Some questions for Republicans

[Stella_Omega]

on many level no countries are second rate, and as a culture and society America does have a lot to learn (I would put France above the us when it comes to the arts and other parts of culture). Now on a business level then I would rate France as a 2nd rate country....purely on an economics standing I would rate Greece as a third world nation (as the government is teetering on chapter 13).

I guess I should ask you how you assess the rates you put to different countries.
Economics, evidently.

What other things might be important to a country? What might make it a good place to live, raise children?

With that said, when it comes to taxes I would rate just about every other country as a 2nd rate nation. Tax rates are too high and for what? The taxes support a very inefficient and multi layers of bureaucracy. I think layovers of bureaucracy need to be pulled back and put an end to a movement of increased taxes. Governments tax too much and never try to fix their own operations.

Well, for one thing, most of those nations have higher levels of scholastic achievement, and...

more healthcare, available to more people.

Off the top of my head.

Just today the IRS announced that they are hiring 15,000 new workers. That’s nuts! Why not make the irs rules simpler and automated? Oh (a government rub) the irs computer system is still not running after ten years of development.

And why are you calling the US first rate?

 

[jeninflorida]

It is at that point now. That is why we are having this fight.

I’ve done a couple of consulting contracts for government agencies…and I’ve always been shocked by how many workers it takes to get things done. I also have some friends that work in different government institutions and even they know that their operations are very wasteful in money, supplies, personal, and other things).

This healthcare thing, has in some ways been a calling of take from the rich and give to the poor (see it from the right wring side).

My point is this. Why not look at ways to fix the system? Address some of the major issues?

Also, what is the finical health of Medicare? Social Security? And any other government run program? Now, we want the government to take control of healthcare (this is not talked about in the first plan as the plan calls for an open exchange)?

With this plan, they call for what, 50 billion in fraud savings from Medicare? Why didn’t they implement a plan to zap the fraud out this year? what about last year? why is this any different, will the government actually be able to reduce fraud?

 

[jeninflorida]

This is a bad point on my part, first rate when it in opportunities where someone can go from zero to a millionaire, or where someone can make his or her life better. Yes, its hard and take a lot of hard work (and at times seems impossible). Totally materialistic on my part.

You have no argument with what you pointed out. Is there anything more important than children? No. Education, very important…

The system is broken and instead of pouring more money into it, others need to stand up and demand that the government be fixed (and I know that this means that a lot of government employees would lose their jobs)….but as we walk down this path, how can it be a good thing that we pay 50%, 60%, or 80% of our income into taxes?

I guess I should ask you how you assess the rates you put to different countries.
Economics, evidently.

What other things might be important to a country? What might make it a good place to live, raise children?

Well, for one thing, most of those nations have higher levels of scholastic achievement, and...

more healthcare, available to more people.

Off the top of my head.
And why are you calling the US first rate?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

This seems like an awfully strong statement. Do you really believe that because a man believes that there is a role for the government to play in the health and welfare of its citizens that the man, by definition, does not believe in any of the individual rights listed in the Constitution?

I'm having a hard time imagining how this could possibly work. Surely it's not at all crazy for a man to believe that Social Security is a good thing but also believe that we have a right to free speech. Surely it's not at all crazy for a man to believe that the government's military ought to be enlarged and still believe that we have an individual right to bear arms.

Help me understand your thinking here, please.

Do you really want my opinion on these items? And what article of amendment says the government can play a role in the health and welfare of its citizens?

Social Security is broke. I'm 60 and I will most likely never see a dime of the money I have contributed for the last 40 years. It's gone. There is no trust holding it, just a drawer of IOU's form a bankrupt bloated government. When government workers salaries rise by more than 9% over private sector salaries, where do you think the money to pay them, let alone all the entitlement programs is going to come from? Government workers pay rose by 28.6% while private sector pay rose by 19.3%. Government workers also get paid $1.45 more than the private sector for the exact same job. The U.S. Government is also the biggest employer in the U.S.

I never said I believe in anarchy. I believe in the rule of law...the Constitution is the law that gives the government it's powers to perform its tasks. Defense of the country with a military is one of those tasks. Putting a gun to my head, in effect, forcing me to buy health insurance is not one of its tasks.

 

[jeninflorida]

Do you really want my opinion on these items? And what article of amendment says the government can play a role in the health and welfare of its citizens?

Social Security is broke. I'm 60 and I will most likely never see a dime of the money I have contributed for the last 40 years. It's gone. There is no trust holding it, just a drawer of IOU's form a bankrupt bloated government. When government workers salaries rise by more than 9% over private sector salaries, where do you think the money to pay them, let alone all the entitlement programs is going to come from? Government workers pay rose by 28.6% while private sector pay rose by 19.3%. Government workers also get paid $1.45 more than the private sector for the exact same job. The U.S. Government is also the biggest employer in the U.S.

