• 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!

Recession Ended in June 2009

Boo Radley said:
I don't think I've argued there will be no expense. It may well cost more, but i'm not sure that is proven with certainty. I have argued that we will almost certainly get more for the cost.

But I agree that this bill satisfies no one, and that is the problem. My biggest problem, however, was in the way it was demoized almost from the beginning, taken it from a rational discussion to the fear mongering we saw. From claims of socialims to death panels, the discussion went silly and this played a major role in the failing of the bill. It kept the discourse from being about what was best, and left us with getting something so improvement would even be possible.

I have some blame for both parties on this. But it has historically been the nature of the healthcare debate, and this saddens me a great deal.
Click to expand...

I agree that the discussion on both sides sought to put their opponents in the worst possible light. Historically for something like this to really work means that there is a lot of behind the scenes negotiations BEFORE the public evens knows the talks are going on. The problem with this is that neither side gets to claim victory but has to share it.

People are tired with the result we get. The Tea Party may be flawed but it was an attempt to say we are mad and won't take it anymore. They got demonized by the left so gravitated to the right. When I was growing up the people fed up with the staus quo mostly turned to the dems. I think most tea party folks would vote for neither party if they got a chance. Saying that some of their candidates seem to be dingbats.
 
washunut said:
I agree that the discussion on both sides sought to put their opponents in the worst possible light. Historically for something like this to really work means that there is a lot of behind the scenes negotiations BEFORE the public evens knows the talks are going on. The problem with this is that neither side gets to claim victory but has to share it.

People are tired with the result we get. The Tea Party may be flawed but it was an attempt to say we are mad and won't take it anymore. They got demonized by the left so gravitated to the right. When I was growing up the people fed up with the staus quo mostly turned to the dems. I think most tea party folks would vote for neither party if they got a chance. Saying that some of their candidates seem to be dingbats.
Click to expand...

The tea party lost me at the town halls. When they started shouting down folks with misinformation, and acting so ignorantly, they lost me. And when republicans like grassley, someone I've voted for often, appeased them, he lost my support.

When Stewart asks for a return to reason, that is what resonates with me. Sure, he's being a comedian, but I would so welcome a rational discoourse that valued real information over misinformation. And I would welcome a movement that went that direction. The tea Party did not.
 
Boo Radley said:
The tea party lost me at the town halls. When they started shouting down folks with misinformation, and acting so ignorantly, they lost me. And when republicans like grassley, someone I've voted for often, appeased them, he lost my support.

When Stewart asks for a return to reason, that is what resonates with me. Sure, he's being a comedian, but I would so welcome a rational discoourse that valued real information over misinformation. And I would welcome a movement that went that direction. The tea Party did not.
Click to expand...

I don't know anyone who is part of the tea party so I really do not know. They seem to be frustrated at what is going on. They are probably like the average American who really knows little about the issues. The ranting is very hard to stomach, but the lack of thoughtful government by people who should be able to act like grown ups is also pretty terrible.

Getting back to HC, how is it possible that a bill passed by dems would not even fix the prices Medicare pays for drugs. How do we mandate people join an insurance scheme that has worked so poorly for so many. The whole system needed fixing, not just adding a bunch of people to something that is already going to bankrupt the country.
 
washunut said:
I don't know anyone who is part of the tea party so I really do not know. They seem to be frustrated at what is going on. They are probably like the average American who really knows little about the issues. The ranting is very hard to stomach, but the lack of thoughtful government by people who should be able to act like grown ups is also pretty terrible.

Getting back to HC, how is it possible that a bill passed by dems would not even fix the prices Medicare pays for drugs. How do we mandate people join an insurance scheme that has worked so poorly for so many. The whole system needed fixing, not just adding a bunch of people to something that is already going to bankrupt the country.
Click to expand...

I certainly agree more needed to be done. While I favor a single payer, the public option seemed like the best compromise to me. I do wish there had been the will to push for better otpions. Hopefully leaders can weather this storm and later do more to fix what passed.
 
Boo Radley said:
I certainly agree more needed to be done. While I favor a single payer, the public option seemed like the best compromise to me. I do wish there had been the will to push for better otpions. Hopefully leaders can weather this storm and later do more to fix what passed.
Click to expand...

What has me most annoyed with what happened is the fear they won't go back and fix it. Obama gets to check one off his list. Don't blame him for not wanting to back to the well on this one. That id why I had said at the time it was better than no bill than one that did so relatively little.
 
Well, I've noticed that people with bachelor's degrees are no longer applying to be my assistants, as they were in 2008.
Therefore, I assume the job market has improved in the interim, and people are now able to find employment more commensurate with their education and experience.
 
washunut said:
What has me most annoyed with what happened is the fear they won't go back and fix it. Obama gets to check one off his list. Don't blame him for not wanting to back to the well on this one. That id why I had said at the time it was better than no bill than one that did so relatively little.
Click to expand...

That is a real fear. But all I can do is keep writing my congressial leaders urging them to revisit and try to improve. I accept that you can't take a second step until you take a first, but you have to willing to take that second step as well.
 
Boo Radley said:
That is a real fear. But all I can do is keep writing my congressial leaders urging them to revisit and try to improve. I accept that you can't take a second step until you take a first, but you have to willing to take that second step as well.
Click to expand...

I've written to my congressman. Telling him how disappointed I was in his record, that I intend to vote for his competitor and then hope for a real democrat in 2012.
 
obvious Child said:
But clearly Corporate America and its shareholders have noticed. Hence the increased volume on high dividend stocks recently.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I would have thought high divenend stocks, since they tend to be more stable and mature companies, would be something to purchase during a recession or time of economic uncertainy. When the economy is in a growth mode, I would pruchase a stock that has more potential and not worry about the income that dividends can provide.
 
buck said:
Hmm. I would have thought high divenend stocks, since they tend to be more stable and mature companies, would be something to purchase during a recession or time of economic uncertainy. When the economy is in a growth mode, I would pruchase a stock that has more potential and not worry about the income that dividends can provide.
Click to expand...

Depends where you are. For example a retired person will generally have a higher percent in fixed versus equity. Also there is a greater concern for preservation of capital rather than appreciation.

But I think what was mentioned is appropriate as people are looking at those stable mature companies as an alternative to buying bonds at low rates. The Fed is pushing people into riskier assets to try and jumpstart the economy. Are they creating the next new bubble. Time will tell.
 
washunut said:
But I think what was mentioned is appropriate as people are looking at those stable mature companies as an alternative to buying bonds at low rates. The Fed is pushing people into riskier assets to try and jumpstart the economy. Are they creating the next new bubble. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

I now see where you were coming from.

Not sure I completely agree, but it's an interesting teory and only time will tell.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom