If Conservatives Have Such Great Ideas....

[acolorado]

I used to consider myself a moderate and an independent voter. I like reading up on political news but have found that no matter the source if I'm interested in the topic I have to do my own homework. Checking the sources and looking at the reports and so forth.

What I started to realize a few years ago is that most of the conservative blogs and websites I was checking were becoming very dishonest. I would check their source and find out they had omitted key information that undercut their arguments, or in some cases twisted what was said so far away from the truth that it would have been more honest if they just made something up. Well, in some cases they did that too.

Death panels... health care reform raising the deficit in the long run... HCR funds abortion... Democrats are responsible for the deficit... Obama is not a citizen, or is a Muslim, or a Communist, or a Fascist, or a racist... Government is going to take over 1/6 of the economy with HCR. I shouldn't even mention torture and weapons of mass destruction or the average global temperature over the last 30 years. In every case the conservative claims are untrue, and it only takes a few minutes of checking reliable sources to find this out. Look at the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), or read the HCR proposals first hand. Look up charts on the average global temp over the last several decades and read some studies. Do your homework.

What this leads me to wonder is ... if conservatives have such great ideas why don't they just put those out there? What is their plan to tackle the health care crisis? What is their plan to combat the budget crisis? What about climate change? I don't hear them talking about that - instead they just lie about what the liberals are trying to do.

I don't like everything the Dems are doing - but most of the time what they claim turns out to be true. They have actual plans and ideas. Most are imperfect, but they are practical, and aim to actually solve problems.

When you compare that to the intellectual bankruptcy that modern conservatism has become, it becomes obvious that the only real choice for anyone concerned with the future of our country is to vote Dem.

I just don't get those people who don't see this. Are they too lazy to find out the truth on their own? Are they dishonest? I just don't get it.

Anyway, I have been grumbling about this to myself and wanted to get it off my chest.

What do you think?

[Chreees]

Welcome to America...

I'm about done with politics. Both dems AND repubs are corrupt and you shouldn't ever trust them. I was hoping for things to happen when Obama got elected, but it would seem he got bought out as well. We need some guys (president AND Congress, considering it's really Congress calling the shots) to come in that aren't thinking about the money and who will actually do the shit they said they would to get elected. America is going into the shitter because of greed. I don't even know if I would want to bring kids into this world with the way I see things going. Hell, I may even move somewhere else. I don't know. All I know is it's bad, and nothing is going to change, unless there's a revolution.

/endrant.

[Charley]

both sides are starting to remind me of kindergartners arguing over the jungle gym at recces.


I dont even feel like I am an American any more. there supposed to represent us but instead all they can do is fight amongst themselves and work to undermine each other. pick up a history book and look at the last days of romes political history before its fall. were 2 steps away from from obama muttering "et tu Biden?"

[TheScotsman]

A "moderate" or "independent" doesn't tout socialism. There is nothing moderate, or independent about it. There seems to be a notable lack of continuity in your preaching.


Must be from boulder.

[Rani]

Having actually been corresponding with my representatives and senators, I've come to the conclusion they're all full of shit - no matter how they label themselves. Tar and feathers need to come back into fashion in Washington DC.

'Rani

[acolorado]

[quote name='TheScotsman' date='14 March 2010 - 08:02 PM' timestamp='1268618540' post='457106']
A "moderate" or "independent" doesn't tout socialism. There is nothing moderate, or independent about it. There seems to be a notable lack of continuity in your preaching.


Must be from boulder.
[/quote]

I know bud. You don't drive down the street, won't call the cops if you get in trouble, won't call the fire department if your house goes up. You won't drive an American car because the companies that make them get government subsidies. You won't eat food or wear clothes made in America because agriculture and textiles are subsidized also. You don't use electricity supported by the public utilities. You won't make any claim in a government court of law, or expect the protection of the publicly funded military. Won't take the bus if your car breaks down. You wont' go to the emergency room when your employer drops your insurance and you get sick. You won't collect social security, or use medicare when you retire. You wont' collect unemployment if you get laid off, or ever use any facility supported with government money such as a public swimming pool. You won't send your kids to public schools, or watch sports programs held in stadiums funded with public taxes. Or watch TV or use the phone for that matter, since those are subsidized by the U.S. government. You won't drink the water the city or county cleans, or use the sewage system or walk on the sidewalk. You won't collect food stamps if you're out of work and starving.

In fact you're not going to use the internet to reply to this, because the landlines used for the net are subsidized also and most of the lines laid for it were paid for by Uncle Sam. Not to mention it was developed using tax dollars by the Department of Defense.

Only "Socialists" would do any of that.

And of course the most important thing to you is ensuring that the United States pays as much per capita as every other developed country while getting much much less for it when it comes to Healthcare. You are proud that we are ranked #37 in the world while spending more than any other country. You believe that it's right for Americans to go homeless, starve, and sicken and die when they get laid off to maximize some corporation's profits.

Please. You can't even live up to the standards you claim to believe in.

[acolorado]

Regarding the above post - I don't intend to impugn your character. I just get very worked up over the arguments on this issue which I find misleading or extremist. Calling a subsidized public service "Socialist" when almost everything we consume or use is subsidized just strikes me as silly.

I trust you're an honest person with honest beliefs, it's just that many of the claims made by the right wing these days don't make sense. I can understand the idea that government spending is out of control, because it is, but that doesn't make the country I love "Socialist", or me one for believing that my tax dollars should be used to help the less fortunate.

God bless and have a good day bud.

[joytron]

[quote name='acolorado' date='14 March 2010 - 08:46 PM' timestamp='1268624774' post='457119']
but that doesn't make the country I love "Socialist", or me one for believing that my tax dollars should be used to help the less fortunate.
[/quote]

I am pretty sure that is exactly what socialism is all about. Not that there is anything wrong with it.

[Razorbeam Z]

I've listened to pundits on both sides and both lie an awful lot. I won't deal with either the red or blue teams. It's all about greed, power and micromanaging people's lives for their own greed, exploitation, prohibitions, and spreading their own brand or morality which I don't agree with. I've spent most of my life feeling like an alien fighting to own my own life and not be used by these arrogant control freaks. My lifestyle is very much a community minded DIY Bohemian who abhors the use of fear and violence to control people like they do. As for who screwed the economy? The government did. There's no reason that everything should spiral down like this in a free society like it has if markets could operate in independent ways, but with government tightly and coercively controlling everything markets can't really operate independently and are lead like lemmings right over the cliff and some with guns at the backs of their heads. The government is at the helm and steers everyone in one direction where they want and they've brought us to this, just like they did back in 1929. Personally I doubt anything will get better; maybe if we have a 3rd or 4th party gain equal power with the 2 dominant corrupt ones.

[Venger]

[quote name='acolorado' date='13 March 2010 - 10:46 AM' timestamp='1268491562' post='456906']
I used to consider myself a moderate and an independent voter. I like reading up on political news but have found that no matter the source if I'm interested in the topic I have to do my own homework. Checking the sources and looking at the reports and so forth.

What I started to realize a few years ago is that most of the conservative blogs and websites I was checking were becoming very dishonest. I would check their source and find out they had omitted key information that undercut their arguments, or in some cases twisted what was said so far away from the truth that it would have been more honest if they just made something up. Well, in some cases they did that too.

Death panels... health care reform raising the deficit in the long run... HCR funds abortion... Democrats are responsible for the deficit... Obama is not a citizen, or is a Muslim, or a Communist, or a Fascist, or a racist... Government is going to take over 1/6 of the economy with HCR. I shouldn't even mention torture and weapons of mass destruction or the average global temperature over the last 30 years. In every case the conservative claims are untrue, and it only takes a few minutes of checking reliable sources to find this out. Look at the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), or read the HCR proposals first hand. Look up charts on the average global temp over the last several decades and read some studies. Do your homework.

What this leads me to wonder is ... if conservatives have such great ideas why don't they just put those out there? What is their plan to tackle the health care crisis? What is their plan to combat the budget crisis? What about climate change? I don't hear them talking about that - instead they just lie about what the liberals are trying to do.

I don't like everything the Dems are doing - but most of the time what they claim turns out to be true. They have actual plans and ideas. Most are imperfect, but they are practical, and aim to actually solve problems.

When you compare that to the intellectual bankruptcy that modern conservatism has become, it becomes obvious that the only real choice for anyone concerned with the future of our country is to vote Dem.

I just don't get those people who don't see this. Are they too lazy to find out the truth on their own? Are they dishonest? I just don't get it.

Anyway, I have been grumbling about this to myself and wanted to get it off my chest.

What do you think?
[/quote]

well You managed to hit every liberal talking point in this rant. What I want you to do is stop listen to both sides and consider what would be best for America then ask yourself one other very important question...WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
money does not grow on trees. It has to be earned,unless your a Governing body,they can tax you.
When I do my budget at home I sit down with my wife and son and say we have 50,000 dollar to spend this year. What do we need?
shelter,food,car,2cars,3 cars,cellphones,cable bundle....but at some point the money runs out.might not have a vacation or send my son to college not unless I am willing to give up something somewhere else. I can't demand my boss give me a raise because all kids should go to college. Its not my bosses responsibility.
Now the government does it this way.we NEED roads,we NEED schools we NEED healthcare NEED NEED NEED they come up with there list of "needs" then hand the tax payers the bill. Both sides have taken wants and turned them into needs. No budget works this way.you will go broke.
an example of a want vs a need. you do not NEED health insurance. Its nice to have but hospital and Drs still take cash. And what about personal responsibility? Who wants this health plan that is currently being proposed? How of them REALLY can't afford it because they have cut all their unnecessary spending (read cable,phone,internet,cell,vacations,movies,and dinners out) and still can't afford a dr visit.
who is going to pay for all this free stuff? Please don't say the rich. Its not realistic to punish someone for success. that is just legal stealing. they earned it why should they pay more? If you have ever paid income tax there is a spot on the form that asks how much above your taxes would you like to give. If someone is wealthy and thinks they should pay more let them fill in that box.
We the middle class poor will pay. I know this because I am this.
RAY

[acolorado]

[quote name='Venger' date='16 March 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1268765146' post='457448']
[quote name='acolorado' date='13 March 2010 - 10:46 AM' timestamp='1268491562' post='456906']
I used to consider myself a moderate and an independent voter. I like reading up on political news but have found that no matter the source if I'm interested in the topic I have to do my own homework. Checking the sources and looking at the reports and so forth.

What I started to realize a few years ago is that most of the conservative blogs and websites I was checking were becoming very dishonest. I would check their source and find out they had omitted key information that undercut their arguments, or in some cases twisted what was said so far away from the truth that it would have been more honest if they just made something up. Well, in some cases they did that too.

Death panels... health care reform raising the deficit in the long run... HCR funds abortion... Democrats are responsible for the deficit... Obama is not a citizen, or is a Muslim, or a Communist, or a Fascist, or a racist... Government is going to take over 1/6 of the economy with HCR. I shouldn't even mention torture and weapons of mass destruction or the average global temperature over the last 30 years. In every case the conservative claims are untrue, and it only takes a few minutes of checking reliable sources to find this out. Look at the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), or read the HCR proposals first hand. Look up charts on the average global temp over the last several decades and read some studies. Do your homework.

What this leads me to wonder is ... if conservatives have such great ideas why don't they just put those out there? What is their plan to tackle the health care crisis? What is their plan to combat the budget crisis? What about climate change? I don't hear them talking about that - instead they just lie about what the liberals are trying to do.

I don't like everything the Dems are doing - but most of the time what they claim turns out to be true. They have actual plans and ideas. Most are imperfect, but they are practical, and aim to actually solve problems.

When you compare that to the intellectual bankruptcy that modern conservatism has become, it becomes obvious that the only real choice for anyone concerned with the future of our country is to vote Dem.

I just don't get those people who don't see this. Are they too lazy to find out the truth on their own? Are they dishonest? I just don't get it.

Anyway, I have been grumbling about this to myself and wanted to get it off my chest.

What do you think?
[/quote]

well You managed to hit every liberal talking point in this rant. What I want you to do is stop listen to both sides and consider what would be best for America then ask yourself one other very important question...WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?
money does not grow on trees. It has to be earned,unless your a Governing body,they can tax you.
When I do my budget at home I sit down with my wife and son and say we have 50,000 dollar to spend this year. What do we need?
shelter,food,car,2cars,3 cars,cellphones,cable bundle....but at some point the money runs out.might not have a vacation or send my son to college not unless I am willing to give up something somewhere else. I can't demand my boss give me a raise because all kids should go to college. Its not my bosses responsibility.
Now the government does it this way.we NEED roads,we NEED schools we NEED healthcare NEED NEED NEED they come up with there list of "needs" then hand the tax payers the bill. Both sides have taken wants and turned them into needs. No budget works this way.you will go broke.
an example of a want vs a need. you do not NEED health insurance. Its nice to have but hospital and Drs still take cash. And what about personal responsibility? Who wants this health plan that is currently being proposed? How of them REALLY can't afford it because they have cut all their unnecessary spending (read cable,phone,internet,cell,vacations,movies,and dinners out) and still can't afford a dr visit.
who is going to pay for all this free stuff? Please don't say the rich. Its not realistic to punish someone for success. that is just legal stealing. they earned it why should they pay more? If you have ever paid income tax there is a spot on the form that asks how much above your taxes would you like to give. If someone is wealthy and thinks they should pay more let them fill in that box.
We the middle class poor will pay. I know this because I am this.
RAY
[/quote]

You've got a very good point. I especially appreciate the honesty that both parties have legislated and administrated programs that are not necessary and not paid for.

An example, when the Republicans took control of the House, Senate, and Presidency in 2000, our nation had a budget surplus of 260 billion. When they lost control of the House and Senate in 2004, we had a budget deficit of 600 billion. Medicare Plan D, the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - none of which were funded (paid for out of the budget) - but instead went straight to the deficit.

According to the CBO - 70 percent of our current debt has resulted from programs and spending passed or legislated when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency.

On the other side, no Democratic president or congress in the last 30 years has attempted to confront the funding gaps in both Medicare and Social Security, which continue to grow and become an ever bigger problem.

Neither party practices fiscal responsibility.

Yet this does not account for the serious problems facing us when it comes to healthcare. You said it yourself - who is going to pay? Well, WE ARE! Every time someone without insurance goes to the emergency room because they let a problem slide until it's serious they are receiving the most expensive and least efficient form of healthcare possible. If they can't pay then the hospital eats that cost, and eventually the local, state, or Federal government has to subsidize it. That's our money.

Not everyone is so fortunate to be able to pay thousands of dollars for a visit like that. Especially now with an average of over 8% unemployment. How can you cut out your "wants" on a budget that won't even allow you to meet your needs, like housing, food or transportation. What about the millions who work for minimum wage and just barely cover rent, food, and utilities? Perhaps you don't know anyone who has to live on that, but it's no cakewalk. The bottom line is that we will end up paying for it.

So what do you have against implementing a system that saves us money? The current plan will do that by giving the uninsured access to doctors and preventive care before their problems get out of control.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that after the expenses of the proposed reform program, when you consider the savings to Medicare and Federal Subsidies, we will save 118 billion over 10 years. That's 118 billion saved over the conservative plan, which is to do nothing.

To put the cost into perspective - Health care reform will add only 1 percent to our current annual healthcare spending, and insure over 30 million Americans. It will cost around 100 billion dollars per year. Compare that to the cost of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy or the war in Iraq (both of which cost over 200 billion per year), and you see it's not much money at all.

In the mean time under the Republican plan (do nothing) more people will lose their insurance, those with insurance will see their premiums rise, medical costs will continue to skyrocket. We will pay more and more.

I think I like the Dem plan better. Saving money sounds smart.

The alternative is simply penny wise and pound foolish.

[jezter6]

[quote name='acolorado' date='16 March 2010 - 03:21 PM' timestamp='1268770865' post='457460']


You've got a very good point. I especially appreciate the honesty that both parties have legislated and administrated programs that are not necessary and not paid for.

An example, when the Republicans took control of the House, Senate, and Presidency in 2000, our nation had a budget surplus of 260 billion. When they lost control of the House and Senate in 2004, we had a budget deficit of 600 billion. Medicare Plan D, the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - none of which were funded (paid for out of the budget) - but instead went straight to the deficit.

According to the CBO - 70 percent of our current debt has resulted from programs and spending passed or legislated when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency.

On the other side, no Democratic president or congress in the last 30 years has attempted to confront the funding gaps in both Medicare and Social Security, which continue to grow and become an ever bigger problem.

Neither party practices fiscal responsibility.

Yet this does not account for the serious problems facing us when it comes to healthcare. You said it yourself - who is going to pay? Well, WE ARE! Every time someone without insurance goes to the emergency room because they let a problem slide until it's serious they are receiving the most expensive and least efficient form of healthcare possible. If they can't pay then the hospital eats that cost, and eventually the local, state, or Federal government has to subsidize it. That's our money.

Not everyone is so fortunate to be able to pay thousands of dollars for a visit like that. Especially now with an average of over 8% unemployment. How can you cut out your "wants" on a budget that won't even allow you to meet your needs, like housing, food or transportation. What about the millions who work for minimum wage and just barely cover rent, food, and utilities? Perhaps you don't know anyone who has to live on that, but it's no cakewalk. The bottom line is that we will end up paying for it.

