that it seems to me that the majority (not all) people against National Health Care have some form of employer provided health care and quickly fall back on two items:
1. I don't want the government to provide my health care.
2. The Constitution doesn't quarantee health care for everyone.

Even with national health care there will be alternatives. Example, there is a public education system and some of us chose to send our kids to private or parochial schools. There will be a government health system and there will be those who can opt for a private or employer provided insurance health care.

Boatwrench,

Doesn't the Obama health care plan simply provide funding mechanisms, through income tax credits and ICT deducutions to assist everyone, but especially, minimum wage earners who work at places like Walmart, who have no health care coverage, to help them buy their own private insurance, and then set up a large group through a combination private-government insurance fund to cover those who are uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions?

I have seen nothing in the current Obama plans that creates a national health care system, in fact all it does it help get everyone covered with some kind private heath insurance as far as I can see so far, leaving the health care provider industry still private.

[Ecomike]

Do you really think so? I have little faith in our governmet to make such a potentially large bureaucratic agency work, let alone work well.

You want to promote health in this country? Get rid of the farm subsidies that make corn and corn based junk foods so damn cheap. So many of this country's health problems can be attributed to poor diet and lack of physical activity. But then again where does personal responsibility come into play...



I agree with this part.

I second the motion, let's outlaw fast food hot dog & burger places!

:yelclap:

[ECKSJAY]

I second the motion, let's outlaw fast food hot dog & burger places!

:yelclap:

Yeah, leave the pizza, chicken, and taco places alone!

:yelclap:

[JohnJohn]

Boatwrench,

Doesn't the Obama health care plan simply provide funding mechanisms, through income tax credits and ICT deducutions to assist everyone, but especially, minimum wage earners who work at places like Walmart, who have no health care coverage, to help them buy their own private insurance, and then set up a large group through a combination private-government insurance fund to cover those who are uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions?

I have seen nothing in the current Obama plans that creates a national health care system, in fact all it does it help get everyone covered with some kind private heath insurance as far as I can see so far, leaving the health care provider industry still private.

Minimum wage jobs are meant for those people still covered under parental private healthcare coverage. They should be stepping stones to careers. Aspiring to something more than a Walmart Clerk should be motivation enough to work hard and get a job with benefits. What will happen if that idea dies. We start GIVING them healthcare, daycare, paid time off, etc. 30-40% Federal tax rates to pay for all the social programs needed to help a $7 hour a week worker survive.

All this crap sounds great and makes you all "feel" good inside. You must have extra money laying around.

Mike, seriously do you have a ton of extra cash around to pay for healthcare for Lolita, your local Walmart Clerk's healthcare? How much you would pay each month to have her family covered? $10, $50, $100? What's your budget?

[Ecomike]

Yeah, leave the pizza, chicken, and taco places alone!

:yelclap:

And the RED MEAT!
:laugh3:

[8Mud]

Minimum wage jobs are meant for those people still covered under parental private healthcare coverage. They should be stepping stones to careers. Aspiring to something more than a Walmart Clerk should be motivation enough to work hard and get a job with benefits. What will happen if that idea dies. We start GIVING them healthcare, daycare, paid time off, etc. 30-40% Federal tax rates to pay for all the social programs needed to help a $7 hour a week worker survive.

All this crap sounds great and makes you all "feel" good inside. You must have extra money laying around.

Mike, seriously do you have a ton of extra cash around to pay for healthcare for Lolita, your local Walmart Clerk's healthcare? How much you would pay each month to have her family covered? $10, $50, $100? What's your budget?

People without healthcare are more apt to forestall seeing a doctor, a treatable illness turns into a catastrophic illness. Who pays then, you and I.

The German plan works after a fashion, a combination of socialism and capitalism, something like 99% of the population is covered. The basic plan is paid for by the employer and the employee 50/50, a straight percentage of your gross. Most every insurance company offers the basic plan. The insurance company does oversight, much like it does with regular US health insurance. The competition between companies keeps the prices in check. For the non employed, the state pays for coverage or they are covered under a spouses or parents plan. Unemployment or disaility works just like wages, a percentage goes to health care insurance.
There is an alternate plan, called private insurance. A person can opt for various plans at there own expense.
I'm a conservative by nature and generally vote Republican, but on this topic I believe health care is a human right and ought not to be trusted to typical capitalistic method.
The German plan works, though sometimes not well, though IMO it's better than leaving a quarter of the population uncovered for many reasons.
Uninsured people in the US require a whole parallel administrative system, redundancy at it's worst. A whole bureaucracy designed to service those who can't or won't afford medical coverage. The existing systems leave a large percentage of the population uncovered or at best sporadically covered. Way to many people fall through the cracks.
The only ones who actually get screwed in the German plan, are the Doctors. They generally don't make what their counterparts in the US make and what they do make seems to be more evenly distributed. The medical care is as good as anybodies.
The drug companies are checked by the insurance companies, which helps to keep the price of drugs under control. The German pharmaceutical industry is world class.
My point is, there are options other than what we have now and straight socialized medicine. A combination of both may be a solution.
Some sort of universal health care is going to be enacted, whether piece meal or a whole new system, Republican or Democrat, the main question is when?

[Ecomike]

Minimum wage jobs are meant for those people still covered under parental private healthcare coverage. They should be stepping stones to careers. Aspiring to something more than a Walmart Clerk should be motivation enough to work hard and get a job with benefits. What will happen if that idea dies. We start GIVING them healthcare, daycare, paid time off, etc. 30-40% Federal tax rates to pay for all the social programs needed to help a $7 hour a week worker survive.

All this crap sounds great and makes you all "feel" good inside. You must have extra money laying around.

Mike, seriously do you have a ton of extra cash around to pay for healthcare for Lolita, your local Walmart Clerk's healthcare? How much you would pay each month to have her family covered? $10, $50, $100? What's your budget?

Nice in theory but many of the floor staff at Walmart are poor, elderly, unable to afford to retire, people. Not everyone is mentally qualified to climb the ladder of success. Note everyone is proficient at handling money.

My real problem is with the health insurance companies and the employers.

At the rate we are going all businesses in the USA will eliminate health insurance coverage as too costly to allow them to compete in a global economy. Facts of life in a global capitalist work place where it is an employers marketplace, not a workers marketplace. We already have 40 million uninsured people in the USA (Probably all US citizens, not counting illigal immigrants).

I think this country and it's people are better than that. As soon as someone gets too sick to work they get laid off with no insurance and no income. If they have any savings or assets, they are usually gone in days of early medical treatment leaving them no plav\ce to live and no income to live on. I have seen it too many times. It is a disgrace!

Why can't we have a national health insurance program that supplements the private programs that catches someone that suddenly comes down with a debilitating terminal disease, who is unable to work, and who looses or has no insurance, or who was in between jobs after a lay off in Detroit, or the housing industry.

Altheimers (sp?) is a big growing issue in this country. All I keep hearing from the right is let them fend for themselves, buyer beware, be self sufficient. Hell they can't even remember who they are, much less keep track of a bank account or keep a job. IF they have family with time and money to care for them great, but not all them have family with the reasources to care for them.

There is also the issue of people being unable to afford minor health care, that leads to them getting sicker and ending up in emergency wards where we end spending 10 to 100 times more in medical care to solve a problem that could handled earlier for much less.

I had a friend here who was a volunter emergency EMS director for the small town nearby that was A Lions club memeber, ex-merchant marine, ex-self employed international cargo registry consultant (smart guy), who had heart problems, two strokes, went on early SS retirement. But no kids, no wife, no family. Nearly lost his house ( he still had a year or 2 of house payments to go when the heart attack disabled him), the floors were eaten out by termites years before he died, it was nearly condemed, he had to beg and borrow (permanently) from those that could and would help him out just to buy medecine and food and just to get a ride somewhere to the doctor, pharmacy or grocery store. From what I have seen of todays electricity rate scandals here (Republican mess here that has raised our electric rates 300% in three months, and we have nuclear power here that paid dearly for 35 years ago, another Halibuton Brown Root scandle) he would have used half of his SS income just to pay for electricty this summer. 98 F for an elederly person with heat problems and diabetic to boot is a MF.