I never said I believe in anarchy. I believe in the rule of law...the Constitution is the law that gives the government it's powers to perform its tasks. Defense of the country with a military is one of those tasks. Putting a gun to my head, in effect, forcing me to buy health insurance is not one of its tasks.

In the 60’s people want to be stock brokers. In the 70’s it was a doctor. The 80’s were about technology. The 90’s were about being a programmer. Today, government has the best job.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Because the healthcare we have now is 3rd rate.

Is the healthcare third rate or is the cost out of control? I still content that the healthcare here is better than anywhere else in the world. It's the access and the cost of that healthcare that is the causative factor. The doctor's and hospitals I have known and been to were excellent. They knew what they were doing and did it professionally and quickly. I never had to wait to see a doctor or a specialist nor did I have to wait for a procedure to be performed for more than a few days.

Costs are driven in part by law suits people bring against doctors, hospital and manufacturers of health care equipment and devices. Tort reform would lower the cost of healthcare drastically. Thus lowering costs of health insurance.

 

[stephen55]

Yet another two bits worth...

no, healthcare needs to be fixed. no question. but with what a few of the trolls pm'd me, its like they demand and expect free health care and that someone else must pay for it.

I suppose there are some who demand and expect free health care. Over the years I had a few patients who refused to pay premiums to the govt. health plan and also refused to pay privately. "I don't believe anyone should have to pay for medical care." Working in Emergency I had a regular stream of uninsured types, usually young males, drunk and busted up from their latest bar fight. For a while it raised my blood pressure. Then an older colleague suggested it wasn't worth the mental distress to get peeved and that I should just deal with the problem and carry on. She was right, not that it completely assuaged my feelings of being abused.

Health care is expensive. It's expensive everywhere. In Canada about one third of a provinces budget goes to health care. It's the biggest ticket on the page.

All countries must ration health care in some way. All countries do. Some do their rationing by simply not providing health care at all. Think of failed states like Somalia and Zimbabwe. What little care is available has nothing to do with government.

The US has one of the best levels of health care on the planet. Us hospitals and their staff are well trained and properly equipped. The US rations health care by making it so expensive that a large portion of the population doesn't have access to proper care, let alone health insurance. A major illness or accident can leave a US citizen destitute.

Canada rations health care by controlling budgets. With the provincial government having the keys to the money vault, they can force efficiency and utility on regional health boards. Access to the system is open but not necessarily instant (except for emergencies). Procedures like hip and knee joint replacement will take longer, from initial visit to the family doc, referral to the orthopedist and finally an operating room time, than it would in a private US system like the Mayo Clinic. Canadian hospitals and staff are top notch. They are also crowded and busy. Provinces are making concerted efforts to reduce wait times but it can only come at the stretching of some other health service budget or accepting higher overall cost.

So...given that no one wants a Somalian approach to health care, Americans are in the process of trying to make their system perform better. That is, better access, better outcomes and better value for dollars spent. The fact that Canada's medical system is not duplicated completely by anyone, though some countries come close, doesn't mean our system is a bad one. It simply means that other countries aren't (yet) willing to spend as much of their taxpayer dollars on health care as we are.

Canada's health care spending as a percentage of the countries GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is actually lower than in the US. It's simply because we spend it more efficiently. We accept higher levels of taxes and simply demand better value from it.

 

[JackLuis]

-

Costs are driven in part by law suits people bring against doctors, hospital and manufacturers of health care equipment and devices. Tort reform would lower the cost of healthcare drastically. Thus lowering costs of health insurance.

Tort Reform, interesting phrase. Mostly I've seen this seems to object to "outrageous" liability settlements. The legal costs added to the cost of the liability must be staggering for insurers and we wouldn't want to raise the cost of collecting insurance premiums. After all those legal costs come right off the bottom line and we all know how thin the profit margin is in insurance.

On the other hand a man has a right to his day in court to address his alleged grievance?

How about a law that Layers can't charge more than $100 an hour for defense work? And no more than $200 and hour plus 10% of the take for Plaintive work? That would reduce the cost of the courts and thin out the ranks of the legal profession.

 

[DeeZire]

...How about a law that Layers can't charge more than $100 an hour for defense work? And no more than $200 and hour plus 10% of the take for Plaintive work? That would reduce the cost of the courts and thin out the ranks of the legal profession.

That's a great idea - except that it would be a new government regulation impinging on our individual freedoms, which is what the Conservatives are constantly complaining about. I'm afraid, in order to placate the Conservatives, you'd have to come up with a Free Market solution to the Free Market approach of protecting the individual freedoms of those harmed by the doctors operating in the Free Market. What would that approach be? Rewarding lawyers for taking lower fees? But then who would pay the reward?

