|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
03-21-2012, 07:10 PM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,348
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
Then, what's up with the Ryan plan to eliminate Medicare? Is that not a program for the elderly? Are we planning to replace it with anything? The language I hear coming from the right, for the last thirty years, paints anyone who recieves anything from the government as a "freeloader" even when they paid into it, or worked for it.
Am I wrong in that?
Dave
|
I'm not familiar with the Ryan plan. It really doesn't matter what his plan is at this moment.
The fact that someone is willing to touch the 3rd rail of politics is long overdue.
In a way, the Democrats deserve some credit for having the guts to address healthcare with PPACA, although they handled it like the dumbest, shade tree mechanic in existence.
Had they have done it right, they and Obama would be guaranteed reelection. The Republicans couldn't even block what they did, and they for sure couldn't have blocked them if they had a plan which gathered public support.
Just some thoughts,
Chas
|
03-21-2012, 06:04 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,737
|
|
Don't need a curve, it's common sense. Smaller government means less debt so they don't have to print as much money, devaluing the dollar. Also means less regulation which spurs business growth.
At least with private enterprise there's some competition over who's gonna try to screw ya.
__________________
"You can't always get what you want" -Rolling Stones
|
03-21-2012, 06:33 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,737
|
|
I think it's a political characterization to imply that the average conservative would deny citizens benefits they have paid for. That said, the government is the worst bank there is. I'm all for phasing these programs out so people can make free decisions in a competitive market about how to finance retirement and healthcare.
I try to be realistic myself. If it goes to the government, the union, or my wife, I never expect to see a penny of it again.
__________________
"You can't always get what you want" -Rolling Stones
|
03-21-2012, 06:53 PM
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,348
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasillaguy
I think it's a political characterization to imply that the average conservative would deny citizens benefits they have paid for. That said, the government is the worst bank there is. I'm all for phasing these programs out so people can make free decisions in a competitive market about how to finance retirement and healthcare.
I try to be realistic myself. If it goes to the government, the union, or my wife, I never expect to see a penny of it again.
|
Go easy on your wife, she can't be THAT bad.
Chas
|
03-21-2012, 07:36 PM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasillaguy
I think it's a political characterization to imply that the average conservative would deny citizens benefits they have paid for. That said, the government is the worst bank there is. I'm all for phasing these programs out so people can make free decisions in a competitive market about how to finance retirement and healthcare.
I try to be realistic myself. If it goes to the government, the union, or my wife, I never expect to see a penny of it again.
|
I think it's an accurate description of conservatives to say they think others are "stealing" from them, if one red cent of their money ends up in anyone elses pocket by any means, especially if it is by taxation. If you want to make copper wire, drop a penny at the Republican Convention.
People already have the ability to choose retirement and healthcare plans in the freemarket. However, the only thing more unstable and unreliable than the government is the so-called freemarket. This is why social safety nets are necessary and why they must be kept as separate from the freemarket as possible. This was the lesson your party failed to learn from the great depression. And the reason why their ideas set us, the common folk, up for disaster. We've already had that system once before. It didn't work. The market tanked, people starved. The reason Republicans want to kill the social safety nets and give more tax cuts to the wealthy, (Not us.), is because that's what they get paid to do.
Isn't it becoming more obvious by the day?
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
03-21-2012, 07:21 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Derby City U.S.A.
Posts: 8,213
|
|
What I have seen from family experience with Medicare and Tricare is that they in effect have been given a cut in benefits and pay have not made it back up. But on the other hand those who can already afford any increases in the costs of living and healthcare have been getting their taxes cut.
Barney
|
03-21-2012, 10:30 PM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerets
What I have seen from family experience with Medicare and Tricare is that they in effect have been given a cut in benefits and pay have not made it back up. But on the other hand those who can already afford any increases in the costs of living and healthcare have been getting their taxes cut.
Barney
|
Of course "pay has not made it back up". That's the whole idea. Daddy Warbucks wants his tax cut. He wants us little pissants to stop oppressing him. We can't give it to him if we compensate like that, the cuts have to be real. You see, the man with the knife at your throat doesn't care how you make up for the money he took, that's your problem. Go out and get a third job and work until you die if you have to. Praise be to Ayn Rand, and pass the collection plate Brother Breitbart. The Plutocracy won't be satisfied with a mere pittance, we must be generous and humble in our submission.
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
03-21-2012, 09:13 PM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
How much more will the widgets cost when the manufacturer has build it's own school to educate it workers, build its own infrastructure to transport it's product and receive its supplies, hire private security to protect its plant, hire mercenaries to protect the shipping lanes for any products it might export, and pay private contractors for every other government service that it takes for granted. Or we could look at the tax as part of the cost of doing business instead of a penalty.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
03-21-2012, 10:29 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
How much more will the widgets cost when the manufacturer has build it's own school to educate it workers, build its own infrastructure to transport it's product and receive its supplies, hire private security to protect its plant, hire mercenaries to protect the shipping lanes for any products it might export, and pay private contractors for every other government service that it takes for granted. Or we could look at the tax as part of the cost of doing business instead of a penalty.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
Doesn't matter how we "look at it" when we have no control over how its spent, what's its spent on, or whether or not it ever goes towards its stated purpose. The penalty or subsidy simply "is".
Also, if you're going down that road, then I'd offer this:
If the tax is really a "cost of doing business", then the business should be able to allocate those costs exactly. But can you confirm for me that the there is a dollar for dollar accounting of the money that the business spends in profit taxes, property taxes, use taxes, sales taxes, payroll taxes, capital gain taxes, transportation fees/taxes, asset taxes, license fees, etc. against those direct expenses? If not, and it the business pays more in taxes then it gets back in services (very, very likely the case), isn't this a subsidy? And who is the beneficiary of that subsidy? And what activity is stimulated with that subsidy?
Last edited by whell; 03-21-2012 at 10:31 PM.
|
03-22-2012, 06:26 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Upper Canuckistan
Posts: 2,180
|
|
The unregulated free market has shown over and over again that, given the freedom to do what they want, they will always cut their own throat for some short term gain.
__________________
There never Was a Good War or a Bad Peace. - Benjamin Franklin.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:29 AM.
|