My point is this guy was a typical hard core Republican in his day (Other than the lack of a family), but he got the Democratic faith real fast when his world fell apart. Kinda like those atheists that get religion all of a sudden when they end up on the front line of a real war.

I see no problem asking the ultra rich that earn billions of dollars a year that they don't reinvest in new jobs, or productivity, to pay a little more in taxes before they 50 million on their 7th house (Or was it 9 houses that McCain owns?) to help keep their wage slave work force healthy. A healthy work force benefits them anyway, and the money they spend goes right back in their pockets anyway, because they own it all already!

OK, time to get off my soap box and go help a fellow Jeeper test a Renix system that is missing a computer.

[Ecomike]

People without healthcare are more apt to forestall seeing a doctor, a treatable illness turns into a catastrophic illness. Who pays then, you and I.

The German plan works after a fashion, a combination of socialism and capitalism, something like 99% of the population is covered. The basic plan is paid for by the employer and the employee 50/50, a straight percentage of your gross. Most every insurance company offers the basic plan. The insurance company does oversight, much like it does with regular US health insurance. The competition between companies keeps the prices in check. For the non employed, the state pays for coverage or they are covered under a spouses or parents plan. Unemployment or disaility works just like wages, a percentage goes to health care insurance.
There is an alternate plan, called private insurance. A person can opt for various plans at there own expense.
I'm a conservative by nature and generally vote Republican, but on this topic I believe health care is a human right and ought not to be trusted to typical capitalistic method.
The German plan works, though sometimes not well, though IMO it's better than leaving a quarter of the population uncovered for many reasons.
Uninsured people in the US require a whole parallel administrative system, redundancy at it's worst. A whole bureaucracy designed to service those who can't or won't afford medical coverage. The existing systems leave a large percentage of the population uncovered or at best sporadically covered. Way to many people fall through the cracks.
The only ones who actually get screwed in the German plan, are the Doctors. They generally don't make what their counterparts in the US make and what they do make seems to be more evenly distributed. The medical care is as good as anybodies.
The drug companies are checked by the insurance companies, which helps to keep the price of drugs under control. The German pharmaceutical industry is world class.
My point is, there are options other than what we have now and straight socialized medicine. A combination of both may be a solution.
Some sort of universal health care is going to be enacted, whether piece meal or a whole new system, Republican or Democrat, the main question is when?
Yes, and And What!

I doubt any system is perfect.

Great post, thanks, you saved me the time of researching it more, and you said it better than I could have, and you know how it works over there, I don't.

I agree with what you said, but my brother just retired here, MD, and I can tell you that the Doctors no longer make the kind of take home pay they did here 30 years ago. It all goes to insurance premiums now. Our problems started with gready doctors, moved on to gready lawyers sueing gready doctors, then the insurance companies found out they could make money getting in the middle. After all much of Wallstreet and the medical industry is owned by the insurance industry here.

I am convinced that the insurance companies deliberately let costs get of control so they had an excuse to raise premiums, they just raised premiums faster than they let the doctors and Hospitals jack up the prices, so they profitted in the end.

[Boatwrench]

INNOVATIVE PEOPLE: No where in history has an innovative person been paid more money to do a government job than a private one.

Disagree. My daughter would make more teaching at a public school than she does at the Catholic school she current teaches at

HEALTHY WORKFORCE: Your statement assumes that government would do a better job of keeping them healthy...and I don't think that's true.
Incorrect. My statement states it is within the Nation's best interest to have a healthy workforce. It DOES NOT state that the government would do a better job
I don't want to have to rely on the government to keep my employees healthy and coming to work.
Good. You can continue to provide health care benefits to your employees
It's not job of government to keep me or my employees healthy.
Correct, but as an employer, wouldn't you want a pool of healthy employees to draw from, therby keeping your expenses lower?

Everyone does not know what's best for everyone. Agreed
I know what's best for me no else does. Loose the ego and realize you don't know what's best for the homeless, the jobless, the countryless, and the lazy
It is not about ego.

My reponse of national Health Care (post #51) was to KARSTIC's post #50 asking what major issue was facing Washington without delay. It is my OPINION, and has nothing to do with my ego. You have your opinion and are stating it and I am stating mine. Having been jobless (between jobs) in the past, getting medical for my family was the #1 issue for me.