The Radicalization of America

I will be the first to admit that today's Republicans have a lot to answer for. especially in the last eight years. As I look forward, I see very little chance for them to be a political force for at least the next two decades. Again, I say that both partys are culpable.

The sanction of federal ownership in banks and the soon to be enacted Federal takover of health insruance serves to make my point. This may very well be the way of the future, but I am still going to speak out against it in my own limited way.

I'm just not convince3d that the State has our best interests in mind. It's one thing for our ogvernment to REGYLATe. It's anotehr thing for it to be such a major force in the economy that it becomes the final arbiter of all future financial happenings. It's true that here are some things that our governments need to do for the sake of the public trust. As you say, too much privatizaiton is a bad thing. Too much plublic ownership is a bad thing, too.

I remain convinced that there is a middle ground. Taht's why conversations like this are necessary. The radiclas who rise to prominence in this next decade aren't going to be looking for any compromises. It would be ironic in the extreme if President Obama had to deal with a modern version of the Weather underground. It's not someting I hope to see, but I can understand how it might come to be.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

I will be the first to admit that today's Republicans have a lot to answer for. especially in the last eight years. Again, I say that both party’s are culpable. The sanction of federal ownership in banks and the soon to be enacted Federal takeover of health insurance serves to make my point.

You Mr J/O have actually led the charge to review the practices of both parties but especially the party you feel more comfortable in. You have not been slack in condemning practices that are inconsistent in preserving worthwhile American values. You take second to no one in willingness to be open and to self-examine.

Your second point, health care. A FREE FOR ALL MESS. We cannot continue on our present course. More than 1,500 insurance companies, each with multiple policy forms, and 50 states to regulate - an oxymoron today - their practices in even adhering to their own policy commitments. Which is to ignore altogether their super slick, super professional and super costly but false (or intentionally misleading) advertising.

In America only FOUR words seem to count: Laissez-faire for sellers and caveat emptor for buyers.

SINGLE PAYER. We cannot afford any other system. That is the system used around the world. We are really much closer to that than most people want to admit. Medicare pays about 18% of the total bill. Medicaid - paid by general taxes - another 6%. Add to that the 1.5 million Armed Forces, the 5-6 million retired civil servants and their families. About 3-4%. We also fund the 3-6 million veterans who really need service connected health care services. 1-2%. Total now paid by the Federal government: 28-30%!

It's one thing for our government to REGULATE. It's another thing for it to be such a major force in the economy that it becomes the final arbiter of all future financial happenings. It's true that here are some things that our governments need to do for the sake of the public trust.

I think the new (next) regulatory paradigm will look something like we have today. It will more closely involve the private industries that we deem need to be regulated in the public interest. Improved hardware and new software can get a lot more oversight for a few more bucks! The public health and safety must come first. Then the public convenience can come next. The public preferences may come last. I do not foresee a legislative rampage some seem to dread.

The radicals who rise to prominence in this next decade aren't going to be looking for any compromises. It would be ironic in the extreme if President Obama had to deal with a modern version of the Weather underground. It's not something I hope to see, but I can understand how it might come to be.

I do not hear those radicals speaking today. A President Obama - as opposed to a McCain-Palin presidency - will have a honeymoon with the public as well as the Democratic Congress. Obama will have - like FDR ahead of him had - about 100 days to do it his way. For January 20, Obama must do a repeat of his magnificent February speech in Philadelphia where he laid Rev. Wright to rest. He can do it. Watch his half-hour coming up.

The Inauguration will give him until about Memorial Day to get on the map! I think he can do it. I don’t see any McCain-Palin team even getting close. Look here, the Dems are NOT going to let McCain-Palin have TWO more Supreme Court seats at any price. If we are to have a fight, then we must fight where it counts.

[edit on 10/20/2008 by donwhite]

When it comes to health care, I says Regulate. Do not Operate. Federal authorities have many regulatory options and tools that they simply are NOT using. I know from first hand expeirence as a Federal civil servant that the agencies are under-staffed to fulfill that function. It's a point you yourself have made many times.

As for the radicals, they are out here. I've had that label applied to me by posters on several different web sites. "Militancy" as you and I know the term hasn't been reached just yet. For the moment, the most ardent of agitators isn't able to get enough traciton to to REDCRUIT.

I don't expect to see that until late 2010. The recession will have to get so deep that the average demoralized voter can't see a way out of it. you and I are old enough to rememberthe 1970's. People who haven't expeirenced that don't knowwhat we are talking about. Things will have to get just that bad before the recruiters can swell the ranks of their organiations.

