Thread: A dirge for America?

In case it's not clear, I am referring to the recently past health care bill adding on to a seemingly insurmountable debt to say nothing about double digit unemployment and the real chance of loosing our triple A credit rating.

Indeed, a beautiful rendition. But Mark...so much drama?

From the financial times:

Last week, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said the amendments would result in a bill that would reduce the US fiscal deficit by $143bn over the next decade and $1,200bn in the decade after that. Republicans nevertheless continued to depict the bill as an expensive new entitlement that would hasten the US towards bankruptcy.

1.3 trillion dollars over the next 20 years. Coming from a NON-PARTISAN group.

Originally Posted by JimR

Indeed, a beautiful rendition. But Mark...so much drama?

From the financial times:



1.3 trillion dollars over the next 20 years. Coming from a NON-PARTISAN group.

future cuts mean nothing.

Cuts only last until the next election.

Any group talking about cuts happening between 10 and 20 years from now is dreaming.

Isn't it odd that we cannot afford the same benefits that every other country in the industrialized world enjoys .... i.e. health care.... but we can afford a military industrial complex that spends more than all of the other countries in the world combined. Not to mention 2 wars, one of which was not only unnecessary but uncalled for. This so called health care bill seems to me to be more of a benefit to the pharmaceuticals and the insurance companies than to the people but we'll have to see how it shakes out. Ray Charles rocks BTW.... but that is obvious.

Originally Posted by JimR

Indeed, a beautiful rendition. But Mark...so much drama?

From the financial times:



1.3 trillion dollars over the next 20 years. Coming from a NON-PARTISAN group.

The only way that it could reduce the deficit is if they use the money that they are going to receive in tax revenue for this program and use it to pay debt. Not spend it on health care.

It's the same thing they did with social security. Social security is bankrupt. They used the money for other things. Another failed ponzi scheme by the government.

Everyone is being stolen from and congress is having a party. The sheep never learn.

Blatant fascism (corporations partnering with government) has just taken a gigantic leap forward. Requiring people to fork over billions of dollars to for-profit insurance companies is enough to make Mussolini blush.
And the most disgusting aspect of this complete trampling of original American principles is that so many Democrats - I once respected - were PROUDLY voting for it.
Watching Congress pass this health care monstrosity literally MADE ME SICK!

Originally Posted by Miner123

The only way that it could reduce the deficit is if they use the money that they are going to receive in tax revenue for this program and use it to pay debt. Not spend it on health care.

It's the same thing they did with social security. Social security is bankrupt. They used the money for other things. Another failed ponzi scheme by the government.

Everyone is being stolen from and congress is having a party. The sheep never learn.

BRAVO! The same people who promised to protect us in our old age and have failed are now going to protect us from cradle to grave, just like social security it is a bail out for the ever expansive government, more money for corporate induced warfare overseas, more money to insecure your liberty. More oysters and champagne along the Potomac.

Originally Posted by denmason

Blatant fascism (corporations partnering with government) has just taken a gigantic leap forward. Requiring people to fork over billions of dollars to for-profit insurance companies is enough to make Mussolini blush.
And the most disgusting aspect of this complete trampling of original American principles is that so many Democrats - I once respected - were PROUDLY voting for it.
Watching Congress pass this health care monstrosity literally MADE ME SICK!

Are you for or against health reform as a principle, and what part of this specific bill are you so upset about?

I can't speak for the above posters, but, what I'm getting from the posts, (perhaps I'm misinterpreting them, so please take that into consideration), irregardless, my position on this is that I don't believe any right-minded person objects to assisting those who cannot help themselves, no one is questioning that concept/endeavor, however you term it.

Here in part is what Roosevelt, (well intended as he was), said with the enactment of Social Security Insurance:

"...It is a structure intended to lessen the force of possible future depressions. It will act as a protection to future administrations against the necessity of going deeply into debt to furnish relief to the needy. The law will flatten out the peaks and valleys of deflation and of inflation. It is, in short, a law that will take care of human needs and at the same time provide the United States an economic structure of vastly greater soundness...."

Now, we all know the current state of SSI, trillions, (I forget the actual figure but it is astronomical), of dollars in unsecured liabilities. Much, perhaps all of that result is by politicans mis-managing the that account for this and that, much of it as gratuitous offering to their voting base's pet causes. Many alcoholics, drug addicts, etc., enjoy SSI, while they continue in their illness. This was not the original intent. A couple of examples...I know of an individual who after an afternoon at a tavern and a few joints, decided it was time to call it a day and headed his Harley home. His problems started when he missed a corner and ended up with a few screws and rods holding a few fractures together...that was about 30 years ago...he's still on SSI...he could go back to work, but, he'd rather rather not and knows the system well enough to circumvent their program/efforts to be re-trained/re-employed. The reciprocal to this is my receptionist; a lady who is in her early sixties, and recently started undergoing chemotherapy for a form of pancreatic cancer...I've created a schedule for her to work only three day a week so she can keep her insurance...she tried to file for benefit and was immediately denied; has been put in collection by the hospital, etc. She put into that system all of her working life, but, is denied...a drunk/stoned motorcycler rider has been living off the same system for 30 years...that's government...that's bureaucracy at it's best.

So, I don't think that we begrudge anyone truly in need, I certainly don't; but, most right-minded people would have little reason to believe that this most recent creation (Health Care as written), won't end up much the same way, only this time, with government control written woven into the fabric of it's contents. When you have a polled 40% plus of the doctors saying they will consider getting out of the profession if it is voted in, I think that is good indication that they forsee big problems...1100 pages, that grew to 2400 pages, that necessitated back-room deals, (I call it bribes), to secure the Yes votes necessary to get it passed, that know one has fully read, much more understands... The majority of the people telling their representatives to hold it, slow down, don't rush this, and the representatives basically replying, we know better than you what is best, and in essence, Sc*w you!. Yes, some would have a problem with that. No one is questioning changing things or doing away with corruption, fraud, and the like, but, some would say that this program looks like that very thing from the start.

Like written above, Mr. Roosevelt thought SSI would prevent future administration from going deeply into debt for the relief of the needy/poor and would flatten out the peaks and valley of inflation/deflation...didn't happen did it!