THE REAL REASON AMERICANS ARE ANGRY

[andymays]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08222009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_real_reason_americans_are_angry_185998.htm?pag e=0

Excerpt:

It's been a hilarious August, watching media supporters of President Obama's health care package puzzle over the obscure motivations of the noncompliant Americans rallying against it.

"Racial anxiety," guessed New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

"Nihilism," theorized Time's Joe Klein.

"The crazy tree blooms in every moment of liberal ascendancy," historian Rick Perlstein proclaimed in the Washington Post.

While the commentariat's condescension is almost comical, the whole evil-or-stupid explanation misses the elephant in Obama's room: Americans of all stripes, it turns out, aren't very keen about the government barging into their lives.

[NJ Stinks]

Oh, I thought it was because these people lost so many elections. :(

Leave it to the NY Post to tell it like they wish it. :rolleyes:

[andymays]

Oh, I thought it was because these people lost so many elections. :(

Leave it to the NY Post to tell it like they wish it. :rolleyes:


Obviously, I agree with the article or I wouldn't have posted it. Do you agree with anything in the article or nothing in the article?

[NJ Stinks]

Obviously, I agree with the article or I wouldn't have posted it. Do you agree with anything in the article or nothing in the article?

I agree that it was painful for the NY Post to say Michael Moore was right about anything.

Other than that this is just more of the "the sky is falling" BS that the right is fostering. I suggest reading a less biased newspaper. Or stick to the Post's racing coverage. No spin there.

[46zilzal]

Ne York POST are you serious? A Murdoch mouthpiece no different to the garbage propaganda on FAUX.

[boxcar]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08222009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_real_reason_americans_are_angry_185998.htm?pag e=0

Excerpt:

It's been a hilarious August, watching media supporters of President Obama's health care package puzzle over the obscure motivations of the noncompliant Americans rallying against it.

"Racial anxiety," guessed New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

"Nihilism," theorized Time's Joe Klein.

"The crazy tree blooms in every moment of liberal ascendancy," historian Rick Perlstein proclaimed in the Washington Post.

While the commentariat's condescension is almost comical, the whole evil-or-stupid explanation misses the elephant in Obama's room: Americans of all stripes, it turns out, aren't very keen about the government barging into their lives.

The New York Post! That radical right wing rag! Another newspaper not fit to line bird cage bottoms.

They are so out of touch with mainstream Americans. All Americans love Nanny because we all know that Nanny loves us and cares for us and wants to watch over us continually to protect us from ourselves. REAL Americans know individualism sucks raw eggs. Real Americans know individual liberties must be abandoned for the public/collective good -- that Collectivism is the wave of the future because it will solve all Man's problems (eventually, of course). Real Americans know what our limitations are. We know we're incapable of thinking for ourselves. We're incapable of making right choices. We know that we need be controlled and disciplined -- just like a loving mother would with her child. We want to be told when to smoke and when not to and where to smoke and where not to. We want to be told that we need to be strapped into our automobiles (even though many states don't even require helmets for motorcycle riders). We want to be told what to eat and what not to eat. We want to be taxed for eating or drinking store-bought but forbidden substances. We want to be told how much energy we can consume and dont' mind at all sitting in the dark or sweltering in the heat or freezing our butts off in order to save the earth. We want to be told that we're really not responsible for our actions (except of course when we piss Nanny off). We want Nanny to monitor our every keystroke on our computers to protect us from unwittingly falling into the clutches of soul and mind- destroying evil right wingers. And we want Nanny to take care of our personal health issues. We don't need no stinkin' crooked doctors (who charge 30K per amputated foot) to recommend what care we need. We need a health czar and his commission to do that. And we really want Nanny to be with us at the end when she tells us its time to pull the plug.
And above all else, we welcome TAXES. We want to be taxed to the hilt because the more taxes we pay, the more patriotic we are and the more Nanny can get to spend on us (not that we're selfish or anything) because we're entitled to be rewarded for our loyalty to Nanny. And we don't have to concern ourselves either with skyrocketing deficits that our our kids' kids' kids' kids won't even be able to pay because soon Nanny will implement very strict controls over our birthrate, too.

In summary: The New York Post is out of touch. All that supposed anger out there is strictly staged and manufactured and bought and paid for by the kook fringe right. In reality, though, it's virtually non-existent because 99% of real Americans worship at the altar of BO.

Boxcar
P.S. We should all march to NYC to torch the Post in protest of their propaganda.

[lsbets]

Ne York POST are you serious? A Murdoch mouthpiece no different to the garbage propaganda on FAUX.

This from the guy who cites Al Jazeera and Reuters (numerous doctored photos) as reliable sources. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

The New York Post! That radical right wing rag! Another newspaper not fit to line bird cage bottoms.



I didn't know you read the Post, Boxcar. :ThmbUp:

[gm10]

The funny thing is that it would cost Americans less money, prevent a lot of human misery and maybe even make Americans live as long as their counterparts do in the rest of the developed world.
And yet the issue seems to split the population in half.

[boxcar]

The funny thing is that it would cost Americans less money, prevent a lot of human misery and maybe even make Americans live as long as their counterparts do in the rest of the developed world.
And yet the issue seems to split the population in half.

Yeah...probably because at least half of us can see beyond the trees to the forest. We can see the bigger, the more fundamental issue, i.e. our individual liberties.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I didn't know you read the Post, Boxcar. :ThmbUp:

I don't. I'm just relying on hearsay from the Left, which is always, always truthful, right?

Boxcar

[andymays]

The funny thing is that it would cost Americans less money, prevent a lot of human misery and maybe even make Americans live as long as their counterparts do in the rest of the developed world.
And yet the issue seems to split the population in half.


What makes you think it would cost less money?

Life expectancy in the U.S. has to do with a lot more than health care!

[gm10]

Yeah...probably because at least half of us can see beyond the trees to the forest. We can see the bigger, the more fundamental issue, i.e. our individual liberties.

Boxcar

Yes I've read that. Must admit, I don't understand it. How does a nationalized healthcare system infringe on those? They won't force you to go into hospital, you know.

[gm10]

What makes you think it would cost less money?

Life expectancy in the U.S. has to do with a lot more than health care!

Because Americans spend a lot more on healthcare than other, longer-living nationalities do.

I know it has to do with more than that, but I also know that some things work less good when they are privatized. Trains are another good example. Unless you build parallel tracks where competing companies can run their trains, you'll never get the benefits that a free market system brings to say, the coffee shop industry (better service, low prices, etc).

[boxcar]

Yes I've read that. Must admit, I don't understand it. How does a nationalized healthcare system infringe on those? They won't force you to go into hospital, you know.

What about not allowing the sick into a hospital because some career bureaucrat won't permit it? :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

I'm afraid, sir, the topics of liberty and tyranny may be beyond your reach, or perhaps have never even been contemplated by you. In either case, I have neither the time or inclination to bring you up to speed on such a fundamental issue to a constitutional republic.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Cost us less, you mean like it did in MASS?

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/147850.php

The people who just botched a simple billion dollar program to trade in a car - not a rocket science event - are going to suddenly run an efficient health care system? :lol:

[gm10]

What about not allowing the sick into a hospital because some career bureaucrat won't permit it? :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


What????? That's exactly the point. Everyone gets access to treatment.


I'm afraid, sir, the topics of liberty and tyranny may be beyond your reach, or perhaps have never even been contemplated by you. In either case, I have neither the time or inclination to bring you up to speed on such a fundamental issue to a constitutional republic.
Boxcar

LOL
alright, dude, hope you stay well

[gm10]

Cost us less, you mean like it did in MASS?

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/147850.php

The people who just botched a simple billion dollar program to trade in a car - not a rocket science event - are going to suddenly run an efficient health care system? :lol:

Americans spend twice as much on healthcare as the french and live 3 years less. I live in England, so I don't care too much about your healthcare system, but seems like you guys aren't exactly getting value for money.

Numbers can be found here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8201711.stm

For the record, I don't find the English system that good either, but at least it's free and open to everyone who has the misfortune to fall ill. And if you prefer to go private, there's plenty of options.

[andymays]

http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/08/23/blue-dog-leader-public-option-unlikely-to-survive-conference-report/

Excerpt:

A public (or "government-run") option in the healthcare bill before Congress is unlikely to survive conference between the House and Senate, a leader of the centrist Blue Dog coalition said this weekend.

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-N.D.) said that while there is a good chance the preliminary House bill will contain the controversial provision, the final bill which will head to the White House probably won't contain the option.

"I think that it will not survive the conference committee," Herseth Sandlin said during an interview with The Daily Republic. She said any version to pass through the House would have to be "structured under very stringent requirements to meet the many concerns that people have about the potential of driving out private companies that would offer plans on the exchange."

Blue Dogs have been reluctant to back the version of the healthcare bill in the House, over concerns about the public option, as well as over some of the taxes used to finance the $1 trillion bill.

[boxcar]

What????? That's exactly the point. Everyone gets access to treatment.



LOL
alright, dude, hope you stay well

Yeah...okay. If YOU and liberal politicians say so. :bang: :bang: No valid reason to distrust any of you, is there? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[andymays]

Americans spend twice as much on healthcare as the french and live 3 years less. I live in England, so I don't care too much about your healthcare system, but seems like you guys aren't exactly getting value for money.

Numbers can be found here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8201711.stm

For the record, I don't find the English system that good either, but at least it's free and open to everyone who has the misfortune to fall ill. And if you prefer to go private, there's plenty of options.

The French Connection by Chris Muir

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cmuir/2009/08/23/the-french-connection/

[gm10]

Yeah...okay. If YOU and liberal politicians say so. :bang: :bang: No valid reason to distrust any of you, is there? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

There's no reason to trust the conservatives either, though, is there.

I'm very interested in the debate that is going in the US right now. I don't live there, and although I try to stay objective at all times, my perception is def. coloured by the British media. However, for me this is a no-brainer: private health insurance doesn't work as it should. Health insurance is supposed to be about people's health, yet it ends up being driven by corporate profit.

[BenDiesel26]

One reason we spend so much is because America has twice the obesity rate of Europe. Sorry, but that's not a health care issue. That's a nutrition issue.

All I know is this: If you need elective surgery, life saving surgery, or you have a life threatening illness such as cancer, you are WAYYYY better off in America than you are in Canada or England. That's a fact. There's also a reason that the vast majority of major medical innovations are born in America. You name it and America most likely had something to do with it: MRI's, CT scans, hip replacement, the birth control pill, etc., etc., etc., etc. Do yourself a quick search on the nobel prize for medicine over the past 34 years and write the country of origin of the winners as well as where they studied, chances are, you will see alot of America's in there.

[boxcar]

There's no reason to trust the conservatives either, though, is there.

I'm very interested in the debate that is going in the US right now. I don't live there, and although I try to stay objective at all times, my perception is def. coloured by the British media. However, for me this is a no-brainer: private health insurance doesn't work as it should. Health insurance is supposed to be about people's health, yet it ends up being driven by corporate profit.

And I guess there's no reason to trust in yourself either, is there? No reason to trust in your own resourcefulness either, I suppose? Or to trust in free market solutions whereby the state gets to stay out of our personal lives?

And allow me to give you a little clue: State-run health care isn't about people's health either. It's about seizing more power and control over our lives.

Ciao,
Boxcar

[46zilzal]

All I know is this: If you need elective surgery, life saving surgery, or you have a life threatening illness such as cancer, you are WAYYYY better off in America than you are in Canada or England. That's a fact. There's also a reason that the vast majority of major medical innovations are born in America.
Never having lived here the only thing you folks hear is propaganda

[BenDiesel26]

Never having lived here the only thing you folks hear is propaganda

Do you deny then that we have higher cancer survival rates than you, faster access to care, and more access to preventative screening? Do you deny that we have much quicker access to such things as hip replacement surgery or even an MRI here? If I really needed one, I would have no problem getting an MRI this week here in America. How long would I have to wait in Ontario, a month? Two months? Four months? How is that propaganda if its fact.

[delayjf]

Americans spend twice as much on healthcare as the french and live 3 years less. I live in England, so I don't care too much about your healthcare system, but seems like you guys aren't exactly getting value for money.

If you factor out homicides, auto mobile accidents, and factor in obesidy rates and life style differences. US citizens live longer.

[andymays]

If you factor out homicides, auto mobile accidents, and factor in obesidy rates and life style differences. US citizens live longer.


Exactly! :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

Never having lived here the only thing you folks hear is propaganda

No, we hear it from Canadians when come here to get what they can't get at home. The propaganda we hear is from you.

[boxcar]

Do you deny then that we have higher cancer survival rates than you, faster access to care, and more access to preventative screening? Do you deny that we have much quicker access to such things as hip replacement surgery or even an MRI here? If I really needed one, I would have no problem getting an MRI this week here in America. How long would I have to wait in Ontario, a month? Two months? Four months? How is that propaganda if its fact.

Exactly right! Several months ago, my specialist ordered an MRI for me and I got in less than a week! Try doing that in Canada! :bang: :bang:

It's no wonder at all that publicly BO has distanced himself from the Canadian health system. He knows it's bad and he knows that a lot of Americans do too.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

If you factor out homicides, auto mobile accidents, and factor in obesidy rates and life style differences. US citizens live longer.

Careful delay - the truth confuses liberals.

[lsbets]

Exactly right! Several months ago, my specialist ordered an MRI for me and I got in less than a week! Try doing that in Canada! :bang: :bang:

It's no wonder at all that publicly BO has distanced himself from the Canadian health system. He knows it's bad and he knows that a lot of Americans do too.

Boxcar

Govt healthcare in the US:

I have a non life threatening yet pretty uncomfortable and pain in the ass thing going on with my left arm. Since it is more than likely service connected from my time in Iraq, I need to go through the VA to get it taken care of, especially if I end up getting compensation for it.

I went to the VA two Friday's ago. They said I need an MRI and then I need to see a neurologist. I was told it would take 4-6 weeks to get an appointment for the MRI. Ten days later I still don't have an appointment. I was also told that I cannot schedule my appointment with the neurologist until the MRI is done, and that will take 4-6 weeks after the MRI. So, I'm probably looking at 3 months to get someone to look at me. If I were going on my own in the private market, I would have had both appointments already.

[andymays]

Years ago most of the people that worked in government did serve the public first.

Now most of the people that work in government are there to serve themeselves first, their political party second, and then the public last.

This is why anything to do with the government (except the Military) is so inefficient. The people who work in government can't get fired so they don't give a s**t.

[andymays]

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/fdemartini/2009/08/23/big-government-big-mistake/

Excerpt:

The biggest success of the “Spending Bill,” oops, “Stimulus Bill,” is ending. Yup, that is right; “Cash for Clunkers” is gone. Why? Because it was such a big success, the government ran out of money for the program not once, but twice. This time President Obama is shutting it down. No more money. It is finished. The official spin is that it brought the automobile industry back from destruction. Or, did it?

In my opinion, it is just another example of a government program that did not work contrary to what I said in a prior column. To begin with, the government mistook the popularity of the program and only allocated one billion dollars of stimulus money to the bill. That money ran out in less than two weeks. Then, Congress immediately allocated another two billion dollars. That money is running out in less than four weeks. Another Big Government miscalculation!

[boxcar]

Govt healthcare in the US:

I have a non life threatening yet pretty uncomfortable and pain in the ass thing going on with my left arm. Since it is more than likely service connected from my time in Iraq, I need to go through the VA to get it taken care of, especially if I end up getting compensation for it.

I went to the VA two Friday's ago. They said I need an MRI and then I need to see a neurologist. I was told it would take 4-6 weeks to get an appointment for the MRI. Ten days later I still don't have an appointment. I was also told that I cannot schedule my appointment with the neurologist until the MRI is done, and that will take 4-6 weeks after the MRI. So, I'm probably looking at 3 months to get someone to look at me. If I were going on my own in the private market, I would have had both appointments already.

Our stories are very similar but with very different outcomes due to the nature of our providers/coverages. About 5 months ago, my chiropractor referred me to THE top orthopedic guy who specializes in shoulders because of nagging and annoying problems I've been having. I get in to see this guy within a week. In the initial visit, he diagnosed a cervical problem -- not a shoulder one. But he said to make sure, let's get an MRI done. I called the MRI place the same day when I returned home and had the appointment within one week. There is no way on this little green planet I would get this kind of top quality service under any stinkin' "public option" plan. It would never happen -- just like you still can't get your MRI performed after all this time. I feel for you, LS. Having to rely on state-run services really sucks raw eggs.

Boxcar

[NJ Stinks]

Years ago most of the people that worked in government did serve the public first....

....This is why anything to do with the government (except the Military) is so inefficient. The people who work in government can't get fired so they don't give a s**t.

Tell that to the 11,000 air traffic controllers Reagan fired in 1981. ;)

[Warren Henry]

Tell that to the 11,000 air traffic controllers Reagan fired in 1981. ;)
and put the safety of the flying public in jeopardy. Ronnie was the last President to acually have a set.

[46zilzal]

Our stories are very similar but with very different outcomes due to the nature of our providers/coverages. About 5 months ago, my chiropractor referred me to THE top orthopedic guy who specializes in shoulders because of nagging and annoying problems I've been having. I get in to see this guy within a week. In the initial visit, he diagnosed a cervical problem -- not a shoulder one. But he said to make sure, let's get an MRI done. I called the MRI place the same day when I returned home and had the appointment within one week. There is no way on this little green planet I would get this kind of top quality service under any stinkin' "public option" plan. It would never happen -- just like you still can't get your MRI performed after all this time. I feel for you, LS. Having to rely on state-run services really sucks raw eggs.

Boxcar
Chiropractor? The SCIENCE invented by a grocer (Daniel David Palmer) when he "cured" his working associate, a Mr. Lillard (he was ostensibly deaf) by somehow "popping" his back. Only problem is that the 8th CRANIAL nerve (the vestibulochochlear) does not travel down the spine, but HE opened as school two years later based upon his "scientific" discovery.

What frauds..You are really lucky to find one who, like Dirty Harry states "a man has got to know his limitations." We had a nut in San Mateo who told his clients to NOT get tetanus shots but rather come in regularly for "adjustments." Same clown had his license suspended when his partner developed pain on exertion, radiating down his LEFT arm associated with sweating and palpatations. He delayed proper diagnosis while he "manipulated his spine." Fellow died of an acute myocardial infarction. Charlatans with "science" based on a false premise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_David_Palmer

"... we must have a religious head, one who is the founder, as did Christ, Mohamed, Jo. Smith, Mrs. Eddy, Martin Luther and other who have founded religions. I am the fountain head. I am the founder of chiropractic in its science, in its art, in its philosophy and in its religious phase."

[Lefty]

Yeah, zilly. 3 yrs ago i had a lot of pain in my neck and shoulder. 2 visits to a Chiropractor and it's gone and hasn't returned. BTW, my health insurance pd for it. You think these crooks are in it together? Hmmm...

[boxcar]

Chiropractor? The SCIENCE invented by a grocer (Daniel David Palmer) when he "cured" his working associate, a Mr. Lillard (he was ostensibly deaf) by somehow "popping" his back. Only problem is that the 8th CRANIAL nerve (the vestibulochochlear) does not travel down the spine, but HE opened as school two years later based upon his "scientific" discovery.

What frauds..You are really lucky to find one who, like Dirty Harry states "a man has got to know his limitations." We had a nut in San Mateo who told his clients to NOT get tetanus shots but rather come in regularly for "adjustments." Same clown had his license suspended when his partner developed pain on exertion, radiating down his LEFT arm associated with sweating and palpatations. He delayed proper diagnosis while he "manipulated his spine." Fellow died of an acute myocardial infarction. Charlatans with "science" based on a false premise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_David_Palmer

"... we must have a religious head, one who is the founder, as did Christ, Mohamed, Jo. Smith, Mrs. Eddy, Martin Luther and other who have founded religions. I am the fountain head. I am the founder of chiropractic in its science, in its art, in its philosophy and in its religious phase."

Err...Zilly, for your info, chiropractic care, especially the activator method, is very sound and can be very helpful -- and the vast majority of major insurance companies cover this kind of care! Some nutcase may have found it, but it has come an awful long way since then. Get up to speed already, Mr, Know-it_All.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

Neurologic complications following chiropractic manipulation: a survey of California neurologists.
Lee KP, Carlini WG, McCormick GF, Albers GW.

Stanford Stroke Center, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1705, USA.

To obtain an estimate of how often practicing neurologists in California encounter unexpected strokes, myelopathies, or radiculopathies following chiropractic manipulation, we surveyed each member of the American Academy of Neurology in California and inquired about the number of patients evaluated over the preceding 2 years who suffered a neurologic complication within 24 hours of chiropractic manipulation. Four hundred eighty-six neurologists were surveyed, 177 responded; 55 strokes, 16 myelopathies, and 30 radiculopathies were reported. Patients were between the ages of 21 and 60, and the majority experienced complications following cervical manipulation. Most of the patients continued to have persistent neurologic deficits 3 months after the onset, and about one-half had marked or severe deficits. Nearly all of the strokes involved the posterior circulation and almost one-half were angiographically proven. Patients, physicians, and chiropractors should be aware of the risk of neurologic complications associated with chiropractic manipulation.

GOOD stuff, dangerous as hell.

[boxcar]

Neurologic complications following chiropractic manipulation: a survey of California neurologists.
Lee KP, Carlini WG, McCormick GF, Albers GW.

Stanford Stroke Center, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA 94304-1705, USA.

To obtain an estimate of how often practicing neurologists in California encounter unexpected strokes, myelopathies, or radiculopathies following chiropractic manipulation, we surveyed each member of the American Academy of Neurology in California and inquired about the number of patients evaluated over the preceding 2 years who suffered a neurologic complication within 24 hours of chiropractic manipulation. Four hundred eighty-six neurologists were surveyed, 177 responded; 55 strokes, 16 myelopathies, and 30 radiculopathies were reported. Patients were between the ages of 21 and 60, and the majority experienced complications following cervical manipulation. Most of the patients continued to have persistent neurologic deficits 3 months after the onset, and about one-half had marked or severe deficits. Nearly all of the strokes involved the posterior circulation and almost one-half were angiographically proven. Patients, physicians, and chiropractors should be aware of the risk of neurologic complications associated with chiropractic manipulation.

GOOD stuff, dangerous as hell.

Yeah, okay, zilly. This is why my orthopedic guy not only spoke so highly of my chiropractor but was actually treated by him at one time. And furthermore, your little study here fails to reveal the pool size of the patients. What is the percentage, silly? :bang: :bang: 55 strokes out of 10, 000 patients? 55 strokes out of 20,000 patients? 30,000 patients? Those 177 neuros must have seen more than a few patients over those two years, don't ya think? :bang: :bang:

Boxcar

[gm10]

Our stories are very similar but with very different outcomes due to the nature of our providers/coverages. About 5 months ago, my chiropractor referred me to THE top orthopedic guy who specializes in shoulders because of nagging and annoying problems I've been having. I get in to see this guy within a week. In the initial visit, he diagnosed a cervical problem -- not a shoulder one. But he said to make sure, let's get an MRI done. I called the MRI place the same day when I returned home and had the appointment within one week. There is no way on this little green planet I would get this kind of top quality service under any stinkin' "public option" plan. It would never happen -- just like you still can't get your MRI performed after all this time. I feel for you, LS. Having to rely on state-run services really sucks raw eggs.

Boxcar

You're confusing two issues here. A proper state-funded health service as they have in continental Europe will give those options to EVERYONE, just as fast, and nearly no cost. The reason why I didn't work in your case is exactly because you don't have a proper national health system.

My father suffered from lung cancer from 2002-2005. The state (Belgium in this case) provided the best available treatments. They send round a nurse daily (to wash him, check up on him). They sent a chiro every week. All paid for by the state. The state even paid my mum 300 euro a month because she took care of my dad at home thereby giving up a hospital bed/room that he was entitled to.

THAT's a proper state health service.

[gm10]

And I guess there's no reason to trust in yourself either, is there? No reason to trust in your own resourcefulness either, I suppose? Or to trust in free market solutions whereby the state gets to stay out of our personal lives?

And allow me to give you a little clue: State-run health care isn't about people's health either. It's about seizing more power and control over our lives.

Ciao,
Boxcar

Well, buddy, I understand your point, but how valid would is still be after you've found out that you've got cancer and have about 6 months worth of treatments saved up or a health insurer that hires a lawyer so that they don't have to cover you for it, etc.

State-run healthcare is NOT about seizing controls over people's lives. How do you substantiate those claims anyway?

[Tom]

We know our dems. We listen to them.
They have told us what their ultimate plan is.

[boxcar]

Well, buddy, I understand your point, but how valid would is still be after you've found out that you've got cancer and have about 6 months worth of treatments saved up or a health insurer that hires a lawyer so that they don't have to cover you for it, etc.

State-run healthcare is NOT about seizing controls over people's lives. How do you substantiate those claims anyway?

From my knowledge of human nature and the study of human history, generally -- and more specifically from knowing how liberals in this country work. After all...governments are run by humans, are they not? As stated previously, all governments naturally gravitate toward despotism which usually finds its expression through oligarchies.

Study world history and the bible. Man hasn't changed one iota.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You're confusing two issues here. A proper state-funded health service as they have in continental Europe will give those options to EVERYONE, just as fast, and nearly no cost. The reason why I didn't work in your case is exactly because you don't have a proper national health system.

My father suffered from lung cancer from 2002-2005. The state (Belgium in this case) provided the best available treatments. They send round a nurse daily (to wash him, check up on him). They sent a chiro every week. All paid for by the state. The state even paid my mum 300 euro a month because she took care of my dad at home thereby giving up a hospital bed/room that he was entitled to.

THAT's a proper state health service.

Sir, with all due respect, stick with what you think you know. For certain you know little or nothing about the U.S. government, the key leaders in our government and what their political agenda is. With all due respect, I could care less what goes on in Europe. If socialism works for you over there, good for you. Go for it. Embrace it. Love it. Do whatever you want with it.
This nation, however, was not founded on principles of socialism, on principles of dependence or on principles of collectivism. These were not the principles or values that have made this such a great nation. Very many of us value our individual independence. We value our individual liberties. We value capitalism. And as much as we love these things, we despise a tyrannical government.

Boxcar

[ddog]

Years ago most of the people that worked in government did serve the public first.

Now most of the people that work in government are there to serve themeselves first, their political party second, and then the public last.

This is why anything to do with the government (except the Military) is so inefficient. The people who work in government can't get fired so they don't give a s**t.


You invalidate any type of reason with the (except the military) foolishness.

ANyone who has been in or experienced dealing with it will tell you it's a boondoggle.

It is needed , but the WASTE and FRAUD and vote buying from the mil budget is on a par with anything you can think of.

[andymays]

You invalidate any type of reason with the (except the military) foolishness.

ANyone who has been in or experienced dealing with it will tell you it's a boondoggle.

It is needed , but the WASTE and FRAUD and vote buying from the mil budget is on a par with anything you can think of.


I should have went into more detail about the Military. I was referring to fighting wars. They are excellent at the fighting and the winning when the politicians and bureaucrats let them!

[ddog]

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/fdemartini/2009/08/23/big-government-big-mistake/

Excerpt:

The biggest success of the “Spending Bill,” oops, “Stimulus Bill,” is ending. Yup, that is right; “Cash for Clunkers” is gone. Why? Because it was such a big success, the government ran out of money for the program not once, but twice. This time President Obama is shutting it down. No more money. It is finished. The official spin is that it brought the automobile industry back from destruction. Or, did it?

In my opinion, it is just another example of a government program that did not work contrary to what I said in a prior column. To begin with, the government mistook the popularity of the program and only allocated one billion dollars of stimulus money to the bill. That money ran out in less than two weeks. Then, Congress immediately allocated another two billion dollars. That money is running out in less than four weeks. Another Big Government miscalculation!


same for home buyers tax credits and on and on.

The gvt should not be in the biz of handing out tax credit/cash to fund private actions in cases like these.

They distort decisions and cause capital distortions of which they have no clue.

Without the current tax foolishness and the past foolish "home owner society" gvt largess, we could not be in the fix we are in now.

Only fools are taking this 8K and going into hock for homes now.

A large part of them will be destroyed within 5 years.

[ddog]

I should have went into more detail about the Military. I was referring to fighting wars. They are excellent at the fighting and the winning when the politicians and bureaucrats let them!


jeez, when was the last war we fought?

We only "nation build" now.

I am sorry, but our mil is being torn down and turned into a welfare society for other countries WHO don't appreciate it, what welfare receiver truly does?

Especially ones who are radically opposed to the religion of the givers.

We are creating (ed) a disaster in the ME.

We are being used and are heading RIGHT back down the road we took the USSR before in AFG.

It's so plain to see that , well, it's just a shame to have to see it.

[boxcar]

same for home buyers tax credits and on and on.

The gvt should not be in the biz of handing out tax credit/cash to fund private actions in cases like these.

They distort decisions and cause capital distortions of which they have no clue.

Without the current tax foolishness and the past foolish "home owner society" gvt largess, we could not be in the fix we are in now.

Only fools are taking this 8K and going into hock for homes now.

A large part of them will be destroyed within 5 years.

:eek: :eek: :eek: Once in every other blue moon you do make some sense. :ThmbUp:

[Black Ruby]

jeez, when was the last war we fought?

We only "nation build" now.

I am sorry, but our mil is being torn down and turned into a welfare society for other countries WHO don't appreciate it, what welfare receiver truly does?

Especially ones who are radically opposed to the religion of the givers.

We are creating (ed) a disaster in the ME.

We are being used and are heading RIGHT back down the road we took the USSR before in AFG.

It's so plain to see that , well, it's just a shame to have to see it.

Absolutely! We have about 1000 bases in foreign countries now (the government says fewer, but due to military reasoning they don't count the ones in Iraq or Afghanistan). I'd like to see at least 2/3 of 'em closed, but we can't close bases and bring soldiers home because there aren't any jobs here for them, and the foreign economies where the bases are depend on our money. What a great situation.

Who'd have thought it....China is becoming the world power not by military might, but by fiscal strength.

[gm10]

From my knowledge of human nature and the study of human history, generally -- and more specifically from knowing how liberals in this country work. After all...governments are run by humans, are they not? As stated previously, all governments naturally gravitate toward despotism which usually finds its expression through oligarchies.

Study world history and the bible. Man hasn't changed one iota.

Boxcar

I really don't see how this helps your argument. Corporations are run by humans too, no? At least governments are held accountable.

[gm10]

Sir, with all due respect, stick with what you think you know. For certain you know little or nothing about the U.S. government, the key leaders in our government and what their political agenda is. With all due respect, I could care less what goes on in Europe. If socialism works for you over there, good for you. Go for it. Embrace it. Love it. Do whatever you want with it.
This nation, however, was not founded on principles of socialism, on principles of dependence or on principles of collectivism. These were not the principles or values that have made this such a great nation. Very many of us value our individual independence. We value our individual liberties. We value capitalism. And as much as we love these things, we despise a tyrannical government.

Boxcar

I really don't see why 'socialism' would be incompatible with 'freedom'. I would suggest, travel some, and try to see for yourself. I don't think anyone has the right to lecture on this, but I don't think that you see the full picture.

Also, you pay taxes for your roads don't you? Are you telling me that you would rather haved each yard of road run by private companies who can charge you as they please, rather than have the state build them?

[gm10]

Absolutely! We have about 1000 bases in foreign countries now (the government says fewer, but due to military reasoning they don't count the ones in Iraq or Afghanistan). I'd like to see at least 2/3 of 'em closed, but we can't close bases and bring soldiers home because there aren't any jobs here for them, and the foreign economies where the bases are depend on our money. What a great situation.

Who'd have thought it....China is becoming the world power not by military might, but by fiscal strength.

Maybe military bases should be like embassies. You get one in China, China gets one in the US.

[Black Ruby]

From my knowledge of human nature and the study of human history, generally -- and more specifically from knowing how liberals in this country work. After all...governments are run by humans, are they not? As stated previously, all governments naturally gravitate toward despotism which usually finds its expression through oligarchies.

Study world history and the bible. Man hasn't changed one iota.

Boxcar

Don't you mean from how Limbaugh and the hired hands at Faux tell you liberals work? Somehow I can't imagine you having a lot of first hand knowledge of liberals. I probably hang with a more diverse crowd than you, and I can only think of 2 this crowd of people I'd categorize as liberals, a couple as neo-cons, and most as moderates who're fed up with both of those groups and their divisiveness.

[Lefty]

G, you can't see how socialism impinges on freedom? and you are a world traveler? Socialism seeks to equalize society through income redistribution. We have too much of that already. why do you think that most of the great inventions in every area have come from us, a capitalist society? Because Socialism is the death of inventivness.
also your 'roads' argument is flawed. We pay gasoline taxes for the roads.
They are usually built by private contractors that bid on the projects. They are individual projects. Not even close to healthcare. Do you think that everytime you get sick, the govt will put your case up for bid? your analogy is weak as water.
I keep asking you guys that want Obama's healthcare plan why they trust the govt to handle National healthcare when they have screwed up the VA, Medicare, Medicaid, The postoffice and everything it touches? there's only a few things, like National Security that the govt can handle better than Private enterprise. Obama even admitted it when he said Fedex and UPS does a better job than the govt.
So, why do you trust the govt with something as vital as your healthcare?

[boxcar]

I really don't see why 'socialism' would be incompatible with 'freedom'. I would suggest, travel some, and try to see for yourself. I don't think anyone has the right to lecture on this, but I don't think that you see the full picture.

Also, you pay taxes for your roads don't you? Are you telling me that you would rather haved each yard of road run by private companies who can charge you as they please, rather than have the state build them?

You need to get up to speed on these kinds of questions. They have been answered and fully addressed various ways in other threads. Go and look at my analogy, for example, of condo ownership and how owners pool their money together and pay the condo fees for maintenance of the common areas on the property, but each are fully responsible for maintaining and paying for their own improvements to their personal living quarters. Roads are analogous to common areas in condos. My personal health care, however, is my personal business and I don't want anyone intruding into my business -- into areas of my personal life. And the operative term here is anyone.

In closing, I have no doubt that you think you live in a free society. Once you're hooked on the opium of socialism, you can't see anything else -- you don't know any other way of life.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Don't you mean from how Limbaugh and the hired hands at Faux tell you liberals work? Somehow I can't imagine you having a lot of first hand knowledge of liberals. I probably hang with a more diverse crowd than you, and I can only think of 2 this crowd of people I'd categorize as liberals, a couple as neo-cons, and most as moderates who're fed up with both of those groups and their divisiveness.

Whatever.... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I really don't see how this helps your argument. Corporations are run by humans too, no? At least governments are held accountable.

Because in the free market place, I'm still free to make choices. With the government, my choices would be severely limited.

I said this also on previous occasions: In an ocean filled with big fish -- fish who eat smaller fish -- I still prefer swimming with the barracuda than with a great white shark. Both are dangerous. Both are sinful. Both are greedy. Both are power-hungry. But...I'd prefer the barracuda because my chances would be somewhat better dealing with them with the free market tools I have rather than a powerful, oppressive government.

For example, with a government "public option", sooner or later everyone will be coerced into participating. This must happen in order for it to "succeed". The People will have no choice. No say in the matter. However, in within a free market framework, if I don't like my insurance company's policy, I can choose to drop them. I can choose not to buy and look elsewhere for other solutions. Free Market = Consumers Free Choices. State-run industry = little or no choices.

The foundational element to Freedom is Freedom of Choice. I'm only as free as I am free from external infringements upon the exercise of my will.

Boxcar

[gm10]

Because in the free market place, I'm still free to make choices. With the government, my choices would be severely limited.

I said this also on previous occasions: In an ocean filled with big fish -- fish who eat smaller fish -- I still prefer swimming with the barracuda than with a great white shark. Both are dangerous. Both are sinful. Both are greedy. Both are power-hungry. But...I'd prefer the barracuda because my chances would be somewhat better dealing with them with the free market tools I have rather than a powerful, oppressive government.

For example, with a government "public option", sooner or later everyone will be coerced into participating. This must happen in order for it to "succeed". The People will have no choice. No say in the matter. However, in within a free market framework, if I don't like my insurance company's policy, I can choose to drop them. I can choose not to buy and look elsewhere for other solutions. Free Market = Consumers Free Choices. State-run industry = little or no choices.

The foundational element to Freedom is Freedom of Choice. I'm only as free as I am free from external infringements upon the exercise of my will.

Boxcar

I don't think the government would force you. I live in what you call 'socialist' europe, and I have a private insurance (employer) and also the free state cover.
I don't of any country where you can't take out any health insurance of your own choice.

[gm10]

You need to get up to speed on these kinds of questions. They have been answered and fully addressed various ways in other threads. Go and look at my analogy, for example, of condo ownership and how owners pool their money together and pay the condo fees for maintenance of the common areas on the property, but each are fully responsible for maintaining and paying for their own improvements to their personal living quarters. Roads are analogous to common areas in condos. My personal health care, however, is my personal business and I don't want anyone intruding into my business -- into areas of my personal life. And the operative term here is anyone.

In closing, I have no doubt that you think you live in a free society. Once you're hooked on the opium of socialism, you can't see anything else -- you don't know any other way of life.

Boxcar

"Once you're hooked on the opium of socialism, you can't see anything else"

Dude what have you been reading???? Or taking?
Do you actually believe this?

[gm10]

G, you can't see how socialism impinges on freedom? and you are a world traveler? Socialism seeks to equalize society through income redistribution. We have too much of that already. why do you think that most of the great inventions in every area have come from us, a capitalist society? Because Socialism is the death of inventivness.

That is nonsense. And by the by, things such as air travel, electricity, etc would never have developed the way that they did without the state backing them. The cost and scale were (at the time) way too big for any corporation to carry by itself.
And it's not just about inventing either. What about the crises in the '30 and right? The first one ended due to a NATIONAL EFFORT - a big socialist program. The second one is about to end because the NATIONS bailed their private banking sectors out.
Do not fool yourself that one is better than the other. They both are as bad, and they both will need each other at different times in history.

also your 'roads' argument is flawed. We pay gasoline taxes for the roads.
They are usually built by private contractors that bid on the projects. They are individual projects. Not even close to healthcare. Do you think that everytime you get sick, the govt will put your case up for bid? your analogy is weak as water.

And who owns and maintains them? Why not give that to the individual, too. Your neighbour will charge you for driving past his house because he owns that 10 yards of road. Is this not a consequence of your logic?


I keep asking you guys that want Obama's healthcare plan why they trust the govt to handle National healthcare when they have screwed up the VA, Medicare, Medicaid, The postoffice and everything it touches? there's only a few things, like National Security that the govt can handle better than Private enterprise. Obama even admitted it when he said Fedex and UPS does a better job than the govt.
So, why do you trust the govt with something as vital as your healthcare?

It works in other countries, so I have no doubt that the US, a country I greatly admire, can do at least as well.

[hcap]

Govt healthcare in the US:

I have a non life threatening yet pretty uncomfortable and pain in the ass thing going on with my left arm. Since it is more than likely service connected from my time in Iraq, I need to go through the VA to get it taken care of, especially if I end up getting compensation for it.

I went to the VA two Friday's ago. They said I need an MRI and then I need to see a neurologist. I was told it would take 4-6 weeks to get an appointment for the MRI. Ten days later I still don't have an appointment. I was also told that I cannot schedule my appointment with the neurologist until the MRI is done, and that will take 4-6 weeks after the MRI. So, I'm probably looking at 3 months to get someone to look at me. If I were going on my own in the private market, I would have had both appointments already.Maybe you should move to London?

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/eddie-george/2009/08/a-note-on-britains-nhs.php

[lsbets]

And just what did you take away from that post Hcap? That in an emergency the system is great, but if you need to see a specialist you are much better off with private insurance? That is basically what they guy said.

[hcap]

OK. But the emergency room wait was not unreasonable. ( so much for long lines)

And it appears that "socialized medicine" in the UK has not driven private insurers out of business.

See my post # 1081 on the Cost of health care.

[lsbets]

OK. But the emergency room wait was not unreasonable. ( so much for long lines)

And it appears that "socialized medicine" in the UK has not driven private insurers out of business.

See my post # 1081 on the Cost of health care.

My emergency room wait was not unreasonable either. Once it was determined that my issue was non life threatening is when the long wait came into play. The story you posted seems very similar to VA experiences, and I don't think you will find many people who use the VA would want that to serve as the model for everyone.

[gm10]

Maybe you should move to London?

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/eddie-george/2009/08/a-note-on-britains-nhs.php

I live in London as well. I think this is a fair account of what you can expect from the health service here. It's of reasonable quality, fairly quick, and totally free.

One important point that the author makes is that the bigger the hospital, the bigger the chance you will find a doctor there who is a specialist in treating patients who had your condition. This is especially true if you're having surgery.

Anyway, I'm just a moderate pragmatic.

[hcap]

My emergency room wait was not unreasonable either. Once it was determined that my issue was non life threatening is when the long wait came into play. The story you posted seems very similar to VA experiences, and I don't think you will find many people who use the VA would want that to serve as the model for everyone.See what happens if you must go to an emergency room here in the states. For an appendectomy. With no insurance. Or how much will be covered under most plans if you are insured. Surprisingly the excellent treatment provided for the above patient was done for almost no out of pocket expense, and non-anecdotal studies show we pay 30-50% more as a percentage of GDP than do Londoners. And they still can purchase private plans if they are so inclined.

So much for the evils of socialism.

[Tom]

We got teeth here.

[ArlJim78]

I live in London as well. I think this is a fair account of what you can expect from the health service here. It's of reasonable quality, fairly quick, and totally free.

One important point that the author makes is that the bigger the hospital, the bigger the chance you will find a doctor there who is a specialist in treating patients who had your condition. This is especially true if you're having surgery.

Anyway, I'm just a moderate pragmatic.

totally free, really? just because you don't pay at the hospital doesn't mean it's free.

[Marshall Bennett]

See what happens if you must go to an emergency room here in the states. For an appendectomy. With no insurance. Or how much will be covered under most plans if you are insured. Surprisingly the excellent treatment provided for the above patient was done for almost no out of pocket expense, and non-anecdotal studies show we pay 30-50% more as a percentage of GDP than do Londoners. And they still can purchase private plans if they are so inclined.

So much for the evils of socialism.
Oh yeah , and how about the evils of having 50% or more of your pay taxed ?

[jballscalls]

Oh yeah , and how about the evils of having 50% or more of your pay taxed ?

I thought the top tax rate in England was 40%??

[lamboguy]

Oh yeah , and how about the evils of having 50% or more of your pay taxed ?when nixon was president the tax rates were as high as 80%, of course there were all these deductions that you could take like second homes and personal loans interest that you could deduct. you could even deduct horses vs. regular income. that lasted until reagan took office and they god rid of all those deductions and in actuality had the largest tax increase of all time even though the tax rates took a steep drop. to jump start the economy they introduced tax credits for equipment and auto's and other things and the banks got fat on that.

as far as healthcare goes, it is the bigest expanding business going on as we speak. i remember when the mass general hospital was only 2 buildings, now its over 30 buildings spread out with tons of people working in them. the population didn't increase 15 fold, just the hospital. that has taken place in the last 12 years. they wouldn't be building all these hospital's if they couldn't get people to walk in them. they get that with full cooperation from out government, and government's throughout the world. they encourage you to eat bad food, get sick, and take bad drugs so get even more sick so you can keep these hospital's growing in size. there is your health crisis for you. you cannot solve it by giving away free care or insurance. the only difference between the democrat plan and the republican plan is that one makes you pay for your own care the other makes you pay for your friends care. either way the hospital's will keep expanding and more people will get alot sicker.

when you look at the life expectancy rates in the last few years you will see a slight decrease in life expectancy. if the doctor's and hospital's were doing such a great job how could the chart's say otherwise?

[ddog]

You need to get up to speed on these kinds of questions. They have been answered and fully addressed various ways in other threads. Go and look at my analogy, for example, of condo ownership and how owners pool their money together and pay the condo fees for maintenance of the common areas on the property, but each are fully responsible for maintaining and paying for their own improvements to their personal living quarters. Roads are analogous to common areas in condos. My personal health care, however, is my personal business and I don't want anyone intruding into my business -- into areas of my personal life. And the operative term here is anyone.

In closing, I have no doubt that you think you live in a free society. Once you're hooked on the opium of socialism, you can't see anything else -- you don't know any other way of life.

Boxcar



and you can do as YOU wish as long as YOU pay for your choices.

The problem with you "let freedom ring dudes" is that you wish for others to pick up the costs of your unfettered freedom of choice , no matter how loony tunes that choice may be.

You are free to make nonsensical choices as long as YOU pay for them.
(the va story and your story are very illustrative of the nonsense)
(there is nothing wrong with not having on demand this minute MRI done in that case)

You do realize that to have that option would require many more MRI beds available which would drive up COSTS as with more supply would have to come more USE which would have to increase costs!

You wish to have a "socialized choice" of any option you wish at any time.

Stay out of the pool in other words.


Of course, at the same time, you wish to DENY others the choice to have a gvt plan.
:lol:

[lsbets]

(the va story and your story are very illustrative of the nonsense)
(there is nothing wrong with not having on demand this minute MRI done in that case)


No, the VA story illustrates the waits that come with government care and the inefficiencies of government care. If I were to go out on my own and have the MRI done, it would have happenned within days. But, since my VA benefit is an earned benefit (something you don't quite seem to grasp), and I may be entitled to compensation for it (again, earned), then it only makes sense to go through the VA system. Otherwise I would have paid out of pocket like I normally do and been very happy with my care.

There is also a huge difference between on demand this minute and a 3 month wait, but you don't seem to be too deep a thinker so I'm not surprised you can't grasp that either.

[JustRalph]

United States= 300 Million People

Great Britain = 60 Million people

Great Britain= 89 thousand square miles

United States= 3.79 Million square miles

Why the hell would we compare the two when it comes to anything?

Especially something so important............?

Think about it............

[gm10]

totally free, really? just because you don't pay at the hospital doesn't mean it's free.

Of course it isn't. Free after taxes.
But it's a good deal. As pointed out before, a country like France spends only half as much on healthcare compared to the US.

[exactaplayer]

But, since my VA benefit is an earned benefit (something you don't quite seem to grasp), and I may be entitled to compensation for it (again, earned), then it only makes sense to go through the VA system.
This "earned benefit" is it anything like the retirement benefits many corporations have taken back from their retirees ?

[lsbets]

This "earned benefit" is it anything like the retirement benefits many corporations have taken back from their retirees ?

Not even close.

[Tom]

Of course it isn't. Free after taxes.
But it's a good deal. As pointed out before, a country like France spends only half as much on healthcare compared to the US.

And even less on soap.

[NJ Stinks]

Oh yeah , and how about the evils of having 50% or more of your pay taxed ?

I'm sure you won't remember it the next time you want to trash the UK but the maximum income tax rate in the UK is 40%. Ours was 39.6% until GWB cut it to 35%. (How has that worked out for us? :rolleyes: )

http://www.contracteye.co.uk/tax_rates_2008_9_shtml.shtml

[Tom]

Very good. Got us right out of the recession Clinton left us and paved the way for unprecedented growth until the dems took over congress and the recession years came back.

Lower taxes are ALWAYS good. High taxes are only goof for those who do not pay them but choose to leech off the ambition and drive of others. Anchors.

Stop and think for a minute - half the people in this country pay no taxes. Why burden those who do - the successful ones? Why not get rid of the half that are anchors - holding us achievers back. Think of how good this country would be if we showed the door to anyone not contributing. Like we used to do in the colonial days.

Oh, there is just sooooo much to trash GB for beside taxes! :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

Stop and think for a minute - half the people in this country pay no taxes. Why burden those who do - the successful ones? Why not get rid of the half that are anchors - holding us achievers back. Think of how good this country would be if we showed the door to anyone not contributing. Like we used to do in the colonial days.



Let's see now. Tom suggests we get rid of those who don't pay taxes. They are "anchors", says our enlightened friend. Further, Tom thinks the country will bloom without these leeches. Let's see who these low lifes are, Tom.

From the Tax Foundation:
_________________________________________________

Income
The 42.5 million non-payers are largely low-income. Indeed, 91 percent of them earned less than $30,000 per year and 96 percent earned less than $40,000. Fewer than 1 percent will earn more than $75,000 per year – a group comprised largely of business owners whose tax liabilities will be erased due to business losses, carry-overs from prior year AMT payments, or foreign tax credits.

Age
Non-payers in 2004 were overwhelmingly young. Looking at the age of the primary breadwinner on these tax returns, only 26 percent are 45 years old or older. More than one-third (35 percent) are younger than age 25, and 54 percent are younger than age 35. Interestingly, there is a significant cluster of households (20.7 percent) where the principal wage earner is between the ages of 35 and 44. Most likely, these are modest-income families who benefited most from the doubling of the value of the child credit to $1,000 and were, thus, pushed into the non-payer status.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/542.html
__________________________________________________ ______

Who the hell doubled the child credit to from $500 to $1,000? :mad: Why GWB did in 2003! Imagine that. :) GWB gave the folks - who do jobs most would not want if given a choice - an extra $500 a year and now they are part of the non-paying layabouts Tom is crying about.

Oh the sweet irony. :lol:

Still doesn't change the fact that anyone making $1M in 2003 got to keep an additional $47,000 a year from GWB's tax cuts. That means in the six years that the Bush tax cuts have been in effect:

People making less than $40,000 (the non-payers) got $500 x 6 or $3,000

Millionaires got $47,000 x 6 or $282,000 for every million they made.

I guess we'll never mix up GWB with Robin Hood.

[hcap]

Oh yeah , and how about the evils of having 50% or more of your pay taxed ?The cost of health care as percentage of GDP is the bottom line. And a fair measuring stick as to who pays more.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/International_Comparison_-_Healthcare_spending_as_%25_GDP.png/800px-International_Comparison_-_Healthcare_spending_as_%25_GDP.png

Now comparee this to our British patient who neededv a appendectomy....

Delays in seeking care and increased use of emergency care

Uninsured Americans are less likely to have regular health care and use preventive services. They are more likely to delay seeking care, resulting in more medical crises, which are more expensive than ongoing treatment for such conditions as diabetes and high blood pressure. A 2007 study published in JAMA concluded that uninsured people were less likely than the insured to receive any medical care after an accidental injury or the onset of a new chronic condition. The uninsured with an injury were also twice as likely as those with insurance to have received none of the recommended follow-up care, and a similar pattern held for those with a new chronic condition.[105] Uninsured patients are twice as likely to visit hospital emergency rooms as those with insurance; burdening a system meant for true emergencies with less-urgent care needs.[106]

Another recent study by researchers with the American Cancer Society found that individuals who lacked private insurance were more likely to be diagnosed with late-stage cancer than those who had such insurance. This was true of both the uninsured as well as those covered by Medicaid. “Individuals without private insurance are not receiving optimum care in terms of cancer screening or timely diagnosis and follow-up with health care providers," study authors concluded.[107][108][109]

[gm10]

Very good. Got us right out of the recession Clinton left us and paved the way for unprecedented growth until the dems took over congress and the recession years came back.

Lower taxes are ALWAYS good. High taxes are only goof for those who do not pay them but choose to leech off the ambition and drive of others. Anchors.

Stop and think for a minute - half the people in this country pay no taxes. Why burden those who do - the successful ones? Why not get rid of the half that are anchors - holding us achievers back. Think of how good this country would be if we showed the door to anyone not contributing. Like we used to do in the colonial days.

Oh, there is just sooooo much to trash GB for beside taxes! :lol:

This is complete BS. If you pay no taxes, you have nothing. No police, no education, no roads, no army. You become Somalia.

[Tom]

This is complete BS. If you pay no taxes, you have nothing. No police, no education, no roads, no army. You become Somalia.

What is BS, your reply? :rolleyes:
I assume you bolded that sentence. Please show me in the word "no." I specifically said "lower taxes are always good" not "no taxes."
The reason we have taxes is to provide what we cannot do as civilians. Like build roads, sewage, police, fire, etc.

In NYS we just handed out $200 for every child in families receiving welfare under the guise of "school supplies."

It was so bad, even WAL MART complained that the debit cards were being used for big screen TV, and stuff like that.

[Tom]

People making less than $40,000 (the non-payers) got $500 x 6 or $3,000

Millionaires got $47,000 x 6 or $282,000 for every million they made.

You EARN more you keep more. Simple concept. You want to get to the higher level, EARN it.

[exactaplayer]

Stop and think for a minute - half the people in this country pay no taxes. Why burden those who do - the successful ones? Why not get rid of the half that are anchors - holding us achievers back. Think of how good this country would be if we showed the door to anyone not contributing. Like we used to do in the colonial days.

Oh, there is just sooooo much to trash GB for beside taxes! :lol:
Sir,
If we get rid of these "anchors" , who is going to perform their jobs ?

[Tom]

Many don't have any.
The rest of the slack will be picked up by the productive half - like we always do.

[NJ Stinks]

Many don't have any.
The rest of the slack will be picked up by the productive half - like we always do.

You just refuse to grasp facts. In Post #85 I pasted info from the Tax Foundation that stated:
__________________________________________________ ____--

"The 42.5 million non-payers are largely low-income. Indeed, 91 percent of them earned less than $30,000 per year and 96 percent earned less than $40,000. Fewer than 1 percent will earn more than $75,000 per year – a group comprised largely of business owners whose tax liabilities will be erased due to business losses, carry-overs from prior year AMT payments, or foreign tax credits."
__________________________________________________ _______

Do you (or anyone else here) consider employees working for you that make less than $40G's unproductive? If so, why employ them?

Just as an aside, I want to clear up something up here. Although I'm convinced many here in Off Topic General have no interest in actual facts, I paste them anyway with the hope that somebody just browsing here may read something they had not considered. In many ways it's a thankless effort but I can't just let some of the opinions expressed here stand like it's somehow based on fact. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

I grasp the fact that if you aren't paying taxes you are riding for free. We don't need you. Go to Mexico. Smoke some dope.
You libs have lived to fleece the wealthy long enough - time for our side to dump you guys. Pay up or get out. No free lunch. Go to Canada and stay with Zilly.