If the Republicans learn their lesson fast enough, they may be able to provide enough opposition to health insurance nationalization.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

When it comes to health care, I says Regulate. Do not Operate. Federal authorities have many regulatory options and tools that they simply are NOT using. I know from first hand experience as a Federal civil servant that the agencies are under-staffed to fulfill that function. It's a point you yourself have made many times. If the Republicans learn their lesson fast enough, they may be able to provide enough opposition to health insurance nationalization.

I don’t see us continuing the no longer affordable quagmire we are now in. Worldwide we’re tops in paying at 18% of GDP and rising but we rank 37th on outcomes. That's not smart.

I agree any serious health care reform will not be easy. There are (unregulated) tens of billions at stake. 45,000 paid lobbyists on Capital Hill. I am myself beginning to have serious reservations about the prospects for a single payer plan.

The AMA is now advertising heavily down here in Florida - full of old rich people. Their plan basically calls for dis-allowing the current corporate tax deduction for health care - worth about $122 billion according to the AMA plan - and taking that money to pay the private carrier premiums for the 43 million (or whatever number it is) of uninsured people.

The AMA plan offers nothing we don’t already have - an expensive uncoordinated overlapping inconsistent mess! Which sounds a lot like the McCain-Palin Plan.

With the right software, I do not see why 5,000 enforcement officers could not give sufficient oversight to the entire medical establishment. I would add 2,000-3,000 high tech professionals to watch over the pharmaceuticals and 1,000 lawyers to bring cases where fraud is found. I’d anticipate that number could be reduced as compliance becomes natural. Or normal.

On the lawyer subject, I’d like to see a FAST TRACK DISPUTE RESOLUTION plan where the comparing party e-mails his or her complaint, the basis he or she has for the complaint, and the Adjudicator replying by the next day. In or out. Up of down. Paid or not paid. And if negative, the reason why.

The final fight will come down to how to set prices or payment for services rendered. We must try to slow of stop the current 6-8% annual cost increases over the past 10-15 years we have tolerated as either irrelevant or uncontrollable by outside forces.

In regards to health care: Without a doubt something must be done for the average working American trying to get by on two part time slightly over minimum wage jobs.

I cannot fathom turning the issue over completely to the government, but we simply cannot allow our current ideas of capitalism run wild either.

We need to get back to non-profit hospitals and institutions. We need to limit lobbying, or even eliminate lobbying by the drug companies. We need torte reform now! When we get back to health care being just that then we can truly progress. No one minds anyone making money it is the greed that follows. Insurance now dictates not only what you can and can't have done but also who can do it for you. They tell the Dr.s what to charge and what to do. Lawyers have caused the Dr.s to be paranoid over a possible mis-diagnosis. For profit hospitals have cut back on qualified nursing and caregivers.

Without a doubt something needs to be done but I for one am not ready to give all to the government and say " here fix this".

To me the dems want government control for everything and the rebs want unrestricted free commerce. There must be a compromise.

To me the republican ticket is just more of the same, but the democratic party line does not force enough incentive to the common man to succeed on his own. Most people just seem to want a chance to succed on there own without the handouts of the dems or the big business greed of the reps.

I feel we will see this country fall apart before the career politicians see past their next term in office. We must make politics a non-choice for those looking for an easy career. All business dealings and profits must be placed aside and only the future of their constituents the main concern. Politics must not be a road to affluence. They should be justly compensated not overcompensated. I feel that any political enumeration must go through an oversight commitee of the people.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

reply to post by reluctantpawn

I cannot fathom turning the issue over completely to the government, but we simply cannot allow our current ideas of capitalism run wild either.

I think we are talking about PAYING and not about the DELIVERY of health care services.

We need to get back to non-profit hospitals and institutions. We need to limit lobbying, or even eliminate lobbying by the drug companies. We need total reform now! When we get back to health care being just that then we can truly progress. No one minds anyone making money . .

Non-profits began a long time ago, and far away. In my home town for example, we had 3 Catholic hospitals, each had been started by an order of nuns. We had a Jewish hospital where I was born. For BAD reasons Jews were not welcome in other hospitals. We had a Baptist Hospital, a Methodist Hospital and an Episcopalian Hospital. For the POOR whites we had a city financed General Hospital. For our black citizens we had a hospital mis-named Red Cross Hospital. A place to go to die. It was tough being black then.

With 1965's Medicare and the long and sharp decline in the religious orders, a private company bought the largest hospital in the state which was the St. Joseph’s Hospital in Louisville in which my sister was born. When it closed in the late 60s, it had one nun. The same was true of St. Anthony’s and St. Elizabeth. One nun each. Now all those hospitals are part of the Jewish Hospital System. Believe it or not.

Although I would like to see non-profits run all the hospitals, it is very unlikely. We could do things that encourage that however if we make it a long-term goal.

Insurance now dictates not only what you can and can't have done but also who can do it for you. They tell the D.s. what to charge and what to do. For profit hospitals have cut back on qualified nursing and care givers.

So why do you dread to see the government involved? It can’t get worse, but maybe it can become more affordable?

Lawyers have caused the D.s. to be paranoid over a possible mis-diagnosis.

The state medical societies or regulating bodies NEVER did a good job of protecting the consumer from mistakes or malpractice. That situation created a niche for lawyers to exploit. Don’t you realize it is the ATLA that protects your health MORE so than any state regulatory agency or the Federal government? Don’t shoot yourself in the foot.

Don,

Why should I trust the government with more of my money? The have robbed social security blind. This was to be set up as a trust for the people, instead it was robbed by congress to cover pork legislation.

It has caused the failure of our financial system. First by the Federal Reserve Act, that gave power to mint money from nothing and loan it back to the government, causing trillion dollar debt.

Second by forcing the mortgage lenders to loan money to unqualified buyers through affirmitive lending policies. While all should be seen as equal under the law if you don't qualify, you don't qualify.

I don't think that the founding fathers ever intended to create the monster that our government has become. Yes it takes lots of people to run a country, but not nearly as many as we have. If you cut out a lot of the programs that may be worthwhile, but not necessary for the continuity of governance, we could save billions.

What we need is strong leadership from the front. A good education base, with good discipline and work ethics taught. Regulation of business not ownership as proposed for the banks. And of course my favorite issue torte reform.

The Native Americans learned a long time ago to not trust the government. I would have thought the African Americans would have learned the same lesson by now. The people simply cannot allow the government to run their lives.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

edit for content



[edit on 21-10-2008 by reluctantpawn]

It comes down to the people being responsible and to always watch our leaders closely and to call them out when they've done wrong. Our government has had free rein of it's power, and the people just sit back and wonder what's on television tonight or just to busy to pay attention. Honestly "I'm so broke that I can't pay attention." Just a joke there but I find myself so busy with working days and parenting kids while my wife works nights that it's hard sometimes to care about politics. I think it's time to find time and I'm doing that from now on. This election has woken alot of people up and have them wondering about our government and the politicians. I just hope they don't fall back asleep. We need to say more, call more to our representatives and email D.C. as much as possible. Honestly we haven't done anything about what's happening now. We are letting our government try to fix our economy when they messed it up. We are the economy and the only sound part of it. Without us the economy would be dead. People need to be more radical in a good way and stand up to these politicians and demand quality government that has less to do with the private sector and more to do with our rights and our national security. Keep waking up people and listen, observe and voice your opinions to make changes when needed. This raising taxes is BS and should be thrown in their face with the Fair tax H.R.25, but I know. People are to busy and government goes on and keeps growing.

reply to post by reluctantpawn

Why should I trust the government with more of my money? The have robbed social security blind. This was to be set up as a trust for the people, instead it was robbed by congress to cover pork legislation.

1) Trust it because it is YOUR government. It protects you. It serves you. It has never let you down. 2) No one has robbed social security blind or sighted. When the Trust Fund money is spent, an IOU is put back and it pays interest. 3) Pork legislation is the only way 435 independently elected representatives and 100 senators can do things for you/their district or state.

Earmarks do need to be “regularized” and should always be 100% transparent, but as long as we have elected representatives and senators there will be earmarks. Think of the alternative. Your congressperson would have to go to the president to have your item included in HIS budget. Your congressperson would “work” more for the president than he or she works for you!

It has caused the failure of our financial system. First by the Federal Reserve Act, that gave power to mint money from nothing and loan it back to the government, causing trillion dollar debt.

The Government did not cause the current financial crisis. The fact is the Dems created the financial regulatory system beginning in 1933 under the New Deal. Republicans HATE the New Deal. Beginning with Ronald Reagan in 1981, the regulatory system that got us from 1933 to 1981 was dismantled.

In all that time - 1933 to 1981 - NOT ONE PENNY was ever lost on an owner occupied insured home mortgage. Under Pres. Reagan, the first Neo Con president and the 2 Bushes after him plus the Newt Gingrich Congress for six of Clinton’s 8 years, the Republicans have had it their way. All the way!

Now we as taxpayers are going to have to pay to put it back like it was before the Great Communicator said “Government is the problem not the solution. Let’s get government OFF your back!” Do you remember that? Google it if you don’t.

The Federal Reserve is the perfect match between government and private enterprise. By the end of the Civil War - 1865 - there were over 300 banks around the country printing money. One bank panic - when you lose your deposits - followed after another bank panic. Note: Before FDIC was created in 1933, when the bank lost, you lost! The country had to have a CENTRAL BANKING SYSTEM. Created by necessity in 1913, the Fed has served us very well since then. If we did not have the Fed, we’d have to create a Fed today.

The “perfect match” is this: private banks “own” the Fed system, but the Board of Governors and its Chairman are appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. We run it, they own it.

There are 2 kinds of Federal debt. The United States incurs debt when we borrow from the Trust Funds - called PRIVATE debt. The other form of debt - called PUBLIC debt - is created or incurred when we borrow by selling Treasury bonds, bills and notes to make up the shortfall in revenue compared to our spending. Because the US has a credit rating next best to GOD you and I have never lived in a time when we could not borrow all we wanted or needed.

I fear we may be getting close to THAT time right now BECAUSE under the Republicans NO ONE WANTS TO PAY TAXES. Republicans claim every problem the country faces can be solved by CUTTING TAXES. I suppose if we cut out taxes all together we'd have the PERFECT country? How dumb can we be? It costs money to run a country. Sweet Jesus!

Second by forcing the mortgage lenders to loan money to unqualified buyers through affirmative lending policies. While all should be seen as equal under the law if you don't qualify, you don't qualify.

No one was FORCED to take out a mortgage. The trouble is what I alluded to above. But by REMOVING REGULATIONS that had prevented selling houses to people who could not afford to pay for it, we created the problem.

For longer than 2 generations people all over the world grew up knowing that was true. Who would not want to buy a “bundle” that included 100s and maybe 1000s of American home mortgages? But 99% of them did not know Reagan and the 2 Bushes had wrecked the system. Now they know. And we get to make good on it. Something is wrong here?

Some wiseacres - your Michael Milken types - realized that with a PERFECT payoff record from 1933 to 1981, Americans and investors around the world regarded the owner occupied insured home mortgage as good as US Treasury paper. And it was. Before 1981.

Aside: Believe me all that money that is now “LOST” went somewhere, It did not go to the Moon. Some smart cookies have OUR trillions of dollars. The crooks outsmarted us. I hope the FBI tracks down that money they stole from us.

If you cut out a lot of the programs that may be worthwhile, but not necessary for the continuity of governance, we could save billions.

If you will look on the back of the 1040 Instruction Book, you will see a pie chart showing where the money comes from and where it goes.

Entitlements get the largest block of the money. About half. Social Security and Medicare are the two largest in the Entitlement category. In both cases, the SS and Medicare Trust Funds are still in the BLACK. I mean the Government still takes in MORE than it pays out. And NONE of the national debt is attributable to social security or Medicare. The debt is mostly due to the WAR budget.

It is in the Discretionary part of the budget where debt is incurred. The DoD - Department of Defense - has the largest amount. Around $700 b. this year. The Debt Service or interest is No. 2, at around $350 b.

All the rest of government runs about $200 b. Contrary to popular notions about cutting programs NOT necessary for the continuance of government, all those other departments together do not amount of a “Hill of Beans” as my rural background father used to say about small things.

Homeland Security. Health. Education. Agriculture. National Parks. Science. Housing. NASA. Highways. Airports. Prisons. Bureaucrats. And Etc. If all were gone we would still add 90% to our debt. The only place we can SAVE large sums is in the Defense budget but Americans LOVE war too much to cut that.

What we need is strong leadership from the front. And of course my favorite issue is tort reform.

In 1993 Bill Clinton and 100% of the Dems in Congress put into effect his tax rates which ended by 1999 with a balanced budget and a surplus. Every GOP in Congress voted NO to the 1993 tax bill. The surplus was promptly given away by Bush43 in 2001 and we have incurred large DEBT every year since.

There is no possibility that McCain if elected would propose a TAX INCREASE. Obama cannot say that out loud because American voters will not VOTE YES on more taxes. We are indeed a funny people. We want everything but we do not want to pay anything.

On TORT reform, the Republicans have worked hard to KILL tort law. They work for industry in the product liability field, for doctors and hospitals in the medical malpractice field, and if the Republicans had their way there would be NO class action suits that got money for lung cancer and asbestos poisoning for 2 examples. TORT Reform is GOP CODE WORDS meaning to KILL tort law.

Q. Who do you think brought on product RECALLS? A. The ATLA.

The Native Americans learned a long time ago to not trust the government. I would have thought the African Americans would have learned the same lesson by now. The people simply cannot allow the government to run their lives.

You have been hoodwinked 100%!

You should know by now the GOP HATE the poor and LOVE the R&Fs. Rich and famous.

[edit on 10/21/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


Don we will have to agree to disagree. My government spends money on a war that was not needed. My social retirement is dependent on IOU's. We all know what we can do with that paper. I simple cannot agree that my government is doing much in my best interest.

I can only imagine where my retirement fund might be if I was allowed to keep it and invest widely in various diversified accounts. They ran my recent ancestors off of their land and used it for oil. What have they really done for the black or red man?

School scores are plummeting healthcare is abysmal. And all you can do is blame the republicans? Don, you are much more intelligent than that. This situation has been brought about by both parties. No one in any of the recent administration has done much to improve our lot in life. It will not be long before we see make work type programs for the unemployed, and without a doubt it will be a democratic leadership that will give it to us.

I for one don't want entitlements, I just want an opportunity to live free and make my own place in life without democratic intrusion and big brother, or republican capitalistic greed. Is that too much to ask for? I personally think that is exactly what the government doesn't want.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

reply to post by reluctantpawn

My government spends money on a war that was not needed. My social retirement is dependent on IOU's. I simple cannot agree that my government is doing much in my best interest. They ran my recent ancestors off of their land and used it for oil. What have they really done for the black or red man?

I have posted that out of 300 treaties with Native Americans, the Government has a perfect record. Every treaty has been broken. But it is not the institution 9f government that failed - - it was the people in the government. Government good, governance bad.

School scores are plummeting health care is abysmal. And all you can do is blame the Republicans? Don, you are much more intelligent than that. This situation has been brought about by both parties.

If you don’t know who are your friends, you are operating under a severe handicap. Just one Q. After 10 years, which political party recently raised the minimum wage?

It will not be long before we see make work type programs for the unemployed, and without a doubt it will be a Democratic leadership that will give it to us.

Correct.

I for one don't want entitlements, I just want an opportunity to live free and make my own place in life without Democratic intrusion and big brother, or Republican capitalistic greed. Is that too much to ask for?

Yes, unfortunately. That is an unrealistic wish in the United States of the 21st century. Cell phones. Eye in the sky satellites. G.P.S. Internet. Etc. It is possible to escape this daily hum-drum only if a person chooses to live the life style of a Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber identified (reluctantly) by his brother and arrested in 1996 at a remote cabin outside Lincoln, Montana. Lincoln is 75 miles east of Missoula, in the Bob Marshall National Wilderness.

As for entitlements, I assume one could refuse to accept it. Or return the money to the US Treasury. After contributing all your working life to Social Security and Medicare it seems a shame to refuse it. As for me, I prefer an intruding Big Brother to a greedy capitalist. But that’s me.

Originally posted by donwhite
I prefer an intruding Big Brother to a greedy capitalist. But that’s me.

Economies can be regulated. Intrusive governments don't take too kindly to regulation, or reform.

Please be advised that ATS is going to close the CM forums. I'm posting this message so that the site owner's decision doesn't take you by surprise.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Please be advised that ATS is going to close the CM forums. I'm posting this message so that the site owner's decision doesn't take you by surprise.

I'm sorry to hear this J/O. I think you handled your part well. I'm sorry I'n mot much into it, but nevertheless I did read a lot and enjoyed the single place to go concept.

Maybe later?

reply to post by donwhite


Big news today.
Part time Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is answering questions from the Alaska Personnel Board.

Wow you say, I knew she could talk without a tele-prompter! And maybe say more than "Oh Golly Gee!"

Nyet! REPUBLICAN TRICK. The Palin people would not let her fly to Alaska to answer questions under oath. INSTEAD the Alaska Board had to FLY to St. Louis, MO where she is answering Q. with her lawyer present. Yup, her lawyer.

Now, if she does lie, WHAT STATE HAS JURISDICTION? It is not against Alaska law to LIE in Missouri. And Missouri would not waste its time to see if she lied or did not lie about matters in ALASKA. Good publicity stunt with minimal risk. Republican style.

PS. I see where the former conscience driven "come clean" WH Spokesman Scott McClellan has endorsed Barack Obama!


BREAKING N E W S! John McCain's brother JOE, with an equally out-of-control temper, called 911 on a non-emergency issue and when challenged by the 911 Operator, cussed him out! Hello Big John!

[edit on 10/24/2008 by donwhite]