Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 412131415 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 149

Thread: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

  1. #131
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,113

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    The Dems have proposed several plans, including one that just raises the debt ceiling. The repubs rejected every single one of them.

    You're ignoring plans from the Dems just to have a point to make.
    where are they? all i've heard are arguments from White House Press Secretaries that you don't, you know, like, have to actually, like, you know, "write these things down", or anything....


    as for the clean debt ceiling rise that everyone now agrees would be a disaster and which Obama spent most of the year demanding before he suddenly decided that he wanted to "do something big"? Democrats helped kill it.

  2. #132
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    that would be Medicare Part D, the only government program of such size to come in at 41% under projected costs, and the only portion of Medicare so structured that it has held down cost inflation in the portion of healthcare that it effects to 1.2%.
    So you approve of the massive increase in spending on health care? And thanks for acknowledging that socialized medicine holds down costs!!

    our current system is not the result of a free market - it is the result of meddling in the market under the FDR administration, which was then expanded under LBJ.
    You complained about health insurance (ie third party payers). Now, you're changing your complaint to FDR and govt meddling. You're moving the goalposts
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #133
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    where are they? all i've heard are arguments from White House Press Secretaries that you don't, you know, like, have to actually, like, you know, "write these things down", or anything....
    As I said, they were rejected by republicans. And what you heard is irrelevant. Just because you didn't hear it, that doesn't mean it didn't happen


    as for the clean debt ceiling rise that everyone now agrees would be a disaster and which Obama spent most of the year demanding before he suddenly decided that he wanted to "do something big"? Democrats helped kill it.
    Umm, since it was proposed, it is obvious that not "everyone agrees" that it would be a disaster.

    And now, you're switching from "it didn't happen" to "Democrats helped kill it". You're moving the goalposts again.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  4. #134
    Educator TBone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Phoenix
    Last Seen
    04-01-15 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    673

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    neither of the plans that have passed are bad plans - though CC&B was better.
    Really, not bad for whom? The rich?


    on the contrary, the Right is awash in plans for healthcare reform. and, where we have been in government (for example, in Indiana), we have been demonstrating their superiority.
    Really, these were plans? I thought they were only statements, nothing to fix the problem immediately. Talking about fixing health care is not fixing it and is not a plan. In the end it is talk.

    that is part of it, but the main killer is our idiotic third-party-payment system
    That is most of it. The right blames lawsuits on the high cost of health care, not the greedy pharmacuticals (sic) or insurance plans that drop paying policy holders with major illnesses. Again, they don't blame Greed on the problem.

    as far as I am aware, the Boehner Plan does not raise taxes on the middle class, who are currently not paying their fair share, no.
    Really, let's do a ratio, for what the MC makes, they pay more than their share of taxes. Not to mention they pay for the entitlements they get later in life. If the BIG Corps and Oil paid their share, for the benefits they recieve, we'd not be having this discussion.

    which is an excellent addition and badly needed.
    No it is not needed. We don't need to spend more money on a concept that will not pass the states or the senate. We need for everyone to pay their fair share. And, we need to have responsible gov't (hey you trust big business to do the right thing, I have my fantasy also?)

    Isn't the right always saying you should not regulate anything? You should like Wall Street play without rules because they will not do damage to our economy, or Insurance companies should not be watched because they are not interested in the bottom line, they care for those that pay for insurance.

    What is needed is the enforcement of the other admendments, e.g. 14th equal protection, etc.
    Last edited by TBone; 07-30-11 at 11:09 AM.
    It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
    Emiliano Zapata


  5. #135
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    obama plans are just too delicate for today's politically charged environment

    The devil certainly is in the details for the White House, as the clamor from some members of Congress for specifics on what President Obama is proposing has drifted over to the briefing room, where answers are scanty.

    Now reporters are looking for more detail -- as Obama might say, less posturing -- about what, exactly, the White House is proposing on the deficit.

    Newly minted Fox News reporter Ed Henry wondered at the daily briefing what the point of Monday's national address was, given the lack of a specific Obama plan for closing the deal.

    White House press secretary Jay Carney called demands for more detail, "talking points issued by the Republican Party," adding, "I get that, OK?"

    Amid Henry's protestations that the talking point crack was unfair, Carney continued:

    "He explained a lot of the detail," Carney said. "The president stood before you -- I can't remember if you were here Friday night. Some of you weren't, because you cut out early, but a lot of you were."

    Responded members of the press: "Ooooooohhhh!"

    "We have shown a lot of leg on what we were proposing," Carney said.

    Pressed for more details -- something on paper? Some numbers? Carney grew scornful.

    "I mean, look, you need something printed for you, you can't write it down?" he said. "There is ample detail."