I really am curious how Conservatives would enact tort reform without relying on the government intervention they're so quick to condemn.

 

[jeninflorida]

also, what if the losing party pays all the fees

Tort Reform, interesting phrase. Mostly I've seen this seems to object to "outrageous" liability settlements. The legal costs added to the cost of the liability must be staggering for insurers and we wouldn't want to raise the cost of collecting insurance premiums. After all those legal costs come right off the bottom line and we all know how thin the profit margin is in insurance.

On the other hand a man has a right to his day in court to address his alleged grievance?

How about a law that Layers can't charge more than $100 an hour for defense work? And no more than $200 and hour plus 10% of the take for Plaintive work? That would reduce the cost of the courts and thin out the ranks of the legal profession.

 

[jeninflorida]

also, what if the losing party pays all the fees

How about this, Government is like a 500lb fifth grader, and by increasing taxes all we are doing is giving that kid more fast-food and candy. Why not put the child on a diet?

 

[sr71plt]

How about this, Government is like a 500lb fifth grader, and by increasing taxes all we are doing is giving that kid more fast-food and candy. Why not put the child on a diet?

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous comparison (and I have no idea why folks are still engaging with you in this discussion). The 500lb fifth grader gives nothing back. You are receiving far, far, far, far more back from the government than you are putting in. I have no idea why you reactionaries can't get your cotton pickin' heads around this reality.

 

[DeeZire]

Originally Posted by jeninflorida
How about this, Government is like a 500lb fifth grader, and by increasing taxes all we are doing is giving that kid more fast-food and candy. Why not put the child on a diet?

True, putting the child on a diet would result in less poop, but to transfer your analogy to the real world, less poop means cutting Social Security and Medicare, since those are the biggest government expenditures besides interest on the national debt. Try getting a consensus on cutting those programs and then get back to us.

Another issue is personal responsibility. Aren't we, as individuals, responsible for the national debt? How are we supposed to pay down the national debt, if not with money? If the working poor can't even afford the necessities of life, wouldn't it make sense to tax the well-off at a higher rate, so that we could lower the amount of money we piss away on the interest payments servicing the national debt?

It really does amaze me that those who are in the best position to contribute to the prosperity of this country are the ones who complain the loudest.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Tort Reform, interesting phrase. Mostly I've seen this seems to object to "outrageous" liability settlements. The legal costs added to the cost of the liability must be staggering for insurers and we wouldn't want to raise the cost of collecting insurance premiums. After all those legal costs come right off the bottom line and we all know how thin the profit margin is in insurance.

On the other hand a man has a right to his day in court to address his alleged grievance?

How about a law that Layers can't charge more than $100 an hour for defense work? And no more than $200 and hour plus 10% of the take for Plaintive work? That would reduce the cost of the courts and thin out the ranks of the legal profession.

I know you hate insurance companies but I didn't mention them but they too would be included in the reform. As would lawyers. Trickle down economics in reverse.

And as far a lawyers charging $100 an hour, the usual practice with tort law is done on contingency where the lawyer get 1/3rd of the judgement or settlement. So where you get $100 an hour I don't have a clue. Limit the judgement or settlement you limit the amount the lawyer gets and the the amount the insurance companies have to "layoff" on the public.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous comparison (and I have no idea why folks are still engaging with you in this discussion). The 500lb fifth grader gives nothing back. You are receiving far, far, far, far more back from the government than you are putting in. I have no idea why you reactionaries can't get your cotton pickin' heads around this reality.

Yep, we receive back a lot. The roads and bridges in this country are falling apart. The rail system is a joke. The only thing growing is the entitlement programs and most of them are broke (spending more than is brought in for that specific purpose is broke). So tell me again, what my federal tax dollars give me besides no body listening to me in Washington?

Oh wait we do have the best armed forces in the world and I gladly pay my share for that.

 

[JackLuis]

Yep, we receive back a lot. The roads and bridges in this country are falling apart. The rail system is a joke. The only thing growing is the entitlement programs and most of them are broke (spending more than is brought in for that specific purpose is broke). So tell me again, what my federal tax dollars give me besides no body listening to me in Washington?

Oh wait we do have the best armed forces in the world and I gladly pay my share for that.

Yep, Billions for Defense, pennies for the People. If I had to guess, the Pentagon is one of those "Too Large to Manage" government programs you complain of. The Fraud, graft and misguided intentions of the Military-Industrial complex are what I want to spend money on.

Another F-35 and fifty people don't get to go to school, hundreds get their health care cut and it' will never do as good a job as the A-10 has. Yeah great choice Zeb.

