• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Health Care Bill has passed

Actually, this tells me that Congressional Republicans were not against the health care bill because of what it was. They were against it because they wanted to do anything they could to defeat Obama politically. This is borne out by the fact that they overwhelmingly approved of Bush's health care bill when he was in office.

Once again, for some, this was not about health care at all, but about political games. Of course, I don't mind the games this time, up to a point, because I didn't want the bill to be passed, but at least I am consistent. I also bashed the Bush bill. Where were you guys then, except telling me how unamerican I was to bash Bush over pretty much the same issue you are now bashing Obama over? And don't tell me that Bush only broke the piggy bank to a smaller degree than Obama did, so it is all on Obama. That is the same thing as saying "We only torture a little".
So because Biden said so, the Republicans were all about politics and the Democrats was all about healthcare. Only a liberal would have such an opinion. Biden's word is no proof at all. The fact that they were worried about Obama's presidency puts the blame for politics squarely on the shoulders of the Democrats. They were desperate to past something, even if it was wrong. Take another sip of koolaid.
 
No....China owns the debt on our failing system of institutions, which I referenced from your previous post. That will be compounded by bankrupting states with additional Medicaid/Medicare obligations when they can't even pay for it right now.

And raising taxes always solves deficit problems, doesn't it? Accept for.....well, never.

Yes, China does own our debt, but if we had a president with some cahonas, this would actually work to our favor. We could force China to stop manipulating their currency, and if they don't, then just declare ourselves bankrupt, and stick China with truckloads of worthless paper.
 
China (or even Japan as they hold the most treasury debt at the moment) have nothing to do with it. Foreign holdings of treasury debt is a function of a negative current account (although not @ 1:1).



Compounded? :confused:

The worlds financial system nearly exploded a little over a year ago. State and federal budget deficits are to be expected. Care to put a time frame on when the US will default? (much less go bankrupt)



USDebt.png


Historical Top Tax Rate

Ah, yes, let's play the "my chart beats your chart" game. Debt right now is higher than it was during the Great Depression as a percentage of GDP.

U. S. Budget Death Spiral Off-Grid Blogger

If we transfer our government's irresponsibility to our wealthy citizens, all you're going to see is 25 percent unemployment and a huge evacuation from the market.

The healthcare bill, and a few other dubious projections we've made at my company, have us preparing for another round of layoffs in June.
 
I wonder how this new healthcare law is going to affect companies moving overseas.
 
Ah, yes, let's play the "my chart beats your chart" game. Debt right now is higher than it was during the Great Depression as a percentage of GDP.

Your chart is off base because it combines public debt with private debt and therefore has nothing to do with this discussion. You might be able to start an argument in regards to "crowding out", although i seriously believe you lack the ability to do so with any sort of accuracy. Not to mention debt as a percentage of GDP was higher following WWII; not during the depression.

None the less.... The "greatest generation" repaid their dues with hard work and higher taxes. To believe you should be free of such responsibility speaks volumes.

If we transfer our government's irresponsibility to our wealthy citizens, all you're going to see is 25 percent unemployment and a huge evacuation from the market.

A uncunning statement grounded in speculation and ideological bias. You have no basis to claim such an extreme nor will you be able to find any sort of data to support it. I find it nothing short of hilarious that you view the strength of a market system with such disbelief.

The health care bill, and a few other dubious projections we've made at my company, have us preparing for another round of layoffs in June.

Ok. But you cannot deny the improvement in the labor market. Doing so is nothing short of blind blathering.
 
Yes, China does own our debt, but if we had a president with some cahonas, this would actually work to our favor. We could force China to stop manipulating their currency, and if they don't, then just declare ourselves bankrupt, and stick China with truckloads of worthless paper.

Of all debt owned by foreigners, China has about 25% of it. Declaring ourselves bankrupt to spurn the Chinese will demolish the rest of the worlds economies who are tied to the US in regards to trade and economic relations. When a spider is biting your foot, you squash it. You do not try to shoot it with a bazooka. :2razz:
 
Of all debt owned by foreigners, China has about 25% of it. Declaring ourselves bankrupt to spurn the Chinese will demolish the rest of the worlds economies who are tied to the US in regards to trade and economic relations. When a spider is biting your foot, you squash it. You do not try to shoot it with a bazooka. :2razz:





Unless of course, you are the Good Reverend, then you do in fact indeed shoot spiders with a bazooka..... Just sayin. :pimpdaddy:
 
Unless of course, you are the Good Reverend, then you do in fact indeed shoot spiders with a bazooka..... Just sayin. :pimpdaddy:

When they are on your foot:shock: Remind me never to drink whiskey with you:mrgreen:
 
First off, they have had socialized healthcare for years... but I'm sure it's run in a drastically different fashion then it's being done according to the new law.

What is the tax rate for those countries with socialized healthcare?? Americans do pay a fair bit less in taxes overall then the countries with socialized health care... and because the people there are accustomed to paying the taxes to be a beneficiairy to that care, there is no real problem with this carrying on like that.

It's not the 'socializing' of health care that is going to destroy the country, but rather, because people are already losing their jobs, the economy is stretched to the limits, and the debt load of the average american is so stretched that to take on an extra 20-30 % tax hike to pay for this care is going to push a great deal of americans over the edge.



The part where it was written by the insurance companies so that it could suit THEIR best interests, rather then in the best interests of those that are depending on that health care.

I agree with most of what you say but I trust Obama to bring this country back to it's former prestige and glory. I am talking about back to before Nixon, Reagan, and Bush destroyed it.:2usflag:
 
I agree with most of what you say but I trust Obama to bring this country back to it's former prestige and glory. I am talking about back to before Nixon, Reagan, and Bush destroyed it.:2usflag:

Now, I can agree with you that Obama is a well spoken, articulate, clean cut, and charismatic individual.... but has he shown that your trust in him is worthwhile??

I also agree that Bush destroyed the country, but he did so with his policies, not his persona... in which a competition with Obama would put Obama with the win everytime. The fact of the matter is that Obama's policies haven't pulled back on Bush's agenda, he's expanded on ALL of Bush's policies by an order of magnitude. This health care bill is proof of that.

I hope your trust in him is not so strong that you at least attempt to skim over the subsections that may be of interest to you?

I mean, it's all good to HOPE, but if you read the bill and see that this cannot CONCEIVEABLY be in the long-term best interest of the people, in both taxes and in health care, are you honest enough to admit you were mistaken by his intent?

Or do you support him soo much that you feel that it's a good thing that he is systematically federalizing essentially everything politically in the US?? Which if you say yes, in spite of an overused analogy, Hitler was democratically elected in a landslide victory.

Looks like that idiot Reid voted against it before he voted for it.

Reid casts wrong vote on health care for second time - CNN.com

As if you get to 'correct' your vote... did he NOT get the memo that the correct answer was yay?
 
Last edited:
I agree with most of what you say but I trust Obama to bring this country back to it's former prestige and glory. I am talking about back to before Nixon, Reagan, and Bush destroyed it.:2usflag:

So Carter (55 mph, fabricated gasolines shortages, weak-spined, bullied by Iran) and Clinton (Whitewater, bj's in the oval office, sperm on a blue dress, definition of the word "is") somehow escaped your "prestige and glory" test?

And now you expect the greasiest Chicago politician ever who hates capitalism with a passion to restore it?

LOL
 
Last edited:
So Carter (55 mph, fabricated gasolines shortages, weak-spined, bullied by Iran) and Clinton (Whitewater, bj's in the oval office, sperm on a blue dress, definition of the word "is") somehow escaped your "prestige and glory" test?

And now you expect the greasiest Chicago politician ever who hates capitalism with a passion to restore it?

LOL

I am taking it you do not have a link....
 
Ugh, it annoys me to no end to see Nancy Pelosi's fake smile calling this legislation a "gift" to the American people. Yeah, some gift, what a benevolent government to bestow this on us. What's that? We are forced to pay for this? What a putz.
 
So Carter (55 mph, fabricated gasolines shortages, weak-spined, bullied by Iran) and Clinton (Whitewater, bj's in the oval office, sperm on a blue dress, definition of the word "is") somehow escaped your "prestige and glory" test?

LOL

I see you are another revisionist. The 55 law was enacted by Nixon. Also gas lines and high prices started with the first Arab oil embargo which also happened under Nixon. Inflation was out of control during the Nixon/Ford years. Nixon even enacted the wage and price freeze which was the worst assault on the free market system up until Bush bailed out Wall St.

Iranian students over ran the US embassy and held the occupants hostage. All of the hostages were eventually released. In your mind this was worse than the 3000+ killed on 9/11 during GWBs watch? Bush was bullied by a small band of extremists and the extremists won.
 
Last edited:
I see you are another revisionist. The 55 law was enacted by Nixon. Also gas lines and high prices started with the first Arab oil embargo which also happened under Nixon. Inflation was out of control during the Nixon/Ford years. Nixon even enacted the wage and price freeze which was the worst assault on the free market system up until Bush bailed out Wall St.

Iranian students over ran the US embassy and held the occupants hostage. All of the hostages were eventually released. In your mind this was worse than the 3000+ killed on 9/11 during GWBs watch? Bush was bullied by a small band of extremists and the extremists won.

Fair enough on Nixon, but it was Carter who had ships full of oil sitting in harbors, driving up gas prices and creating 2-hour lines at gas stations just for his political purposes.

And Iran laughed at him through the crisis. As soon as they saw Reagan coming, they ended it.

And only in your little liberal mind could you somehow attach Bush to 9-11 in that manner.
 
I am taking it you do not have a link....

Obama’s Real Thoughts About Capitalism, from Mr. Obama’s first autobiography, Dreams From My Father, (pp 50-1).

And after a few months of closer scrutiny, he began to realize that the city had indeed had an effect on me, although not the one he’d expected. I stopped getting high. I ran three miles a day and fasted on Sundays. [...] I was confirming Sadik’s estimation of the city’s allure, I suppose; its consequent power to corrupt. With the Wall Street boom, Manhattan was humming, new developments cropping up everywhere; men and women barely out of their twenties already enjoying ridiculous wealth, the fashion merchants fast on their heels. The beauty, the filth, the noise, and the excess, all of it dazzled my senses; there seemed no constraints on originality of lifestyles or the manufacture of desire-a more expensive restaurant, a finer suit of clothes, a more exclusive nightspot, a more beautiful woman, a more potent high. Uncertain of my ability to steer a course of moderation, fearful of falling into old habits, I took on the temperament if not the convictions of a street corner preacher, prepared to see temptation everywhere, ready to overrun a fragile will.

My reaction was more than just an attempt to curb an excessive appetite, though, or a response to sensory overload. Beneath the hum, the motion, I was seeing the steady fracturing of the world taking place. [...] I had no guide that might show me how to join this troubled world, and when I looked for an apartment there, I found Sugar Hill’s elegant brownstones occupied and out of reach, the few decent rental buildings with ten-year-long waiting lists, so that all that remained were the rows and rows of uninhabitable tenements, in front of which young men counted out their rolls of large bills, and winos slouched and stumbled and wept softly to themselves.

I took all this as a personal affront, a mockery of my tender ambitions — although, when I brought up the subject with people who had lived in New York for a while, I was told there was nothing original about my observations. The city was out of control, they said, the polarization a natural phenomenon, like monsoons or continental drift. Political discussions, the kind that at Occidental had once seemed so intense and purposeful, came to take on the flavor of the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union...
 
Fair enough on Nixon, but it was Carter who had ships full of oil sitting in harbors, driving up gas prices and creating 2-hour lines at gas stations just for his political purposes.

And Iran laughed at him through the crisis. As soon as they saw Reagan coming, they ended it.

And only in your little liberal mind could you somehow attach Bush to 9-11 in that manner.

LOL You really do make up your own history, don't you?
Please do some research before you make a complete fool of yourself.

There were gas shortages under Carter due to the second oil crisis. It was Nixon's price controls that also drove up prices.

"The 1979 (or second) oil crisis in the United States occurred in the wake of the Iranian Revolution. Amid massive protests, the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, fled his country in early 1979, allowing the Ayatollah Khomeini to gain control. The protests shattered the Iranian oil sector. While the new regime resumed oil exports, it was inconsistent and at a lower volume, forcing prices to go up. Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations, under the presidency of Dr. Mana Alotaiba increased production to offset the decline, and the overall loss in production was about 4 percent.[2] However, a widespread panic resulted, driving the price far higher than would be expected under normal circumstances."

Reagan made a deal with terrorists to obtain the release of the hostages. I am sure they were terrified of the ex actor, ex governor of the looney state. He was so scary.
The hostage crisis was an attack on US soil just as 9/11 was. The attack did occur on Bush's watch just as the hostage taking occurred on Carters. If you blame Carter, you must blame Bush. Bush will always be attached to 9/11 as Carter is to the hostage crisis. It is part of history unless you're in denial..
 
Last edited:
So Carter (55 mph, fabricated gasolines shortages, weak-spined, bullied by Iran) and Clinton (Whitewater, bj's in the oval office, sperm on a blue dress, definition of the word "is") somehow escaped your "prestige and glory" test?

And now you expect the greasiest Chicago politician ever who hates capitalism with a passion to restore it?

LOL

History does not count jism soaked dresses to judge prestige and glory.:roll:
 
Ugh, it annoys me to no end to see Nancy Pelosi's fake smile calling this legislation a "gift" to the American people. Yeah, some gift, what a benevolent government to bestow this on us. What's that? We are forced to pay for this? What a putz.

You should pray that you look as good as her when you are 70.:)
 
Back
Top Bottom