    Reminded that Obama on Friday also promised to walk reporters through the process, saying, "We'll go through all the paper" but then there was no paper, Carney told the press to grow up:

    "Most of you are veteran Washington reporters," Carney said. "You know how this process works: that if you -- that when you put forward a position, it becomes highly -- on difficult issues before a compromise is reached, it becomes charged politically and your chances of acting getting an agreement diminish significantly. That's how it works. You know that's how it works."
    Carney turns tables, mocks press | POLITICO 44

    one can appreciate the president's pusillanimity, the only time he's actually put numbers on paper he was rejected by his own senate, 97 to 0

    leadership, anyone?

  6. #136
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,113

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    So you approve of the massive increase in spending on health care?
    i approve of the structure of Medicare Part D, and I appreciate the power of it's results. the rest of Medicare needs to be moved to a similar structure, and I am glad that Republicans have voted to do so.

    And thanks for acknowledging that socialized medicine holds down costs!!
    Medicare Part D works to hold down costs because it utilizes market pressure. what we have seen from socialized medicine is that costs climb rapidly while expenditures are controlled through rationing.

    You complained about health insurance (ie third party payers). Now, you're changing your complaint to FDR and govt meddling. You're moving the goalposts
    not at all. the reason we get health insurance from our employers, and the reason why we overpurchase health insurance is because of FDR's meddling in the labor market. like agricultural subsidies, it was a stupid policy that took on a life of it's own and which we've never changed.
    Last edited by cpwill; 07-30-11 at 10:42 PM.

  7. #137
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,113

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by TBone View Post
    Really, not bad for whom? The rich?
    not bad for the nation. The wealthy "need" us to avoid fiscal meltdown much less - they have, after all, the ability to shift rapidly. It's the middle and lower income classes that need to worry about the inevitable results of our overspending.

    Really, these were plans? I thought they were only statements, nothing to fix the problem immediately. Talking about fixing health care is not fixing it and is not a plan. In the end it is talk.
    agreed, which is why I am glad that Republicans have put forth a variety of plans that would help us lower Healthcare costs and expenditures. In Indiana, for example, Republican Governor Mitch Daniels introduced HSA's to the state workforce, and was able to reduce state expenditures by 11%.

    That is most of it. The right blames lawsuits on the high cost of health care, not the greedy pharmacuticals (sic) or insurance plans that drop paying policy holders with major illnesses. Again, they don't blame Greed on the problem.
    you have just contradicted your own argument, claiming first that the Right Wing blames the greed of Tort Lawyers, and then complaining that they don't blame "greed".

    In reality, the need for tort insurance does drive up healthcare costs. I had a friends father close his OB/GYN practice when malpractice insurance in his state rose to $200,000 a year. it is an expense that our legal system drives higher than it should be - and loser pays is a good market-pressure fix to that; certainly better than some artificial cap system.

    But again, you are fighting a strawman. because tort reform is not the key piece needed (according to conservatives) to bring down the rise in the cost of Healthcare; we need to bring market pressure in by altering the way we pay for it.

    Really, let's do a ratio, for what the MC makes, they pay more than their share of taxes.
    the highest earning decile in the US gets about 33.5% of of our total income; but they pay a little over 45% of our tax burden. meanwhile, US Households are now receiving more from Uncle Sam than we are paying in Taxes.

    If the BIG Corps and Oil paid their share, for the benefits they recieve, we'd not be having this discussion.
    those companies pay their taxes according to our current tax code. they take deductions and credits the same as the President does, the same as the middle class family does, the same as the lower income family does. I'm all for stripping out credits and deductions from the Tax Code, but let's not pretend that doing so for oil companies is going to provide much more than a drop in the bucket.

    No it is not needed. We don't need to spend more money on a concept that will not pass the states or the senate.
    the BBA is needed (both parties have now officially proven themselves to be completely incapable of disciplining themselves), and it will pass the States.

    After it passes the Senate.

    in 2013.

    We need for everyone to pay their fair share. And, we need to have responsible gov't (hey you trust big business to do the right thing, I have my fantasy also?)
    i don't trust big business or big government to do the right thing. I trust them to follow their incentives and do what is best for them. That is why I want to alter our regulatory and tax structure to make it good for business to invest and expand here in America.

    Isn't the right always saying you should not regulate anything?
    no. we are saying we should regulate intelligently, which the left seems to have confused with regulate more. We could pass regulation stating that each employer shall be fined $100,000 for each new job he creates and it would be regulating the job market - that wouldn't make it wise.

    You should like Wall Street play without rules because they will not do damage to our economy, or Insurance companies should not be watched because they are not interested in the bottom line, they care for those that pay for insurance.
    on the contrary; insurance companies should face steep punishment should they violate their contracts. enforcement of contract is one of the prime reasons for government in the first place.

    What is needed is the enforcement of the other admendments, e.g. 14th equal protection, etc.
    not to mention the 10th.

  8. #138
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    i approve of the structure of Medicare Part D, and I appreciate the power of it's results. the rest of Medicare needs to be moved to a similar structure, and I am glad that Republicans have voted to do so.
    Thanks for admitting that socialism works!!