 

[sr71plt]

Yep, we receive back a lot. The roads and bridges in this country are falling apart. The rail system is a joke. The only thing growing is the entitlement programs and most of them are broke (spending more than is brought in for that specific purpose is broke). So tell me again, what my federal tax dollars give me besides no body listening to me in Washington?

Oh wait we do have the best armed forces in the world and I gladly pay my share for that.

Yeah, back when the Bush administration was pulling us into the wrong war in Iraq, I mentioned in assorted consulting meetings how the money could be spent better on the country's infrastructure.

But yours isn't really an argument not to be coalescing our resources to tackle such needed projects, now is it Zeb? Or were you thinking that Halburton would do that for us if we just left private enterprise alone?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Yep, Billions for Defense, pennies for the People. If I had to guess, the Pentagon is one of those "Too Large to Manage" government programs you complain of. The Fraud, graft and misguided intentions of the Military-Industrial complex are what I want to spend money on.

Another F-35 and fifty people don't get to go to school, hundreds get their health care cut and it' will never do as good a job as the A-10 has. Yeah great choice Zeb.

Hey I never, ever claimed government in any form was perfect. And if you say there is a perfect government out there I'll call you a liar just for trying.

Sure there's graft, yes they buy shit they may not need, in your opinion. But what if they do need it and don't have it. Then what? Surrender? You probably want everyone to give up their guns too?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Yeah, back when the Bush administration was pulling us into the wrong war in Iraq, I mentioned in assorted consulting meetings how the money could be spent better on the country's infrastructure.

But yours isn't really an argument not to be coalescing our resources to tackle such needed projects, now is it Zeb? Or were you thinking that Halburton would do that for us if we just left private enterprise alone?

You what I just read...blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada. You still haven't told me what I get that you claimed we get. Have you?

 

[sr71plt]

You what I just read...blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada. You still haven't told me what I get that you claimed we get. Have you?

Is there an English translation for this first sentence?

(On the latter, yes I have answered that time and time again. For the fourteenth time, go down to the end of your driveway and see if there is a road leading from there to your workplace, your grocery store, your gym, and your favorite bar. Now analyze now much of that road just in itself--aside from those other thousands of services you get from what your taxes are paying for--what you personally pay in taxes would cover in design, materials, and labor. My bet is that the road your taxes would cover wouldn't go further in any direction than you can eyeball)

Again, I cannot fathom how you reactionaries can be so dumb about this.

 

[JackLuis]

Hey I never, ever claimed government in any form was perfect. And if you say there is a perfect government out there I'll call you a liar just for trying.

Sure there's graft, yes they buy shit they may not need, in your opinion. But what if they do need it and don't have it. Then what? Surrender? You probably want everyone to give up their guns too?

I never said that Government was perfect. How can it be when it is run by people?

I do object to several hundred billions being spent on "go Fast" toys for the Air Force, when the ground support needs are left to aging A-10's and Army Helo's. I objected to Bushian bullshit, but I never said I wanted gun control, except by the ones with the guns, hitting the target is the whole point.

All I want is that the Government enforce the law, and do a proper job of it.

 

[cloudy]

You know what I just read...blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada.

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/1.gif

Plagiarize much?

I can't figure out if your English knowledge is really that horrible, or if you're just foaming at the mouth so excessively that you forget where the letters are on your keyboard.

 

[sr71plt]

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/1.gif

Plagiarize much?

I can't figure out if your English knowledge is really that horrible, or if you're just foaming at the mouth so excessively that you forget where the letters are on your keyboard.

Well I can see how frustrating it would be for him--so impotent on shoving a reactionary political agenda that he can only do it on an erotica writing site discussion board--and by sticking his fingers in his ears and going "la, la, la" when he has no counter to the answers given to his questions. That's rather amusing to watch, actually.

 

[cloudy]

Well I can see how frustrating it would be for him--so impotent on shoving a reactionary political agenda that he can only do it on an erotica writing site discussion board--and by sticking his fingers in his ears and going "la, la, la" when he has no counter to the answers given to his questions. That's rather amusing to watch, actually.

True. Like poking an anthill with a stick just to watch them panic.

 

[MzDeviancy]

Yep, we receive back a lot. The roads and bridges in this country are falling apart. The rail system is a joke. The only thing growing is the entitlement programs and most of them are broke (spending more than is brought in for that specific purpose is broke). So tell me again, what my federal tax dollars give me besides no body listening to me in Washington?

What would you propose as a solution? This may seem like a very ignorant question but do conservatives tend to believe that infrastructure is the responsibility of government or do you guys lean more toward an invisible hand type solution? It seems like US right-wingers are always advocating the laissez-faire approach, and I honestly don't know how far that extends.

The only conservatives I really know are Canadian and they're waaaay more left than American conservatives.