So what do you have against implementing a system that saves us money? The current plan will do that by giving the uninsured access to doctors and preventive care before their problems get out of control.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that after the expenses of the proposed reform program, when you consider the savings to Medicare and Federal Subsidies, we will save 118 billion over 10 years. That's 118 billion saved over the conservative plan, which is to do nothing.

To put the cost into perspective - Health care reform will add only 1 percent to our current annual healthcare spending, and insure over 30 million Americans. It will cost around 100 billion dollars per year. Compare that to the cost of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy or the war in Iraq (both of which cost over 200 billion per year), and you see it's not much money at all.

In the mean time under the Republican plan (do nothing) more people will lose their insurance, those with insurance will see their premiums rise, medical costs will continue to skyrocket. We will pay more and more.

I think I like the Dem plan better. Saving money sounds smart.

The alternative is simply penny wise and pound foolish.
[/quote]

Again with the talking points. As someone who claims to be somewhat independent, you're swinging way to one side. So far, the only thing you got right is that neither side does anything for fiscal responsibility.

So long as you continue to spout the "republicans have no plan" line - we'll all know you're full of piss and vinegar and haven't actually researched anything beyond what MSNBC and Rachel Maddow have shoved down your throat.

How about you ACTUALLY go look at the other ideas, that haven't even made it to committee yet because the Democrats have shut it ALL down, and then say they have no ideas. Just because MSNBC doesn't report on it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[acolorado]

I made sure to mention if my first post that I used to consider myself an Independent. Now I am quite proud to be a liberal convinced by facts and hard evidence.

As for the other ideas you mention.

The official RNC website lists 4 policy proposals for healthcare reform. Plan portability, Improving quality through wellness programs and such, Funding research, and Protecting patient rights and choice.

If you take time to peruse the current Democratic proposal, you will find that all 4 of these points are included and addressed in the current plan.

So what other "ideas" are out there? I looked at NRO, Instapundit, Free Republic, RealClearPolitics, and other conservative news sites. I could not find a single other "idea" with the exception of co-ops. Republicans have stopped talking about those for good reason - in the states where they have tried these programs they have failed miserably and are on the chopping block.

So really what's the problem? I see alot of general and unsubstantial criticism of the Dem plan - almost all of it dishonest and easily disproven - but no facts to back that up. Only speculation.

And the 4 ideas that the official Republican website claims to support are already included in the health care plan.

This goes straight back to my first question. If the Republicans had some original good ideas, why not just put them out there? Why argue against ideas they claim to support? Why is there a simple statement including only 4 policy proposals which are already included in the reform plan - and not an official comprehensive plan on their website? Why all the lies and misinformation such as Death Panels or funding for abortion or saying that reform would Socialize 1/6 of the economy?

I'm serious, if there is a comprehensive and official republican plan out there point me to it. I've read the talking points but that's a far cry from what the Dems have on the table.

And just to throw this out there - why am I the one bringing all the facts and research to the debate here?

[thatonethere]

In my opinion, both parties do their fair share of lying to the people. I've given up on the idea that maybe, just maybe we'll get a candidate who will implement good ideas without trying to fufill their own self interests.

All people want what's good for the rest of the country. The problem is that we don't know whose hand is in whose pockets. Money and special interests are what fuel politics in general. This happens in all aspects of life (work politics, parenting, etc).

It'll take a mass uprising for people to wake up and smell the coffee. But I guess as long as the general consensus is complacent, then nothing will change.

I have no facts to bring to the discussion...
sorry.

[acolorado]

[quote name='thatonethere' date='16 March 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1268779895' post='457501']
In my opinion, both parties do their fair share of lying to the people. I've given up on the idea that maybe, just maybe we'll get a candidate who will implement good ideas without trying to fufill their own self interests.

All people want what's good for the rest of the country. The problem is that we don't know whose hand is in whose pockets. Money and special interests are what fuel politics in general. This happens in all aspects of life (work politics, parenting, etc).

It'll take a mass uprising for people to wake up and smell the coffee. But I guess as long as the general consensus is complacent, then nothing will change.

I have no facts to bring to the discussion...
sorry.
[/quote]

You've got a real good point here bud.

Special interests have controlled almost the entire debate and fashioning of the health care bill. Good provisions have been dropped because the insurance industry opposes them. The Dems have watered down the bill in many areas reducing it's potential to fix the problem. Many of them, probably the majority, are more concerned with campaign contributions than helping Americans.

It's no different with either party. I just want to see at least one of the major problems facing our country fixed.

[thatonethere]

[quote name='acolorado' date='16 March 2010 - 05:14 PM' timestamp='1268781288' post='457508']
[quote name='thatonethere' date='16 March 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1268779895' post='457501']
In my opinion, both parties do their fair share of lying to the people. I've given up on the idea that maybe, just maybe we'll get a candidate who will implement good ideas without trying to fufill their own self interests.

All people want what's good for the rest of the country. The problem is that we don't know whose hand is in whose pockets. Money and special interests are what fuel politics in general. This happens in all aspects of life (work politics, parenting, etc).

It'll take a mass uprising for people to wake up and smell the coffee. But I guess as long as the general consensus is complacent, then nothing will change.

I have no facts to bring to the discussion...
sorry.
[/quote]

You've got a real good point here bud.

Special interests have controlled almost the entire debate and fashioning of the health care bill. Good provisions have been dropped because the insurance industry opposes them. The Dems have watered down the bill in many areas reducing it's potential to fix the problem. Many of them, probably the majority, are more concerned with campaign contributions than helping Americans.

It's no different with either party.[b] I just want to see at least one of the major problems facing our country fixed.[/b]
[/quote]
+1 Edited March 16, 2010 by thatonethere

[Venger]

[quote name='thatonethere' date='16 March 2010 - 07:22 PM' timestamp='1268781733' post='457513']
[quote name='acolorado' date='16 March 2010 - 05:14 PM' timestamp='1268781288' post='457508']
[quote name='thatonethere' date='16 March 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1268779895' post='457501']
In my opinion, both parties do their fair share of lying to the people. I've given up on the idea that maybe, just maybe we'll get a candidate who will implement good ideas without trying to fufill their own self interests.

All people want what's good for the rest of the country. The problem is that we don't know whose hand is in whose pockets. Money and special interests are what fuel politics in general. This happens in all aspects of life (work politics, parenting, etc).

It'll take a mass uprising for people to wake up and smell the coffee. But I guess as long as the general consensus is complacent, then nothing will change.

I have no facts to bring to the discussion...
sorry.
[/quote]

You've got a real good point here bud.

Special interests have controlled almost the entire debate and fashioning of the health care bill. Good provisions have been dropped because the insurance industry opposes them. The Dems have watered down the bill in many areas reducing it's potential to fix the problem. Many of them, probably the majority, are more concerned with campaign contributions than helping Americans.

It's no different with either party.[b] I just want to see at least one of the major problems facing our country fixed.[/b]
[/quote]
+1
[/quote]

There have been plenty of good ideas on both sides.
libs want to make sure you cant be refused insurance or have it canceled for getting sick.
thats a good idea.
conservatives have good ideas
remove the barrier of competition between states,like car insurance. I can buy it from the lowest price company in any state.
tort reform=you don't let people sue dr.s blind. understand drs are human and make mistakes and life is risky.
But bad ideas abound in the current bill.
forcing every man women and child to have it.they have no right to tell me where to spend my money.
forcing businesses to cover all employees=the cost of everything will go up.businesses don't pay for anything out of profit they just raise prices.
charging the rich (read anyone making 250,000 a year) most of these people are folks who own their own business. They create jobs.jobs=good=more money for everyone.
we need to sit down and seriously discuss needs vs wants. Back in the day you paid your dr cash and they had to compete with each other for business.one dr charges 60 another comes along and charges 40 the first guy will lose business and be force to lower his price to compete.
the only insurance anyone had was major medical to cover "the big stuff"like hospital or x-rays. we need less of the government telling us how they are going to fix stuff and then make it worse. Hell I would rather see single pay like Canada has rather than this cluster fuck they are trying to pass. Sometimes too much "help" makes things worse.
Ray

[jezter6]

[quote name='acolorado' date='16 March 2010 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1268773689' post='457471']
I made sure to mention if my first post that I used to consider myself an Independent. Now I am quite proud to be a liberal convinced by facts and hard evidence.

As for the other ideas you mention.

The official RNC website lists 4 policy proposals for healthcare reform. Plan portability, Improving quality through wellness programs and such, Funding research, and Protecting patient rights and choice.

If you take time to peruse the current Democratic proposal, you will find that all 4 of these points are included and addressed in the current plan.

So what other "ideas" are out there? I looked at NRO, Instapundit, Free Republic, RealClearPolitics, and other conservative news sites. I could not find a single other "idea" with the exception of co-ops. Republicans have stopped talking about those for good reason - in the states where they have tried these programs they have failed miserably and are on the chopping block.

So really what's the problem? I see alot of general and unsubstantial criticism of the Dem plan - almost all of it dishonest and easily disproven - but no facts to back that up. Only speculation.

And the 4 ideas that the official Republican website claims to support are already included in the health care plan.

This goes straight back to my first question. If the Republicans had some original good ideas, why not just put them out there? Why argue against ideas they claim to support? Why is there a simple statement including only 4 policy proposals which are already included in the reform plan - and not an official comprehensive plan on their website? Why all the lies and misinformation such as Death Panels or funding for abortion or saying that reform would Socialize 1/6 of the economy?

I'm serious, if there is a comprehensive and official republican plan out there point me to it. I've read the talking points but that's a far cry from what the Dems have on the table.

And just to throw this out there - why am I the one bringing all the facts and research to the debate here?
[/quote]
again, apparently you're only looking at talking points. There have been no less than 2 bills that I know of specifically that have been submitted by Republicans for healthcare reform.
1) http://rules-republicans.house.gov/Media/PDF/RepublicanAlternative3962_9.pdf
2) http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/27/rep-paul-ryan-to-introduce-alternative-to-health-care-and-spending/ (similar bill, but at least they can't be accused of not doing anything...oh wait, people like you are continually deciding the accuse them of not having any ideas in spite of having bills)


So much for you bringing the only research to the debate.

It's also up for debate as to what the Democrat plan actually does with some of the 4 main ideals of GOP healthcare reform. Some of it is surely in there, and some of it is off base. The problem isn't so much that the Democratic plan doesn't do enough, it's that it does too much. Add in all the nice Democrat pork in the Senate bill that even the House Democrats are trying to avoid...how can anyone support this? If you have to resort to subversive tactics to pass a bill without showing that you voted for it (because you wouldn't vote for it if it just came up in the NORMAL PROCESS OF CONGRESS), then it's obvious that this bill is losing support even among it's own party.

I've said this in many debates, and liberal fail to answer every time I bring it up.

If there are things we can all agree on (yes, there are some of those in the various bills)...why can't we get together and pass all the things we agree on, and then go back to debate the rest? Why must this be a Democratic bill or NOTHING option to the Democrats and the President? Everyone keeps saying we must do something NOW -- why isn't anyone willing to step up and do SOMETHING now, and then work on the crazier parts of both parties? Dems have the majority. They can put together a bill that has enough items to get likely near 100% of the votes and get something accomplished and feel good about doing a good thing.

[acolorado]

[quote name='jezter6' date='17 March 2010 - 01:55 PM' timestamp='1268855747' post='457665']
[quote name='acolorado' date='16 March 2010 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1268773689' post='457471']
I made sure to mention if my first post that I used to consider myself an Independent. Now I am quite proud to be a liberal convinced by facts and hard evidence.

As for the other ideas you mention.

The official RNC website lists 4 policy proposals for healthcare reform. Plan portability, Improving quality through wellness programs and such, Funding research, and Protecting patient rights and choice.

If you take time to peruse the current Democratic proposal, you will find that all 4 of these points are included and addressed in the current plan.

So what other "ideas" are out there? I looked at NRO, Instapundit, Free Republic, RealClearPolitics, and other conservative news sites. I could not find a single other "idea" with the exception of co-ops. Republicans have stopped talking about those for good reason - in the states where they have tried these programs they have failed miserably and are on the chopping block.

So really what's the problem? I see alot of general and unsubstantial criticism of the Dem plan - almost all of it dishonest and easily disproven - but no facts to back that up. Only speculation.

And the 4 ideas that the official Republican website claims to support are already included in the health care plan.

This goes straight back to my first question. If the Republicans had some original good ideas, why not just put them out there? Why argue against ideas they claim to support? Why is there a simple statement including only 4 policy proposals which are already included in the reform plan - and not an official comprehensive plan on their website? Why all the lies and misinformation such as Death Panels or funding for abortion or saying that reform would Socialize 1/6 of the economy?

I'm serious, if there is a comprehensive and official republican plan out there point me to it. I've read the talking points but that's a far cry from what the Dems have on the table.

And just to throw this out there - why am I the one bringing all the facts and research to the debate here?
[/quote]
again, apparently you're only looking at talking points. There have been no less than 2 bills that I know of specifically that have been submitted by Republicans for healthcare reform.
1) [url="http://rules-republicans.house.gov/Media/PDF/RepublicanAlternative3962_9.pdf"]http://rules-republi...ative3962_9.pdf[/url]
2) [url="http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/27/rep-paul-ryan-to-introduce-alternative-to-health-care-and-spending/"]http://dailycaller.c...e-and-spending/[/url] (similar bill, but at least they can't be accused of not doing anything...oh wait, people like you are continually deciding the accuse them of not having any ideas in spite of having bills)


So much for you bringing the only research to the debate.

It's also up for debate as to what the Democrat plan actually does with some of the 4 main ideals of GOP healthcare reform. Some of it is surely in there, and some of it is off base. The problem isn't so much that the Democratic plan doesn't do enough, it's that it does too much. Add in all the nice Democrat pork in the Senate bill that even the House Democrats are trying to avoid...how can anyone support this? If you have to resort to subversive tactics to pass a bill without showing that you voted for it (because you wouldn't vote for it if it just came up in the NORMAL PROCESS OF CONGRESS), then it's obvious that this bill is losing support even among it's own party.

I've said this in many debates, and liberal fail to answer every time I bring it up.

If there are things we can all agree on (yes, there are some of those in the various bills)...why can't we get together and pass all the things we agree on, and then go back to debate the rest? Why must this be a Democratic bill or NOTHING option to the Democrats and the President? Everyone keeps saying we must do something NOW -- why isn't anyone willing to step up and do SOMETHING now, and then work on the crazier parts of both parties? Dems have the majority. They can put together a bill that has enough items to get likely near 100% of the votes and get something accomplished and feel good about doing a good thing.
[/quote]

Thank you Jetz for finding that. I checked it out and man what a doozie you have there!

According to the CBO - the Boehner plan you cite would insure 3 million Americans over 10 years (by 2019). It would reduce the deficit by 63 billion. This would leave an estimated 53 million uninsured.
[url="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10705/hr3962amendmentBoehner.pdf"]My link[/url] - [url="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10705/hr3962amendmentBoehner.pdf"]http://www.cbo.gov/f...mentBoehner.pdf[/url]

The current Dem plan would insure 31 million over 10 years (by 2019). It would also reduce the deficit by over 100 billion. People still uninsured under the plan would be eligible for subsidies.
[url="http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11307/Reid_Letter_HR3590.pdf"]My link[/url] - [url="http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11307/Reid_Letter_HR3590.pdf"]http://cbo.gov/ftpdo...tter_HR3590.pdf[/url]

3 million versus 31 million with less deficit reduction. I think it's obvious why the Republican "plan" didn't get much support.

The pork you refer to (such as the Nebraska Nelson deal) is being removed with the upcoming amendments. That is the whole purpose of amending the bill - to get some of the bad stuff out. You failed to mention that in your argument but that just gives me a chance to point out that misinformation is part and parcel of current Republican arguments on this.

As for using Reconciliation and Deeming - you call it passing a bill without showing your vote - Republicans are whining alot about that but it's important to remember 2 things.
1. Reconciliation has been used 19 times in the last 30 years. 14 of those - yes 3 out of 4 - were by Republican controlled Congresses. 6 of those 14 on major legislation.
2. Deeming was used a record 35 times by the Republican controlled Congress between 2000 and 2004.

So it seems these "subversive tactics" are fine if used by Republicans, but unconstitutional when used by Democrats. That might as well be the dictionary definition of hypocrisy.
It's just another example of Republicans failing to live up to the same standards they expect of others.

As for the bill losing support - in the House the 11 vote whip in favor of the bill turned into a 13 vote whip since you posted bud. Looks like increasing support to me.

The biggest point you put up here that just doesn't make sense is that the Dems are doing TOO MUCH to fix a major problem facing this country?
This is why in November 2008 the country voted overwhelmingly for a Democratic half-black man who was reportedly a muslim and a foreigner, who had only 1 term in congress, and was named Barack [u]Hussein[/u] Obama - rather than the Republican war hero with 30 years in the Senate.
America has had enough of Republicans doing too little.

[acolorado]

Whoops here's a correction to my last post. I caught this while reading up on HCR today.

The whip count i referred to was from 11 against to 9 against. I had it backwards.

After todays update it's 205 for and 209 against in the House - yesterday it was 197 for and 217 against.

My point remains - support for HCR is growing, not shrinking as many on the right are claiming.

You've just seen a liberal correct themselves. I suspect Haley's Comet will come around again before you see a conservative do the same .

[Venger]

So it seems these "subversive tactics" are fine if used by Republicans, but unconstitutional when used by Democrats. That might as well be the dictionary definition of hypocrisy.
It's just another example of Republicans failing to live up to the same standards they expect of others.

this is my point. The entire system is corrupt. Both parties are using these tactics that are morally bankrupt to get what they want. Health care is not a right nor is it necessary to live. Food, air, water, and shelter. These are necessities not health care insurance. Insurance is basically someone ready to loan you money when you don't have enough to cover your bill. It is not free health care. you still need to pay the dr the hospital and for all your tests. to put it simply you pay me $5 a month and if you get sick I promise to cover your dr bill. Now you can pay me for years and never use my service...I win OR you could get sick 4-5 time in that same period of time and the dr bills I pay are greater than what I collected from you...I lose. How is it the federal governments job in anyway via the constitution to be your health insurance provider?
Its not. period. people get sick, people die thats life. health care is a business just like cable tv. Someone has to be paid for their service. either you can pay or not it is that simple. The only way this is going to be fixed is to lower how much health care cost,not change who pays the insurance bill. The current plan is just moving money from the haves to the have nots. That is nothing less than legal theft. Is it ok for a starving man to walk into a store and steal food...no.
Ray

[Rani]

[quote name='Venger' date='18 March 2010 - 03:52 AM' timestamp='1268913123' post='457859']
So it seems these "subversive tactics" are fine if used by Republicans, but unconstitutional when used by Democrats. That might as well be the dictionary definition of hypocrisy.
It's just another example of Republicans failing to live up to the same standards they expect of others.

this is my point. The entire system is corrupt. Both parties are using these tactics that are morally bankrupt to get what they want. Health care is not a right nor is it necessary to live. Food, air, water, and shelter. These are necessities not health care insurance. Insurance is basically someone ready to loan you money when you don't have enough to cover your bill. It is not free health care. you still need to pay the dr the hospital and for all your tests. to put it simply you pay me $5 a month and if you get sick I promise to cover your dr bill. Now you can pay me for years and never use my service...I win OR you could get sick 4-5 time in that same period of time and the dr bills I pay are greater than what I collected from you...I lose. How is it the federal governments job in anyway via the constitution to be your health insurance provider?
Its not. period. people get sick, people die thats life. health care is a business just like cable tv. Someone has to be paid for their service. either you can pay or not it is that simple. The only way this is going to be fixed is to lower how much health care cost,not change who pays the insurance bill. The current plan is just moving money from the haves to the have nots. That is nothing less than legal theft. Is it ok for a starving man to walk into a store and steal food...no.
Ray
[/quote]

You raise valid points Ray but you miss one really big one....... It is part and parcel of who we are to save lives no matter what the cost. With my personal belief of life just being a walk through I don't necessarily agree with that view, but it is what it is. If we find a John Doe on the street injured with no record of who he is or where he came from, in the interest of preserving the "sanctity" of life, we'll transport him to the hospital and if necessary keep him alive for years against all hope on machines at the cost of the taxpayer. Nobody is going to say, "Well, nobody claimed him in 10 days and he has no insurance so we're pulling the plug." It's ingrained into our culture that we hope even when there is none. And we will continue to struggle to save lives even when everyone else is paying the bill. It's who we are and a huge part of what our national self-recognition is built on. We're not going to stop.

The medical industry loses billions every year treating uninsured patients. A contributing factor in identity theft is the ability to get medical attention under someone else name. Not that long ago I knew a whole lot of people who went to the hospital for everything and never paid a dime. It's a huge, huge problem to the medical industry. Mandatory insurance would dramatically lessen the overall impact on the tax paying public, because believe me, every time you go to the doctor on your insurance, you and your insurance company are paying for a dozen people who got treated and didn't pay. Every citizen needs to have access to health care without ripping off the hospital, or doctor, or ambulance company. In the long run it's going to end up saving us money.

So, yes, I absolutely believe we need it. And I hear nothing from the Republican party except that they want to scrape everything and start over which means nothing to me except stalling while more money goes down the drain.

'Rani

[acolorado]

[quote name='Venger' date='18 March 2010 - 05:52 AM' timestamp='1268913123' post='457859']
So it seems these "subversive tactics" are fine if used by Republicans, but unconstitutional when used by Democrats. That might as well be the dictionary definition of hypocrisy.
It's just another example of Republicans failing to live up to the same standards they expect of others.

this is my point. The entire system is corrupt. Both parties are using these tactics that are morally bankrupt to get what they want. Health care is not a right nor is it necessary to live. Food, air, water, and shelter. These are necessities not health care insurance. Insurance is basically someone ready to loan you money when you don't have enough to cover your bill. It is not free health care. you still need to pay the dr the hospital and for all your tests. to put it simply you pay me $5 a month and if you get sick I promise to cover your dr bill. Now you can pay me for years and never use my service...I win OR you could get sick 4-5 time in that same period of time and the dr bills I pay are greater than what I collected from you...I lose. How is it the federal governments job in anyway via the constitution to be your health insurance provider?
Its not. period. people get sick, people die thats life. health care is a business just like cable tv. Someone has to be paid for their service. either you can pay or not it is that simple. The only way this is going to be fixed is to lower how much health care cost,not change who pays the insurance bill. The current plan is just moving money from the haves to the have nots. That is nothing less than legal theft. Is it ok for a starving man to walk into a store and steal food...no.
Ray
[/quote]

The first thing I have to point out is that health care is a right. It's a right under the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, Federal law, and so far as I know the law of every state in the Union. We are a civilized people in this department.