    Medicare Part D works to hold down costs because it utilizes market pressure. what we have seen from socialized medicine is that costs climb rapidly while expenditures are controlled through rationing.
    Every nation with a socialized health care system has lower costs than the US, and many provide better health care. In the US, health care is rationed. Only those who can afford it get it

    But thanks for admitting that socialized medicine works!!


    not at all. the reason we get health insurance from our employers, and the reason why we overpurchase health insurance is because of FDR's meddling in the labor market. like agricultural subsidies, it was a stupid policy that took on a life of it's own and which we've never changed.
    That's not what you said at first. But I won't complain if you back away from your prior nonsense. I would do the same if I had said something so absurd

    So why don't you tell us about that massive cut in spending you claimed happened sometime in the last century? Will you ever back that up, or were you hoping I'd forget about it?
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #139
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    vote obama, 2012!

    socialism works!

    LOL!

    seeya at the polls, progressives

  10. #140
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,113

    Re: House GOP revolts against Boehner plan

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Thanks for admitting that socialism works!!
    ....thereby indicating that in fact, you have no idea what Medicare D is or how it functions.....

    but hey, if letting you call the Ryan Plan "socialism" will get you to vote for it.... a rose by any other name. go right on ahead with your bad self.

    Every nation with a socialized health care system has lower costs than the US
    you are mistaking "costs" with "expenditures".

    , and many provide better health care.
    this is incorrect. particularly when it comes to access and severe condition survival rates, the US system is superior.

    In the US, health care is rationed. Only those who can afford it get it
    this is incorrect. not only do we have Medicaid to take care of those who have difficulty affording medical care, our emergency rooms are required by law to treat any who come in.

    But thanks for admitting that socialized medicine works!!
    again. whatever you want to call it. but if you think that applying market pressure to a corporatist system in which costs are socialized while benefits are individualized is "socialism".... then you really don't have any idea what you are talking about.

    That's not what you said at first. But I won't complain if you back away from your prior nonsense. I would do the same if I had said something so absurd
    my position hasn't changed at all. this isn't exactly the first time I've argued precisely this point.

    So why don't you tell us about that massive cut in spending you claimed happened sometime in the last century? Will you ever back that up, or were you hoping I'd forget about it?
    More than happy to give you such an example:

    The Not So Great Depression

    ...America’s greatest depression fighter was Warren Gamaliel Harding. An Ohio senator when he was elected president in 1920, he followed the much praised Woodrow Wilson — who had brought America into World War I, built up huge federal bureaucracies, imprisoned dissenters, and incurred $25 billion of debt.

    Harding inherited Wilson’s mess — in particular, a post–World War I depression that was almost as severe, from peak to trough, as the Great Contraction from 1929 to 1933 that FDR would later inherit. The estimated gross national product plunged 24 percent from $91.5 billion in 1920 to $69.6 billion in 1921. The number of unemployed people jumped from 2.1 million to 4.9 million...

    One of Harding’s campaign slogans was “less government in business,” and it served him well. Harding embraced the advice of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon and called for tax cuts in his first message to Congress on April 12, 1921. The highest taxes, on corporate revenues and “excess” profits, were to be cut. Personal income taxes were to be left as is, with a top rate of 8 percent of incomes above $4,000...

    Federal spending was cut from $6.3 billion in 1920 to $5 billion in 1921 and $3.2 billion in 1922. [[cpwill notes: that is a cut of 49%. Were we to do this today, we would be running a surplus]] Federal taxes fell from $6.6 billion in 1920 to $5.5 billion in 1921 and $4 billion in 1922. Harding’s policies started a trend. The low point for federal taxes was reached in 1924; for federal spending, in1925. The federal government paid off debt, which had been $24.2 billion in 1920, and it continued to decline until 1930...

    With Harding’s tax and spending cuts and relatively non-interventionist economic policy, GNP rebounded to $74.1 billion in 1922. The number of unemployed fell to 2.8 million — a reported 6.7 percent of the labor force — in 1922. So, just a year and a half after Harding became president, the Roaring 20s were underway. The unemployment rate continued to decline, reaching an extraordinary low of 1.8 percent in 1926. Since then, the unemployment rate has been lower only once in wartime (1944), and never in peacetime.

    The Roaring 20s were a time of unprecedented prosperity. GNP expanded year after year without inflation. Productivity improved, and real wages increased. The stock market tripled. There was a dramatic expansion of the middle class. The Great Migration occurred during the 1920s, with some 7 million African-Americans moving north for better schools and job opportunities. Women had the vote. Millions of Americans began to buy cars, originally a luxury of the rich. People bought radios that enabled ordinary people to hear the finest entertainers in their own homes. Movies became popular. Frozen food made possible a more varied diet year-round. Doctors developed new medicines to fight deadly diseases like diphtheria and tuberculosis...



    would you like to hear about an even greater reduction in government spending, one which Keynesian economists uniformly would produce massive unemployment, but which instead helped fuel a major economic boom?

Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 412131415 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •