• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

U.S. Politics

Page 403 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 20, 2009
1,172
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Well, McCain is still bumping around.

But I understand your point all too well.
i sometimes wonder if he would have been better, but the thought of his ex-running mate anywhere near the white house sends shivers down my spine. i would sooner have a third of fourth bush term than that.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
gregod said:
i sometimes wonder if he would have been better, but the thought of his ex-running mate anywhere near the white house sends shivers down my spine. i would sooner have a third of fourth bush term than that.
Hard to know. McCain is fairly moderate. Economically we would be in better shape as Obamacare would have never seen the light of day.

Foreign policy would not have been much different, IMO.

President Palin would be a little un-nerving.

But McCain was never going to beat Obama.
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,172
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Hard to know. McCain is fairly moderate. Economically we would be in better shape as Obamacare would have never seen the light of day.

Foreign policy would not have been much different, IMO.

President Palin would be a little un-nerving.

But McCain was never going to beat Obama.
heritagecare has not contributed one iota to the economic problems of the US.

other than that, i agree.
 
May 27, 2012
5,293
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
There is the problem.

I get bashed here routinely for commenting on the wisdom of our founders. But they understood human nature. No doubt about that.
But you connect things like universal health insurance to the government spying on it's own citizens without warrants...without the recognition that the basis for both programs are completely different. and the one that is a real danger was championed by your politicians.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
gregod said:
heritagecare has not contributed one iota to the economic problems of the US.

other than that, i agree.
Imo, our GDP growth would have been more robust much sooner without ACA. Unemployment would be much lower. U-6 would not still be in the 14% range.

Hard to argue ACA has had no negative effect but its impossible to know what our current situation would have been in its absence.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
But you connect things like universal health insurance to the government spying on it's own citizens without warrants...without the recognition that the basis for both programs are completely different. and the one that is a real danger was championed by your politicians.

Fast forward a few decades from now. With IRS enforcement of the ACA penalty and review of everyone's plan... are you really going to say there is no possibility of that information not appearing in opposition research for friendly administrations and/or party?

I realize it sounds tinfoil hat-ish but given recent events I don't think that would even be a surprise if it occurred.

If given the power, it will be abused particularly in the Exec branch. It seems the bigger the beaurocracy the bigger the problem.
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,172
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Imo, our GDP growth would have been more robust much sooner without ACA. Unemployment would be much lower. U-6 would not still be in the 14% range.

Hard to argue ACA has had no negative effect but its impossible to know what our current situation would have been in its absence.
this is complete rubbish. no, it is not impossible to know. there are plenty of examples with other economies, including massachusetts which has weathered the economic troubles better than most states. the economy needs more money, not less. so far, heritagecare has been mostly revenue neutral to slightly positive.

there is no demand, therefore unemployment is weak.
 
Amsterhammer said:
I sincerely hope that you're not posting this two year old story in order to suggest that our Scotty is a covert ops sockpuppet?



Totally agree, Rhub. I have never understood this 'the great and noble Founding Fathers knew absolutely everything best' line of thinking. Just about the most charitable description that I can come up with for such views is, 'anachronistic'.

The only rational way forward apart from some sort of horrendously bloody revolution, would probably be a Constitutional Convention, charged with revising, rewriting, updating, or otherwise altering the existing document, in order to reflect the realities of a multicultural, multilingual, 21st century industrial society. No one who ever held elected office would be allowed to take part in this endeavor.

Thanks for that brilliant selection of clips by a brilliant man, who really knew his sh!t!:cool:
Verily I tell you the guy was in class all by himself. ;)
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,924
0
0
I recommend that you spend 8 minutes listening to some common sense, Scott, though I expect you'll probably dismiss Reich out of hand. I added the word in bold to the quote.

Top Six GOP Economic Lies:

1. Tax cuts for the rich and corporations trickle down to the rest of us
2. If you shrink government you create jobs
3. High taxes on the rich hurts the economy
4. Debt is to be avoided and it is mostly caused by Medicare (Obamacare)
5. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme
6. We need to tax the poor
http://atlasleft.org/watch-robert-reich-debunk-the-6-biggest-gop-lies-about-the-economy-video/
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,172
0
0
Amsterhammer said:
I recommend that you spend 8 minutes listening to some common sense, Scott, though I expect you'll probably dismiss Reich out of hand. I added the word in bold to the quote.

Top Six GOP Economic Lies:

1. Tax cuts for the rich and corporations trickle down to the rest of us
2. If you shrink government you create jobs
3. High taxes on the rich hurts the economy
4. Debt is to be avoided and it is mostly caused by Medicare (heritagecare)
5. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme
6. We need to tax the poor


http://atlasleft.org/watch-robert-reich-debunk-the-6-biggest-gop-lies-about-the-economy-video/
fixed that for you
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
gregod said:
this is complete rubbish. no, it is not impossible to know. there are plenty of examples with other economies, including massachusetts which has weathered the economic troubles better than most states. the economy needs more money, not less. so far, heritagecare has been mostly revenue neutral to slightly positive.

there is no demand, therefore unemployment is weak.
Rubbish is taking a tiny State and extrapolating its' results countrywide. Romney care was enacted in 2006. it's effects were already know by the time of the economic melt-down. Big difference.

ACA has neutered job growth in the US. We have had this discussion on this thread multiple times. Not too interested in having it again.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
gregod said:
fixed that for you
Giving Heritage the power to propose and pass legislation now are we?

Interesting how fast you guys are running away from BO's masterpiece.

Top Six GOP Economic Lies:

1. Tax cuts for the rich and corporations trickle down to the rest of us
2. If you shrink government you create jobs
3. High taxes on the rich hurts the economy
4. Debt is to be avoided and it is mostly caused by Medicare (heritagecare)
5. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme
6. We need to tax the poor

#1, #3 and #4 crack me up. If debt isn't a problem then we don't need taxation at all, do we? Why worry about revenue if debt isn't a problem?

OH WAIT!!! You mean debt CAN be a problem? At what levels would Reich become alarmed? Krugman?

#2 Shrinking the size of government worked pretty well for a President that Reich worked for. SHOCKING that. Remember what happened during Clinton's term.... he SHRANK spending as a percentage of GDP. Ho-ly sh!t.

#5 Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, but going back to #4, it can be adjusted by an unlimited ability to print money.

#6 We already tax the poor. Cigarette taxes, gas taxes, energy taxes. Regressive as hell.
 
May 27, 2012
5,293
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Rubbish is taking a tiny State and extrapolating its' results countrywide. Romney care was enacted in 2006. it's effects were already know by the time of the economic melt-down. Big difference.

ACA has neutered job growth in the US. We have had this discussion on this thread multiple times. Not too interested in having it again.
There is absolutely no empirical evidence for that statement. Just opinion. I would also submit that placing the blame solely on something like that is political football and not reality and you are well smart enough to know that.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
There is absolutely no empirical evidence for that statement. Just opinion. I would also submit that placing the blame solely on something like that is political football and not reality and you are well smart enough to know that.
There is absolutely no empirical evidence for that statement. Just opinion.
True. I've never stated otherwise. Anecdotally, in speaking with small business men and women in various parts of the country there's little doubt as to the negative effect.

I would also submit that placing the blame solely on something like that is political football and not reality and you are well smart enough to know that
I've never placed the slow recovery solely on ACA. My argument is this was a shock to job creators at a time when they couldn't deal with it. Thousands of pages of regulatory language regarding the implementation of Obamacare. Hell, even today the Sebellius's of the world can't explain, in plain English, what's going to happen and how it works or what the net effect will be.

And you are well aware of how much business loves surprises.

So, yeah, Obamacare has fundamentally hurt our recovery as much or more than any other single self-inflicted wound has.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
Scott SoCal said:
Imo, our GDP growth would have been more robust much sooner without ACA. Unemployment would be much lower. U-6 would not still be in the 14% range.

Hard to argue ACA has had no negative effect but its impossible to know what our current situation would have been in its absence.
Not that I have had any time to research the interwebs myself but have you or has anyone come across any material on what the effect or non-effect of affordable health care act has had on various issues including the economic recovery?