Any person in need can walk into the emergency room to receive care. Treatment received in the emergency room is the most expensive and least efficient possible. The same procedure done in an emergency room can cost twice as much as when done at a doctor's office. If they can't pay the hospital first eats the bill - then is reimbursed by either the state or federal government. So we, as taxpayers, pay for it. Keep in mind we are paying for the least efficient and most expensive treatment possible. That is not a good deal.

If every person had some form of insurance they can go get treatment at a doctor's office. They can get preventive care, which has been proven again and again to lower the long term costs of medical care. The cost to the taxpayers is less than the current system. We the taxpayers save money. This is a good deal.

What you are arguing for is a contradiction. You want to save a penny today and spend a dollar tommorow. I would rather spend a penny today and save a dollar tommorow. This is a good example since the CBO scored that the proposed health care plan will raise federal health care spending by only 1 percent over the next decade, while insuring 31 million people. It will also reduce the deficit.

On top of that we spend more per capita than any other industrialized nation on earth on health care. Right now. We rank 37th in the health care our citizens receive according to the WHO, which uses over 200 health related benchmarks to determine quality of care received. Under the current system we pay more and get less. Not smart.

On the subject of moving money from the have's to the have nots - anyone who takes the time too look at the redistribution effects of the Bush tax cuts will very quickly realize that over the last decade trillions of dollars in tax responsibility have been shifted away from the wealthiest people in this country and onto the shoulders of the middle class and the poor. The rich are NOT paying their fair share. I agree that this is legal theft - but why don't conservatives call it theft when the poor and middle class are getting robbed? Insane.

Here's a great article with links to the IRS sources which explains simply how the rich are now paying less than almost everyone else. Theft indeed.
[url="http://www.tax.com/taxcom/features.nsf/Articles/0DEC0EAA7E4D7A2B852576CD00714692?OpenDocument"]My link[/url] - [url="http://www.tax.com/taxcom/features.nsf/Articles/0DEC0EAA7E4D7A2B852576CD00714692?OpenDocument"]http://www.tax.com/t...92?OpenDocument[/url]

[FiveSpeedF150]

[quote name='Rani' date='18 March 2010 - 05:52 PM' timestamp='1268959933' post='458051']
Every citizen needs to have access to health care without ripping off the hospital, or doctor, or ambulance company. [i]In the long run it's going to end up saving us money[/i].
[/quote]

Please explain how.

[quote name='acolorado' date='18 March 2010 - 06:49 PM' timestamp='1268963386' post='458066']
The first thing I have to point out is that health care is a right. It's a right under the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, Federal law, and so far as I know the law of every state in the Union. We are a civilized people in this department.
[/quote]

Wrong. Saying that health care is a right implies that the .gov can force someone to provide it to you. Health care is a service that is provided by the professionals who choose to make a living at it. They have the right to quit at anytime. The UN can get fucked.




The current system is fucked, ladies and gents, no arguing that. But to imply that taxing the American people to implement socialized medicine is the solution is way out there. Plus the hypocrisy of claiming that now is a good time when we all know the US is bordering on bankruptcy. Health care reform of some kind is a necessity. Giving the government complete control over it is not the solution.
[i]

[/i]
[b][i]"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there would be a shortage of sand" [/i]-Milton Friedman[/b] Edited March 20, 2010 by FiveSpeedF150

[acolorado]

[quote name='FiveSpeedF150' date='20 March 2010 - 01:14 PM' timestamp='1269112470' post='458427']
[quote name='Rani' date='18 March 2010 - 05:52 PM' timestamp='1268959933' post='458051']
Every citizen needs to have access to health care without ripping off the hospital, or doctor, or ambulance company. [i]In the long run it's going to end up saving us money[/i].
[/quote]

Please explain how.

[quote name='acolorado' date='18 March 2010 - 06:49 PM' timestamp='1268963386' post='458066']
The first thing I have to point out is that health care is a right. It's a right under the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, Federal law, and so far as I know the law of every state in the Union. We are a civilized people in this department.
[/quote]

Wrong. Saying that health care is a right implies that the .gov can force someone to provide it to you. Health care is a service that is provided by the professionals who choose to make a living at it. They have the right to quit at anytime. The UN can get fucked.




The current system is fucked, ladies and gents, no arguing that. But to imply that taxing the American people to implement socialized medicine is the solution is way out there. Plus the hypocrisy of claiming that now is a good time when we all know the US is bordering on bankruptcy. Health care reform of some kind is a necessity. Giving the government complete control over it is not the solution.
[i]

[/i]
[b][i]"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there would be a shortage of sand" [/i]-Milton Friedman[/b]
[/quote]

Well I'm not sure how to respond to you except to point out that you're own questions would be answered if you read the thread.

If that doesn't work and you're from the South just read it out loud and go very slowly.

So if you think that the current system is messed up what is your solution? Just saying "reform of some kind" only solves problems in Republican Magical Fantasy Land.

If we had listened to Republicans in the past the country would still be segregated, interracial marriage would be illegal, old people and the disabled would be left to scrounge and starve on the streets without Medicare and Social Security, workers would still be chained to the machines in our factories, women would not be able to vote, and minorities would still be second class citizens.

According to Republicans allowing women to vote would turn us into Communists (1920's)

Then Social Security would turn us into Communists (1930's).

Then Civil Rights, interracial marriage, and desegregation would turn us into Communists (1950's).

Then Medicare would turn us into Communists (1960's).

Then cleaner energy would turn us into Communists (1970's).

Now health care reform will turn us into Communists.

I think it's pretty clear that you don't know what you're talking about.

And if you really believe that using public services constitutes Socialism, pledge to all of us that you will never accept any such service in the future. You won't use our publicly subsidized streets, water, sewage, communications, or other utilities. You won't call our police or fire departments, you won't work for the government or military, you won't eat any product produced by a company receiving subsidies, you won't collect unemployment, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, or VA benefits. You won't send your children to public schools, or accept the protection of our military.

Walk your Talk. That will be the day.