dsandreas

If we had 30 or 40 million citizens and a miniscule amount of illegal immigrants we could have a system like Canada. The conditions in the US are neither. Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe you like Canada..... Lots of people do. And a wealthy nation like ours could probably figure out a way to take the best of both systems and come up with a better one. http://www.bloomberg.com/...amp;sid=a_zs1Y1FspIM

Are you a moron or joking? Citing a study by these ultra liberal numbskulls would be like me referring to a study by EIB. Wake up...question and challenge what you read. Also, use common sense....you really think most doctors want to have their salaries controlled by the Feds. I assume you are just jerking my chain and not dumb enough to believe this. The nonsense you cite are not facts. Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- most doctors do NOT want a public option. I could go on...but anyone who thinks the government is more efficient at anything probably doesn't want facts. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To ------------------------------------------------------------ I love facts, so I'll correct my earlier post. It's not 2 out of three doctors who support a public option, it's only 62.9%. Physician Views on the Public Health Insurance Option and Medicare

Anyone thinking a government solution is more efficient should be in an institution. Crazy....name something where it has been done? A few facts: 1) Canada has about 10% of the US population and minimal illegal immigration, 2) Government workers with their union wages and pensions make significantly more than all but senior executives at private companies, 3) fraud in medicaid is estimated above 5%...at private insurers .05%, 4) most doctors do NOT want a public option. I could go on...but anyone who thinks the government is more efficient at anything probably doesn't want facts. Quote There's a good argument for a single payer system and it's too bad that it's been eliminated from the debate. The multi payer system we use results in 25-30% of health care expenses going to administrative costs. Single payer systems typically have that overhead down to below 5%. As a result of the current system, our doctors often spend 40% of their time dealing with servicing the insurance company overhead instead of servicing their patients. That's likely why most doctors would like to see a public option. I think that including the pros and cons of a single payer system in the health care debate would probably bolster the position for a robust public option. I'm also pretty sure that's why it was excluded from debate, well.....that and $3 million/wk in lobbyist efforts.

Well...that is easy. One is defensive medicine due to lack of tort reform. Two is state mandates and the fact insurance companies can not compete across state lines. Three...our health care is more than twice as good as other countries. Next question? Quote so why is the cost to the us customer twice that of its nearest national competitor?

I am hungry tonight. I would like a nice steak but I can not get my employer, nor my various insurance companies, nor my local Publix nor my local restaurant to pay for it. Food is certainly a more basic need than health care...without food I need no health care because I will eventually be dead from starvation. Yet it appears I will have to pay for it myself. What kind of country is this? Now, in order to have my job so I can afford food and health insurance I need a car to get to work...

Luckyboy is a simpleton. No many how many times you explain that his analysis means nothing...that its based upon a faulty assumption (in this case meaningless liberal WHO data) he just repeats the same argument over and over. I will give it to him...he can use an incredible amount of space to say nothing. Quote Because they're basing on the same bullshit criteria WHO is?

It won't be four or five years...it will be months from now that we drop a thousand or two on the Dow. Yes...I will mention you were wrong also. Quote Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It will all come crashing down…whether its two weeks, two months, or longer remains to be seen. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How about four or five years from now? That seems to be about the cycle. Then after the market gains all the way back to full strength, piddles, then dies in four or five years, you can stand up and say "see, I told you so". And the liberals will blame the conservatives, and vice-versa.

You have got to be joking. The Fed along with Wall Street and the Obama administration are trying to keep the façade up as long as possible. It will all come crashing down…whether its two weeks, two months, or longer remains to be seen. Unemployment is still high with no improvement in sight, massive number of late mortgages heading for foreclosure, commercial real estate is now in the tank, and massive government overspending continues. Many of the economists who predicted the 2008 debacle are predicting another one with this fake recovery. I have sold 80% of my equities over the last three weeks. When the market drops a couple thousand points I will bring this thread back. A house of cards will normally collapse at some point. Jobless recovery in 2009: 24,000,000 google hits

Anyone who believes the rankings from the liberal bureaucrats at the WHO is brain dead. Their rankings are meaningless. There is no more reason to have government run health care than there is to have government run grocery stores to provide us all food so that nobody is hungry. The system can be/should be improved. Having the government run health care is an idiotic/simpleton solution that will make it worse.

Medicaid and Medicare fraud are estimated in the 5% to 8% range. For private insurers its about .05%. Government control is very expensive. Quote >check Medicare and Medicaid fraud, abuse and massive over-spending >vs. estimates. Yep. The only system that's worse is the private insurance-based + free care for deadbeats system we have now.

I assume you are suggesting it (true communism) has never existed? No free people crave being told what to do by elitist, power hungry leaders. Quote In Reply To ----------------------------------------------------------- Take a trip to Phnom Penh and mention that opinion.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No ,dsandreas, I said "true communism". Do you know the difference betweenthat an Cambodias' form of government? Blues,

"Immigration Raids Yield Jobs for Legal Workers; Americans fill void, even help raise wages. http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2009-09-13-plants_N.htm I rest my case.....

Take a trip to Phnom Penh and mention that opinion.... Quote Capitalism is not perfect nor fair...the only thing worse is everything else. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Have you tried true communism? In theory it is ,IMO, a better system. YOMV Blues, Cliff

Cliff...I said millions. If you are a Indonesian maid and you want to go to HK or Taiwan ...some agency can possibly get you a job there. However, you will not cross the border illegally nor will you enter legally and over-stay your visa. Capitalism is not perfect nor fair...the only thing worse is everything else. Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have traveled outside the country extensively and lived in Europe and Asia. No other country allows millions of unskilled workers to enter their country illegally or legally if they can stop it. If you expect to enter most countries for more than 30 days you will need a work permit/job or to demonstrate financial status that you will not become a burden of the State. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- They don't allow them to enter legaly? Is that what you said? Well no you said "illegally or legally" So no other country allows workers to enter "legally" (we can forget the "or"). Hey, dsandras, do you believe that the capitalistic system is the best economic system or would you prefer socialism or communism or perhaps something else? Blues, Cliff

I have traveled outside the country extensively and lived in Europe and Asia. No other country allows millions of unskilled workers to enter their country illegally or legally if they can stop it. If you expect to enter most countries for more than 30 days you will need a work permit/job or to demonstrate financial status that you will not become a burden of the State. BTW...you won't become a citizen in many countries no matter how long you live there and will never have the right to vote. Quote Illegal unskilled immigrants drive down the wages for blue collar workers. Construction, meat packing, and landscaping are three prime examples. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- dsandreas, If the same people came in legaly ,how would they impact wages in the industries you mention? Blues, Cliff

Government run health care is...check Medicare and Medicaid fraud, abuse and massive over-spending vs. estimates. ______________________________________________ In Reply To In your experience...how many wrongs make a right? _____________________________________ Not relevant, since health care is not a "wrong".

In your experience...how many wrongs make a right? _____________________________________ Quote Country couldn't afford to invade Iraq either, but the moron did it and many more morons supported him. On the whole I'd rather we spent money on our own health instead of killing other people who presented no threat to us. But that's just me.

Quote I don't think illegal immigrants are the core of the problem. This situations is actually a perfect example of why illegal immigration is seen as a problem. __________________________________________________ Illegal unskilled immigrants drive down the wages for blue collar workers. Construction, meat packing, and landscaping are three prime examples.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is, and it seems that you swallowed Wilson's too, -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just like you and a lot of others swallowed Obama's. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You STILL haven't told us where HR3200 contains provisions to provide benefits for illegal aliens. ______________________________________________ Already explained this to you...there is NO provision to provide proof of legal status and there is NO penalty for getting care if you are not legal. In this case....it would be easy to get care even if you are not here legally. My solution is not an identity card...it is to NOT increase government involvement in health care. They have already made a mess of Medicare and Medicaid...give them something else to make a mess? Country can not afford it....

In Reply To --------------------------------------------------------- I'm more looking at the plans the current administration is putting forward, tempered a bit by the fact that they've got to deal with Congress. You're looking at historical data to draw conclusions about the present folks in charge? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There's a saying about remembering the past or being doomed to repeat it. I'm sure you ARE familiar with it. ______________________________________________ Luckyboy's analysis is simplistic and meaningless...it is not history. It would be the same as if I said that when I fill my car with fuel, the price of oil goes down. Although the two events may happen at the same time, one does not cause the other. He completely ignores monetary policy, macroeconomic factors at the time, the lag time between a change in policy and when it manifests itself, and many other events/factors (e.g. the end of the cold war and associated peace dividend, trade policy, who had control of Congress at various points, etc.). No matter how many times he repeats it in any number of forums…its meaningless drivel. No different than my example of my car and the price of oil.

Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- An excerpt that relates to this thread: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of the people I ended up talking to, the general vibe was that they were conservative, and then either Republican, formerly Republican, or independent. Every single one had unkind words to say about George W. Bush's spending and governing record, though none had protested him. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There's your hypocrisy, QED. Just the same as we see right here in this forum. Folks who sat on their hands when Bush was prez, but suddenly find fiscal responsibility when a Dem is in the White House. _______________________________________________ Ever hear of tipping point....or 100th monkey theory? Doesn't mean people didn't care before...it just took time (and actions) to create the tipping point. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_Monkey

In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ...81 Reagan and GWB have been the culprits and GHWB and Clinton have.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm very confused. I wasn't aware that the President actually exercised complete control over the budget. Can you point me at a reference I can read that explains the process? Thanks! _________________________________________ Tom....already been down that road with this kid. Ravings of a lunatic. Takes any two statistics and pieces them together to support his view of the world. I stopped reading his posts....complete waste of time.

Quote These questions are for ALL of the righties. They are very simple and straightforward. Do you support ending the "temporary" Bush Administration tax cuts? If the answer is No, please list your reasons why not. Do you support the elimination of the income cap on Social Secuity and Medicare taxes? If the answer is No, please list your reasons why not. _________________________________________ No and no. I do not believe raising taxes in a recession will create GDP growth nor reduce unemployment....both of which would lead to increased tax revenues. Do you recommend these actions? If so, do you recommend these actions to increase tax revenues, to punish achievement, or some other reason?

Quote Auto bailouts for GM and Chrysler- started by GWB. Bank bailouts - GWB again. AIG - the biggest single bailout - GWB again. Stimulus - remember GWB's checks for everyone? Republicans are the world's biggest hypocrites when it comes to criticizing government spending. __________________________________ I am not a Republican and I think Bush was a horrific President. Now that we have that established...what makes the continued wasteful spending something good for the country?

Quote Pay attention - I was writing about about federal revenues, NOT spending. In real terms (constant $$) revenues decreased during GWB's presidency. They increased during Clinton's administration. __________________________________________ I understand what you wrote...doesn't make what I wrote to be incorrect. It appears you think its a revenue problem and I think its a spending problem.