Obama care

[DeistPaladin]

Ha Ha! Excellent!...and I'll organize a revolt of the masses when you become president!

That's cheating! No dying in some Waco-style compound just to save face. You have to live through the eight years so when it's all over and it turns out you were wrong, you have to admit it.

Trust me. I've been there as a former conservative Republican. It's not so hard to do.

---

Absolutely =D. And I'm guessing you know that I would opt for the first option (and you the second), this would make for an excellent debate topic. The situation you currently find yourself in is one neither of us would opt for.

Actually, I would say "it depends".

Remember the whole reason the government got involved with the banks at all is because of the crash in 1929. Government insurance for bank deposits has helped create some peace of mind and prevent panic. Panic is, after all, something to avoid at almost any cost if you hope for a healthy economy.

I'm actually sympathetic to libertarian ideals when it comes to business. I just see a need for the government regulators to get involved if foolhardy and shortsighted decisions might cause the whole thing to come crashing down. How would you suggest we avoid runs on the banks if there is no government insurance?

what then are your thoughts on public sector unions? Is there still a balance as with in the private sector, do you think?

Above all, it's important to remember that the whole frackus over public sector unions is really a cover for a larger political strategy. If I may be so bold, it's the "endgame" strategy for corporate interests.

With the floodgates of "Citizens United" opened wide, elections is now more than ever about fundraising. To a great (and shameful) extent, it always was in America but now far more so. Republicans can count on major corporations and wealthy donors. The only organized source of funding for the Democrats is unions. Once those are broken, Republicans have unlimited funding from corporations while Democrats get to hold bake sales.

My personal feeling is we should ban all forms of political advertisement completely. Replace the Madison Ave soundbites and scary music with spooky voiceovers with substantive weekly debates.
We need to get the funding out of American politics.

The tax burden and the tax compliance burden (you need to pay to be able to navigate the thousands of pages of tax rules) are further kicking businesses while they are down imo. With europe being a basket case I would say that you can't afford to have those nonsense regulations.

As one who runs a business myself, I can tell you what's killing me is not taxes or regulations but the lack of demand (from the death of the Middle Class) and competition from China. What distinguishes a healthy 1st world capitalist economy from a third world one is a healthy Middle Class (the latter are stratified into a small percentage of blue bloods and the rest as peasantry). We need to spend less time worrying about Wall Street and more about Main Street or else we'll continue to slide.

How would you go about the massive stimulus? Or, wanna start a economy based new thread?

America's infrastructure is crumbling. The Obama package is helping somewhat but it wasn't aggressive enough. In theory, it should be like giving a heart attack victim a shock from a defibrillator. Putting even temporary construction jobs in place, creating a stronger infrastructure that will benefit the economy anyway, will place more money into the hands of the working class and create demand that will be good for business.

Tax cuts once sounded good to me in the 80s but they've been shown to have little or no economic impact. In retrospect, it's not hard to understand why. The "job creators" don't just hire people because they have extra money. They do so because they see opportunity to make even more money. With the lack of demand, the result of a dying Middle Class, job creators will simply pocket the extra money (which is precisely what happened). The only result of the W Bush tax cuts was to increase the economic divide in America between the haves and have nots.

What did you learn creed?

Creed? I'm not sure I understand your question.

Back to healthcare: How then would you guys go about dealing with those who are unhealthy due to their own actions and those who were injured when engaging in reckless activities (the obese, the smokers, the daredevils, and the guys who exercise their right not to wear a seatbelt and end up flying through a windscreen), under socialised medicine?

Same way we deal with them now under Medicare.

My solution to America's health care costs is simply "Medicare for all". It would be the easiest solution to implement since the rules and infrastructure are already in place. All that is needed is to expand it to all age groups.

This would be a more efficient solution, cost wise, because we'd eliminate an unnecessary middleman, namely insurance companies. Medicare has its problems too, but for-profit insurance is far worse.

One of the things I learned in Organizational Behavior class, in fact rule #1, is that you get what you reward. Rewarding A and hoping for B is folly. This is the problem with our current health care scheme. Insurance companies have a vested interest to NOT provide care unless they are forced to. Hence the fox running the chicken coup analogy.

I do believe that 9 times out of 10, for profit business is a more efficient and effective way to care for consumer demand. Health care is the 1 in 10 where the government provides a better option.