The Economy

[Sihouette]

A little socialism in the form of universal health care is better than tons of socialism in the form of Trillion dollar public purchases of private businesses, eh?

This is the very very baffling aspect of conservatives. They know that universal health care is good for the free market. Way good, by seeing how bad it can get without it.

Yet they still balk at the one thing that will cause American business to get back up on its feet and kick the economy back into high gear so the free market can thrive again.

Then now that things are all in the toilet, they're totally OK with using public money to buy out private business all in the name of "a rescue".

What they're really saying is: "When rich people are eating it, socialism is just hunky dorey. When poor people are eating it, socialism is EVIL bad bad bad."

In an amoral nutshell.

 

[PLC1]

A little socialism in the form of universal health care is better than tons of socialism in the form of Trillion dollar public purchases of private businesses, eh?

This is the very very baffling aspect of conservatives. They know that universal health care is good for the free market. Way good, by seeing how bad it can get without it.

Yet they still balk at the one thing that will cause American business to get back up on its feet and kick the economy back into high gear so the free market can thrive again.

Then now that things are all in the toilet, they're totally OK with using public money to buy out private business all in the name of "a rescue".

What they're really saying is: "When rich people are eating it, socialism is just hunky dorey. When poor people are eating it, socialism is EVIL bad bad bad."

In an amoral nutshell.

Actually, it is the liberal Republican president currently in the Whitehouse, and the Democrats in Congress that seem to be "totally OK with using public money to buy out private business."

It is the conservatives in Congress who are balking and holding up the giveaway, as well as insisting on some oversight and controls on the cash flow.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Actually, it is the liberal Republican president currently in the Whitehouse, and the Democrats in Congress that seem to be "totally OK with using public money to buy out private business."

It is the conservatives in Congress who are balking and holding up the giveaway, as well as insisting on some oversight and controls on the cash flow.

Maybe you've seen something I haven't, but I don't recall hearing Bush say anything about it being "OK" with him. The only thing I've seen is his admitting that something has to be done, and him waiting for congress to come up with something he can sign.
I am happy to see that someone is trying to put some controls on this thing though.

 

[PLC1]

Maybe you've seen something I haven't, but I don't recall hearing Bush say anything about it being "OK" with him. The only thing I've seen is his admitting that something has to be done, and him waiting for congress to come up with something he can sign.
I am happy to see that someone is trying to put some controls on this thing though.

Did you catch Bush's speech on TV about the bailout? I think it is pretty accurate to call the original plan the Bush bailout plan.

Yes, I'm happy to see that someone is trying to put controls on it also. The original plan, calling for up to $700 billion to be spent with no oversight or controls of any kind was scary to say the least!

 

[Andy]

So the French are getting raped by corruption. Whatever. In the US we can institute oversight. There is no reason why the fine details of bringing jobs back home cannot be hammered out. Employers cannot afford American workers and compete globally. That you cannot deny. A superfund, with extensive oversight and regular revisiting, that is padded by low monthly premiums with people making more visits for preventative care without worry of cost will cost less than the mess we're in now.

Can you deny that?

No.

So support the one solution that will bring American jobs back, stabilize the banks, the economy and lead to a future for America instead of a predicted decline into forced socialism on more levels than you, Andy, would be comfortable with at all..

The evidence and data, does not support anything you have claimed.

You know, I do appreciate that when you talk, I know you believe what you say... however... I don't see how you could possibly believe this.

This exact system you are talking about, has been duplicated in a number of countries. It hasn't worked. Why do you think it will work here? You even state the French are being screwed by corruption... and you think that will not happen here if our government gains control of the entire health care industry?

CORRUPTION:
You, Mr Sihouette who claims every part of our government is corrupted by evil BigOil, BigNuclear, BigBusiness, Big-whatever-the-latest-conspiracy-is-today, want to trust that government will be pure as the wind driven snow with health care? You are telling me that the same government that (supposedly) controls the media, has psy-ops running around, and might even have political plants on this very forum, yet can totally be trusted with your health?

But let's take a step back... is there anything in our own country that we can look to as an example of the system you claim you want?

SOCIAL SECURITY! (SS)
SS is a 'superfund'. It has "extensive" oversight, and is regularly "revisited", and has supposedly "super low premiums".

When SS was planned and sold to the public, it would be 1% tax on the first $1,400 of yearly income. You could retire at age 62-63. The SS contribution would be tax deductible, and most importantly, it was voluntary enrollment. If you wanted it, you could sign up, and if not, you didn't have to.

So where are we now?

• First, it is not voluntary. Like any government tyranny, you have no choice but to enroll in SS.
• Second, the tax rate is now 15.3% taken from your check (both sides).
• Third, you are taxed on the first $102,000 dollars, more than most will ever earn in a single year.
• Fourth, you can not deduct SS deductions from your taxes.
• Fifth, thanks to Bill Clinton, you now get taxed on the money you receive from SS, just as you got taxes on the money you put into SS. (double taxation)
• Sixth, thanks to Jimmy Carter and the democrats, now anyone who immigrates to the US, even if they are over 60 years old, and never paid a dime into the system, they can collect a check just like anyone who paid in their whole lives.
• Finely the retirement age was 62 years old, and now it's 70.

So let us review. Social Security has increased in cost, and reduced in benefits, every single year since it was enacted. Further, it is going bankrupt as we speak, thus more increases in cost and reductions in benefits, are in the future. But wait! MAYBE.... the pay off is really good!

In the early 80s, in Galveston County, Texas, thousands of employees were allowed to opt-out of SS. Their payroll taxes were given to a private retirement fund of their choosing. Here are the results.
Employees who earned $50,000 a year, *would have* collected $1,302 a month.
Under the private plan, they collected $6,843 a month.
Employees earning $20,000 a year, *would have* collected $775 a month.
Under the private plan, they collected $2,740 a month.

Hmm.... so the service is crap too.

CONCLUSION:

Based on evidence and data, not opinion and hearsay, and some utopian "it should / could work" theories... I can safely say, that if you do the same thing with health care, the results will be similar, if not exactly the same as SS and every socialized care in the world... namely... higher cost, lower benefits, and reduced service.

 

[Andy]

A little socialism in the form of universal health care is better than tons of socialism in the form of Trillion dollar public purchases of private businesses, eh?

Nope. Both are bad.

This is the very very baffling aspect of conservatives. They know that universal health care is good for the free market. Way good, by seeing how bad it can get without it.

When I look around the world at other universal health care systems, and the economies in which they reside, it's not good. France is a clear cut example. They have one of the most stagnate economies in Europe. Socialized health care hasn't helped them, it's nearly bankrupted their government, and sent their economy into dormancy.

Yet they still balk at the one thing that will cause American business to get back up on its feet and kick the economy back into high gear so the free market can thrive again.

lol, are you trying to dress up socialism and a support for capitalism? How laughable

Then now that things are all in the toilet, they're totally OK with using public money to buy out private business all in the name of "a rescue".

I am not OK with it.

What they're really saying is: "When rich people are eating it, socialism is just hunky dorey. When poor people are eating it, socialism is EVIL bad bad bad."

In an amoral nutshell.

Er, you meant immoral? Amoral, means it's morally neutral.

Well regardless, it's not relevant to me since I don't care who does or does not benefit from a bail out. All socialism is wrong. All bail outs are wrong. It is immoral to take money from one group of people by force, and hand it out to another that hasn't earned it. So this doesn't apply to me.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Did you catch Bush's speech on TV about the bailout? I think it is pretty accurate to call the original plan the Bush bailout plan.

Maybe I missed something in Civics 101, but if we're to call it the "Bush bailout plan", wouldn't that intimate that Bush initiated the plan? As I understand it, this bailout plan was initiated by democrats in the congress...no? Therefore, wouldn't it be more accurate to call it the "Reid bailout plan" or the "Pelosi bailout plan"?

Yes, I'm happy to see that someone is trying to put controls on it also. The original plan, calling for up to $700 billion to be spent with no oversight or controls of any kind was scary to say the least!

Again, perhaps I missed something (I have been VERY busy with work lately), I seem to recall that the AIG part of the "bailout" was to be an 8% loan rather than a "bailout". As far as Fannie and Freddie, frankly I'd be VERY happy to see them come back under full governmental control, and as a line item on the Federal Budget, or better yet killed outright.

I have a close friend who owned an automobile dealership for several decades, and one of the things that they used to do was to guarantee the loans on the cars they sold. If the person they sold the car to defaulted on the bank loan, the bank called him for the money, and it was up to him to either make the payments or repossess the car and sell it to someone who would make the payments. If we're going to ever have a solid home mortgage system again, the mortgage brokers are going to have to be required to do the same thing, guarantee their own loans, instead of doing the thing that got us into this mess in the first place, namely loaning money on the same property...twice! The MBS system allowed banks to write a mortgage to someone, and then to write bonds using the property as security! When you couple that with the ARM's, and "interest only" scams that were running rampant a few years ago, is it any wonder that these companies are going down like a MIG with an AMRAAM up it's tailpipe?

 

[Shotgun314159]

Actually, it is the liberal Republican president currently in the Whitehouse, and the Democrats in Congress that seem to be "totally OK with using public money to buy out private business."

It is the conservatives in Congress who are balking and holding up the giveaway, as well as insisting on some oversight and controls on the cash flow.

you right wing nuts caused this problem

you voted for w

twice

 

[Andy]

you right wing nuts caused this problem

you voted for w

twice

You didn't address the evidence. You didn't make a point. You didn't support your pointless theory with any evidence. You slandered a moderator, and a left leaning moderator at that, with a baseless accusation.

 

[Sihouette]

The bottom line, and the moral of the current crises is:

Accept some small measure of socialism so that your entire country doesn't HAVE TO become socialist. And I mean that from the mildest to the most horrific of potential scenarios..

If we had a socialized health plan for our workers, American companies could afford them. That would've kept jobs home, mortgages paid, the economy strong and our capitalistic free market thriving like no other. If we had not allowed insurance companies to lobby our country into the dirt and keep health care private (and of course, pricey), we would not be in the mess we're in today.

And if we'd not let BigOil lobby to stonewall our changeover to alternatives, that could've started 30 years ago in large measure, we would not be in the mess we are today. If BigOil hadn't coerced GM into gestapo-style recalls of the Volt in 2000, in favor of the collosal guzzler the "Hummer", we would be world leaders in production of electric and hybrid cars. Now we're bailing out car companies to be able to afford to stay in business long enough (hopefully) to quickly mass-produce cars that will undoubtedly have 8 years of bugs we already would've worked out to compete globally..

Lobbiests/bribery and greed are the evil garden from where forced socialism springs. They are the ones who sewed the seeds forcing us to buy the companies they work for in a socialist bailout. They get the profits from all those years of corruption and they get to walk away with more cream just for good measure.

Congress is making a mistake if they allot one US dollar to any of them!

"Here you go bad dog, here's a bisquit for biting me TWICE".

We need to reform lobbying laws. I say, make all lobbying illegal. Lobbying is nothing but bribery. Congress can and will work way more effetively if there aren't forceful distractions and coercion going on 24/7 on Capitol Hill. We are a nation of people FIRST and healthy capitalism a close second. The two cannot be separated in fact because the entire premise of capitalism lies on the productivity and well-being of the lowly worker and his family.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

you right wing nuts caused this problem

And again, as usual, you don't have any idea what you're talking about.

you voted for w

twice

As a matter of fact, yes I did, and for the same reason I'm voting for McCain this time, because the alternative is entirely too damned stupid to be allowed anywhere near 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

 

[Sihouette]

Despite the fact that nearly every GOP person interviewed prayed that we ignore the source of our economic woes and instead focus on the solution (giving them even more money), Mr. Dodds is going to start hearings as early as this week after the vote on the duct-tape Bill for the economy to get to the bottom of who is at fault and why.

I suggest to Mr. Dodds that upon launching his hearings that he take immediate action to freeze the assets of those to be called to defend themselves. I imagine that if BigOil people are behind the debacle we could realize a windfall from hefty fines. They could pay half their profits and still be fat.

Would be good to offset some of the damage eh?

 

[BigRob]

Despite the fact that nearly every GOP person interviewed prayed that we ignore the source of our economic woes and instead focus on the solution (giving them even more money), Mr. Dodds is going to start hearings as early as this week after the vote on the duct-tape Bill for the economy to get to the bottom of who is at fault and why.

I suggest to Mr. Dodds that upon launching his hearings that he take immediate action to freeze the assets of those to be called to defend themselves. I imagine that if BigOil people are behind the debacle we could realize a windfall from hefty fines. They could pay half their profits and still be fat.

Would be good to offset some of the damage eh?

Seeing as how Dodd has gotten the most money from Fannie and Freddie, does that mean he will freeze his own assets?

Further, I cannot possibly comprehend how you blame " BigOil" for this. What did "BigOil" have to do with any of this, I am dying to know.

 

[Pandora]

Despite the fact that nearly every GOP person interviewed prayed that we ignore the source of our economic woes and instead focus on the solution (giving them even more money), Mr. Dodds is going to start hearings as early as this week after the vote on the duct-tape Bill for the economy to get to the bottom of who is at fault and why.

I suggest to Mr. Dodds that upon launching his hearings that he take immediate action to freeze the assets of those to be called to defend themselves. I imagine that if BigOil people are behind the debacle we could realize a windfall from hefty fines. They could pay half their profits and still be fat.

Would be good to offset some of the damage eh?

Chris Dodd needs to investigate himself and his party over the fanny and freddie stuff.

 

[Mr. Carpenter]

Despite the fact that nearly every GOP person interviewed prayed that we ignore the source of our economic woes and instead focus on the solution (giving them even more money),

Post your sources and cites.

Mr. Dodds is going to start hearings as early as this week after the vote on the duct-tape Bill for the economy to get to the bottom of who is at fault and why.

Well, he won't have far to look. Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, HIMSELF, and all the rest of the Democrats that steadfastly refused to do anything about it back in '02 and '03, and even after the took total control of the Congress 2 years ago, they STILL didn't do anything about (or anything else for that matter) hoping it would fall apart before the election so that they could blame it on Bush, and try to morph that into a reason for the brain dead "Kool-Aid" drinkers (as Bill O'Reilly calls them) to vote their Manchurian Candidate into office.

I suggest to Mr. Dodds that upon launching his hearings that he take immediate action to freeze the assets of those to be called to defend themselves. I imagine that if BigOil people are behind the debacle we could realize a windfall from hefty fines. They could pay half their profits and still be fat.

Would be good to offset some of the damage eh?

That has got to be, without a doubt, one of the most mindless things I've read here. Take pride in the fact that you've now set the bar to an all time low. Call hearings, and punish people who had absolutely nothing to do with what happened.