Massachusetts Treasurer: Dems healthcare plan will 'bankrupt the country in four years'...

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by xxshadowfaxx

 

It's called political bullcrap. Cahill, serving as a wannabe independent (sort of like Lieberman, where "independent" just means "Republican that jewish people will vote for") under a Republican, has a vested interest in slinging this slobber far and wide.

Funny, I was thinking the exact same things about your posts. You always come running to the defense of Obama, no matter where the criticism comes from. Almost like a paid shill. Or a shill.

He never mentioned Obama in his post, and was pretty accurate in his comments. This politician from Massachusetts is pandering to the right for votes. Not one reputable or nonpartisan source believes this healthcare legislation will bankrupt the country in 4 years.

Maybe you should talk about the topic instead of attacking a poster's character because they don't share your extremely narrow partisan view? At least, that's what adults would do. Thought maybe you'd want to give it a go.

reply to post by Avenginggecko


I agree he is pandering for votes. I also agree with him kind of. We actually are bankrupt currently it isn't a matter of when we go. This politician seems to think that this will bankrupt us but as I understand we have been spending more than we have taken in for a long time. The bill isn't good though admittedly I haven't read the entire thing nor am I going to. It is going through. This politician might want to change his views from "is" to "we went bankrupt a long time ago." If he wants votes he needs to go independent and start pushing for us to start laying off government workers that do nothing. That alone would get us going in the right direction.

reply to post by EnlightenUp

Yeah economics, it's all about that in't it?

But in all fairness, that includes people who disagree with you. This sounds as though anyone with a different opinion has no regard for themselves, their economic situation or those in their charge.

Yes it is about economics. And there are other issues to be considered by the left. But when the country is going to H in a hurry, people who know about such things get very concerned! The Congressional Budget Office included! CBO: Huge deficits to average $1 trillion a year under Obama

You can't fund your social programs, hand out political pork or fund your endless social mandates if the country has no money and no one wants to lend. You might look into what is going on in Greece.

Or: A ruinous Meltdown

Taxes are being raised. Draconian cuts in services are being made. Public employees are being fired. The tissue-thin national economic recovery is being undermined. And in many cases, the most vulnerable populations — the sick, the elderly, the young and the poor — are getting badly hurt.

Arizona, struggling with a projected $2.6 billion budget shortfall, took the drastic step of scrapping its Children’s Health Insurance Program. That left nearly 47,000 low-income children with no coverage at all. Gov. Jan Brewer is also calling for an increase in the sales tax. She said, “Arizona is navigating its way through the largest state budget deficit in its long history.”

In New Jersey, the newly elected governor, Chris Christie, has proposed a series of budget cuts that, among other things, would result in public schools receiving $820 million less in state aid than they had received in the prior school year. Some well-off districts would have their direct school aid cut off altogether. Poorer districts that rely almost entirely on state aid would absorb the biggest losses in terms of dollars. They’re bracing for a terrible hit

[edit on 20/3/10 by plumranch]

Originally posted by plumranch
reply to post by EnlightenUp

 

Yes it is about economics. And there are other issues to be considered by the left.

(Empasis mine)

Or more simply, to be considered...period.

But when the country is going to H in a hurry, people who know about such things get very concerned! The Congressional Budget Office included! CBO: Huge deficits to average $1 trillion a year under Obama

How does this display "knowing about such things"? Can you say without a doubt this is a different outcome than other likely administrations? No politically unslanted picture emerges from this. It's a symptom of something more fundamental, not a cause. People focus on what they want so they have the scapegoats they want and cherrypick corroborative "evidence" for their own personal opinions.

Anyway, there were already material signs here and there of calamity popping up in my surroundings by Bush's first term. It sure as hell didn't start with Obama. Debt levels aren't unprecedented as a percentage of GDP nor when adjusted for inflation.

You can't fund your social programs, hand out political pork or fund your endless social mandates if the country has no money and no one wants to lend.

Yes, they're certainly a Keynesian approach. At least money can be circulating if the banks do not wish to lend (or are you talking about creditor nations not wanting to lend to us?). Some money can take a trip through the population and back again-- just recirculate it.

You might look into what is going on in Greece.

Yes, splendid idea. Considering it mainly service economy with a high reliance on tourism, which has markedly dropped. They have a high level of tax evasion and corruption as well.