How about all the people with no means for health care???? any hope for them really? This goes into effect in 2014 correct. Will help anyone that we know? A large part of my relatives live below the poverty line established by the USgov. I'm curious if it provides any help.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
Amsterhammer said:
I recommend that you spend 8 minutes listening to some common sense, Scott, though I expect you'll probably dismiss Reich out of hand. I added the word in bold to the quote.



http://atlasleft.org/watch-robert-reich-debunk-the-6-biggest-gop-lies-about-the-economy-video/

What is considered rich these days? Does the government have a number? They have a national poverty number correct? What is the majic annual salary that gets the label of rich?
How about here at the CN forums what is everyone’s notion or rich?
Household annual income of 450,000.00 higher or lower?
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
Not that I have had any time to research the interwebs myself but have you or has anyone come across any material on what the effect or non-effect of affordable health care act has had on various issues including the economic recovery?

How about all the people with no means for health care???? any hope for them really? This goes into effect in 2014 correct. Will help anyone that we know? A large part of my relatives live below the poverty line established by the USgov. I'm curious if it provides any help.
There are federal subsidies on the exchanges up to 400% of the poverty level... so, yeah, it's going to make health insurance more affordable for lower end wage earners.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
What is considered rich these days? Does the government have a number? They have a national poverty number correct? What is the majic annual salary that gets the label of rich?
How about here at the CN forums what is everyone’s notion or rich?
Household annual income of 450,000.00 higher or lower?
That's really the question of the century. I don't know how many times I've asked for a definition of "rich."
 
May 27, 2012
5,293
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
Not that I have had any time to research the interwebs myself but have you or has anyone come across any material on what the effect or non-effect of affordable health care act has had on various issues including the economic recovery?

How about all the people with no means for health care???? any hope for them really? This goes into effect in 2014 correct. Will help anyone that we know? A large part of my relatives live below the poverty line established by the USgov. I'm curious if it provides any help.
Yes, it will help me. I have a couple of health issues and cannot get an insurance company to write me a quote for any amount of money.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,119
0
0
Interesting:

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators can sue drug companies for antitrust violations when brand-name drug makers pay generic competitors to keep cheaper, rival copies of a drug off the market, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday.

In a decision that shifts the balance of power in the drug business, manufacturers will now have to defend the agreements against charges that they violate anticompetition laws, perhaps exposing the companies to a greater likelihood of aggressive competition from generic drugs and to lawsuits from drug retailers and wholesalers, insurers and others. Consumers also could benefit from sharply lower drug costs.

The court did not address whether the agreements, called pay-for-delay or reverse payments, were presumptively unlawful. But it laid out a number of possibilities under which the contracts could be attacked by antitrust officials.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
That's really the question of the century. I don't know how many times I've asked for a definition of "rich."
If you make more money than me, you are rich. If you make less, you are lazy.
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,172
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Yes, it will help me. I have a couple of health issues and cannot get an insurance company to write me a quote for any amount of money.
same boat here. i am perfectly healthy, but my family history precludes me from insurance at any price in the US. so far, in japan, singapore, hong kong and france, i have never had a problem getting top-quality, inexpensive health care. only the US seems to think it is impossible.

also, two friends of mine, one a dentist and one a doctor, both do not have health insurance for the same family reason that i have. both are healthy and at this stage in their lives extremely unlikely to become affected by their genetics. fortunately, they are wealthy enough to cover almost anything out-of-pocket.

what is insurance? it is a risk pool. if insurance companies are allowed to eliminate all of the risk, then you are just handing a company money for nothing. nice work if you can get it.
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,172
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Giving Heritage the power to propose and pass legislation now are we?

...
i was just pointing out that the conservative heritage foundation wrote the conservative plan that became the "liberal" obama care. (how one's political affiliation affects whether an idea is liberal or conservative remains a mystery.)

incidently, the heritage foundation came up with this in response to clinton's proposal for health care reform and in my opinion they largely cribbed it from a harvard medical economics professor's ideas from november, 1992. if you have an old copy of scientific american laying around, i think you would find it fascinating reading.

i tried my best google-foo but couldn't come up with a reprint. just to get an idea about the author, here is a fascinating and prescient piece he wrote in the new england journal of medicine (conservative, by the way) in 1982.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS