The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
2. The GOP is the worst party, except for all others.

When will the fucking Dems get over this fantastic belief that Govt can somehow fix the economy?

1992

Say we gave the Dems what they want - repeal of tax cuts. What would that do? What does taking money from people and putting it in the govt's hands do to help the economy? I agree that it theoretically provides more funds for states and the fed govt to provide services. But those services are not going to give the middle class new jobs. The Dems seem to be arguing - when they approach anything coherent - that the answer to our soft employment problem, which lies at the foundation of all our economic woes (and they are only going to get worse), is to put more money into govt services? How does that cure our problem with foreign labor competition?

Given today's budget, we wouldn't be putting in the government's hands, but would instead be putting it in the hands of the government's debtors, reducing the debt.

That would likely lessen demands for funds enough to pull interest rates down slightly. That's good for the economy. Probably good for you, too - assuming you have a mortgage.l

BTW, wouldn't it benefit the economy more to privatize govt services as much as possible? If we need a buyer for our labor, why not make it Uncle Sam? He'd do a lot more good in that capacity than merely being a handout provider. At a minimum, we'd create more efficient services. Is there anyone who doubts a company, which has to make profits and run an organized, efficient ship, wouldn't provide better services more effectively than the govt? I hate dealing with corp behemoths, but at their worst, they move 5X faster than any govt angency I've encountered.

Maybe, but private industry is very good at what it does - maximizing profits - and not always as good at doing what government often does, which often has more to do with a specific goal like bringing electricity to the Tennessee Valley or providing a national park that preserves the wilderness. There are some things that may be appropriate to privatize, but it's not a panacea.

So there's some fraud when you use private contractors. Those losses are a fraction of what the govt wastes running a comparabale program.

Maybe. Let's try an experiment, and start by privatizing your street. What do you think we can get out of you in the way of tolls?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Maybe, but private industry is very good at what it does - maximizing profits - and not always as good at doing what government often does, which often has more to do with a specific goal like bringing electricity to the Tennessee Valley or providing a national park that preserves the wilderness. There are some things that may be appropriate to privatize, but it's not a panacea.

2. Talk to your grandparents or parents about regular Medicare enrollment vs. enrollment in the clusterfuck that is Medicare Part D.

[Replaced_Texan]

Heh.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
2. Talk to your grandparents or parents about regular Medicare enrollment vs. enrollment in the clusterfuck that is Medicare Part D.

You said 2. to the fact that privitization is not the cure for everything. Is Medicure D some sort of privitization gone wrong? Wasn't it the other way around where government stepped into something and screwed it up.

I have lived in four countries that had socialized medicine. And in every single country it sucked. I prefer our health system any day.

However, the private market does not provide health care for everyone so the government has to step in. I believe that the government should step in to make sure everyone has healthcare, but this step should involve as little government involvement as possible.

The probably with the Dems is that every time they try and propose a health care plan it is too government intensive. It is like they just don't get that when it is feasible, you don't involve the government.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
You said 2. to the fact that privitization is not the cure for everything. Is Medicure D some sort of privitization gone wrong? Wasn't it the other way around where government stepped into something and screwed it up.

I have lived in four countries that had socialized medicine. And in every single country it sucked. I prefer our health system any day.

However, the private market does not provide health care for everyone so the government has to step in. I believe that the government should step in to make sure everyone has healthcare, but this step should involve as little government involvement as possible.

The probably with the Dems is that every time they try and propose a health care plan it is too government intensive. It is like they just don't get that when it is feasible, you don't involve the government.

Compare and contrast Medicare Parts A, B and D and then discuss this with me.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Compare and contrast Medicare Parts A, B and D and then discuss this with me.

Why would I waste my time on that and why should I care. From what I understand D is pretty screwed up. Why do I need to know anymore than that. And isn't the fact that D is screwed up just an argument for less government not more?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
Why would I waste my time on that and why should I care. From what I understand D is pretty screwed up. Why do I need to know anymore than that. And isn't the fact that D is screwed up just an argument for less government not more?

Part D is a public/private "partnership" and is totally fucked up. Parts A, B and C are all run by the government, and are not nearly as fucked up.

Medicaid, which used to provide benefits to the poorer chunk of people who now have Medicare Part D, was not totally fucked up, and was all public (run by gov't).

Thus, the smaller point is that when the "market" and private businesses were inserted into a system, it fucked it up. The larger point is probably that some things, like standard benefits that are to be offered to everyone in the whole country by federal mandate, are better administered by one entity than spread out among many.

Also, the state of CA (and possible also TX and some other state) are suing the federal gov't over Part D because it is going to be more expensive than what it had cost CA (and TX and some other state, and probably still more) to do the same thing at the state level, and yet the gov't is requiring CA to pay over a bunch of money.

Possibly what you actually want to argue is that Medicare Part D was a just a bad idea that never should have happened. I tend to agree with you.

I left out "You little shit moron" that started this post because while it is friday for me, it is not for most people.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Part D is a public/private "partnership" and is totally fucked up. Parts A, B and C are all run by the government, and are not nearly as fucked up.

Medicaid, which used to provide benefits to the poorer chunk of people who now have Medicare Part D, was not totally fucked up, and was all public (run by gov't).

Thus, the smaller point is that when the "market" and private businesses were inserted into a system, it fucked it up. The larger point is probably that some things, like standard benefits that are to be offered to everyone in the whole country by federal mandate, are better administered by one entity than spread out among many.

Also, the state of CA (and possible also TX and some other state) are suing the federal gov't over Part D because it is going to be more expensive than what it had cost CA (and TX and some other state, and probably still more) to do the same thing at the state level, and yet the gov't is requiring CA to pay over a bunch of money.

Possibly what you actually want to argue is that Medicare Part D was a just a bad idea that never should have happened. I tend to agree with you.

I left out "You little shit moron" that started this post because while it is friday for me, it is not for most people.

From what I understand Medicare is not run all that great. It is just that part D is a lot worse. Just because part D is screwed up does not mean all attempts at making medicine as private as possible are screwed up. Socialized medicine sucks. Does anyone really want the government to take over medicine. Do people really want our healthcare system to run just like the Department of Motor Vehicles?

Hospitals and drug companys need to compete for business. We need to help the poor etc. but we need to keep as much competition as we can to keep the quality of service up. Because without competition you get health systems like UK, France or Japan where the quality of service is beyond pathetic.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
From what I understand Medicare is not run all that great. It is just that part D is a lot worse. Just because part D is screwed up does not mean all attempts at making medicine as private as possible are screwed up. Socialized medicine sucks. Does anyone really want the government to take over medicine. Do people really want our healthcare system to run just like the Department of Motor Vehicles?

Medicare parts A, B, and C are not run just like the department of motor vehicles.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Medicare parts A, B, and C are not run just like the department of motor vehicles.

Is it worse or better? And if it is better, why is Medicare run better than the DMV?

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
From what I understand Medicare is not run all that great. It is just that part D is a lot worse. Just because part D is screwed up does not mean all attempts at making medicine as private as possible are screwed up. Socialized medicine sucks. Does anyone really want the government to take over medicine. Do people really want our healthcare system to run just like the Department of Motor Vehicles?

The military is run by the government. Do you think the military is run like the DMV?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Hi Hank!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
2. Talk to your grandparents or parents about regular Medicare enrollment vs. enrollment in the clusterfuck that is Medicare Part D.

I plan to be dead before the issue becomes ripe for me.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
The military is run by the government. Do you think the military is run like the DMV?

No, silly. You miss the basic tenet of neo-Con thinking. The government is utterly, shockingly, thoroughly incompetent and cannot possibly handle any task.

Except bringing democracy to the Middle East.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
I have lived in four countries that had socialized medicine. And in every single country it sucked. I prefer our health system any day.

Have you lived in this country without health insurance?