Sign, as usual, it is the social programs at fault, always those programs that might go to the undesireables instead of the desireables.

Or: A ruinous Meltdown

All this should make one question the wisdom of having economies in the first place, especially chaotic ones that run so close to critical levels where small changes spell the difference between boom or bust.

reply to post by EnlightenUp


I presume you are aware that money on such frivolous endeavors such as health care must be conserved to bail out rich bankers and finance illegal wars? We must rebuild the countries we've destroyed.
_______________________

We are apparently broke anyway, when it comes to spending money on health care, so what does it matter where we don't spend money we don't have? We can spend the money we don't have on our citizenry for once, or we can spend the money we don't have on other countries citizens, and continue to support the rich.

Now, study that.

reply to post by ladyinwaiting


While I agree, I tried to steer clear of those usual diatribes where I could. LOL.

Any which way you slice it there's some degree of socialism, and that includes the military and basic infrastructure. The key difference though is who is considered worthy of receiving it.

When those receiving Social Security checks, V.A. benefits and Medicare while bitching about it and attending tea parties, I just don't want to hear any guff. If you were serious you'd do without it. There are a few here and there that live up to their rhetoric and I suppose I can respect that.

What is really intended is to have socialism for themselves and nothing for others they do not like for whatever reason. Any benefits these "others" receive are despite that desire to mould the system to favoristism, not because of it. The "rich" getting something isn't much of concern so long as the "others" are not.

reply to post by EnlightenUp

All this should make one question the wisdom of having economies in the first place, especially chaotic ones that run so close to critical levels where small changes spell the difference between boom or bust.

Economics is the study of how man manages the distribution of relatively rare goods and services. You and I make economic decisions all day, eg. coffee vs. tea, TV vs the internet.

Economies are the systems that countries use to deal with rare goods and services. Socialistic systems use elite bureaucrats to decide who gets the valuable goods, very inefficient! Capitalism allows individuals to allocate their goods and services as they see fit, so is naturally a very efficient system.

where small changes spell the difference between boom or bust.

The small changes that led to this boom and bust began with the CRA Act. Government required banks to make bad loans then it weakened banking controls. This Congress hasn't done anything about CRA to date! It still stands.

Other small changes that led to where we are would be the Stimulus that wasn't spent wisely on jobs and tax relief for employers who hire but on political kickbacks and pork.

Now we have used up all of our economic ammunition so to speak and we still need jobs bills and further spending on the economy and it is questionable whether China for instance will want to lend us more money. Especially when we have 1 trillion dollar a year deficits as far as the eye can see because of reckless spending and on top of that an expensive social mandate in the form of a HC bill that will not encourage people to make wise health care decisions, rather use medical assistance more recklessly and carelessly.

Originally posted by plumranch
reply to post by EnlightenUp

 

Economics is the study of how man manages the distribution of relatively rare goods and services. You and I make economic decisions all day, eg. coffee vs. tea, TV vs the internet.

Economies are the systems that countries use to deal with rare goods and services. Socialistic systems use elite bureaucrats to decide who gets the valuable goods, very inefficient! Capitalism allows individuals to allocate their goods and services as they see fit, so is naturally a very efficient system.

Scarcity-based devolved social immobility machine!

Remove money and barter. That's right, you just do stuff to help out and run to the grocery depot and take what you need. Take as much as you want, but why would you bother to overindulge; you can get more anytime? Next, noone overproduces or needlessly exploits because there is no motive built into the system to do so. Machines can serve us because they can sit idle rather than running all day and night to maximize the profit for their owners.

That is where it will go when humans are spiritually evolved enough. Someone like myself has already done that with open-souce software. I get nother but "thanks" and do the best work I know how, but only as much as it requires to get the job done. If there's me, there are more like me and there can be more yet.

The small changes that led to this boom and bust began with the CRA Act. Government required banks to make bad loans then it weakened banking controls. This Congress hasn't done anything about CRA to date! It still stands.

By "bad loans" you mean loans to minorities and the poor who otherwise couldn't have acquired anything, to get a pull-up by the boot strap?

Other small changes that led to where we are would be the Stimulus that wasn't spent wisely on jobs and tax relief for employers who hire but on political kickbacks and pork.

Not sure what to say here other than I'm considering the possibility of classification errors on your part. Of course "tax relief" means money that doesn't need to be circulated but can add to the boss' coffers whereas some pork moves funds around, even if for some purportedly stupid things.

Now we have used up all of our economic ammunition so to speak and we still need jobs bills and further spending on the economy and it is questionable whether China for instance will want to lend us more money.

The ace in the hole is to kill them dead when we need to after using them. I think the time is nighe.

Especially when we have 1 trillion dollar a year deficits as far as the eye can see because of reckless spending and on top of that an expensive social mandate in the form of a HC bill

Like I said, it's not unprecedented, nor can the eye always see very far.

that will not encourage people to make wise health care decisions, rather use medical assistance more recklessly and carelessly.

Will you as well? This is just a red herring of an assumption, and I have been assigned to cook beer-battered cod tonight for the the big family pow-wow. Perhaps you mean that people will have sex and get abortions just because it's free, as in "free beer"? Yay! Party 'till the STD's get us instead.

Originally posted by plumranch
Eg. CNBC, the money channel, took a poll of its listeners today and found 75% were against this legislation! These are people who are serious about their economic future and have a stake it the future.

Woohoo, I watch Cable TV and have a vested interest. And because I invest in the market, watch TV and follow trends, my stake in the future trumps average Americans.

[/sarcasm] What a pantload.

Regarding the states who filed lawsuits:

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum is taking the lead and is joined by attorneys general from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Michigan, Utah, Pennsylvania, Alabama, South Dakota, Idaho, Washington, Colorado and Louisiana. All are Republicans except James “Buddy” Caldwell of Louisiana, who is a Democrat.

Partisan politics ya think?
Source

Classic: www.billionairesforwealthcare.com...




[edit on 23-3-2010 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by plumranch

Massachusetts Treasurer: Dems healthcare plan will 'bankrupt the country in four years'...

Isn't that the whole idea?

Next, climate change bills.

reply to post by plumranch

Massachusetts Treasurer: Dems healthcare plan will 'bankrupt the country in four years'...

So the Mayans were only off by 2 years?

Impressive.

Todays news, 4-10-2010

Massachusetts health program encounters massive cost increases

For the state’s policymakers, rapidly rising health-care costs are the central problem with the plan. Since 2006, the cost of the state’s insurance program has increased by 42 percent, or almost $600 million. According to an analysis by the Rand Corporation, “in the absence of policy change, health care spending in Massachusetts is projected to nearly double to $123 billion in 2020, increasing 8 percent faster than the state’s gross domestic product (GDP).”

Meanwhile, the cost of insurance premiums in the state is the highest in the nation, and double-digit rate hikes are expected again in 2010.

This is the plan that Obama used as a showcase example during the HC debates.

It is also curious that Obama thinks his HC bill, admittedly fashioned out of the Massachusetts bill, will somehow save the country money, control costs, etc.

The Massachusetts bill costs are increasing 8% faster than the state's GDP!

Congressional budget office: Fiscal policy unsustainable!

“U.S. fiscal policy is unsustainable, and unsustainable to an extent that it can’t be solved through minor changes,” Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Elmendorf Read more: dailycaller.com...

[edit on 9/4/10 by plumranch]

Well if Obamacare works out as well as Chris Dodd's Credit Card Act signed last year into law did (which had a terrible backlash against consumers) then we're all doomed.

www.americanbankingnews.com...

www.americanbankingnews.com...

www.smartbalancetransfers.com...

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

 

When those receiving Social Security checks, V.A. benefits and Medicare while bitching about it and attending tea parties, I just don't want to hear any guff. If you were serious you'd do without it. There are a few here and there that live up to their rhetoric and I suppose I can respect that.

I receive a VA pension and I did not and would not have anything to do with the TEA PARTY movement.

Many of us veterans saw that the tea party movement was a front for the radical religious right.
en.wikipedia.org...
and were acting as shills for the insurance industry to get things like no public option in the health care bill so that the insurance industry can keep ripping us off without competition.

Originally posted by sos37
Well if Obamacare works out as well as Chris Dodd's Credit Card Act signed last year into law did (which had a terrible backlash against consumers) then we're all doomed.

www.americanbankingnews.com...

www.americanbankingnews.com...

www.smartbalancetransfers.com...

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Of course if it works out like Romney care, it will all be ok though, right?