To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
And now, the play is hard toward
government. By the Left, of the Left, for the Left.
I think we should make Obamacare supporters give up their
private health care, sign up for Medicare under a special provision, and send in their insurance premiums plus an
extra 20% tax to "reduce costs". This is essentially what they're proposing. Let's call it the
Barack-Kennedy Reid and Pelosi Plan, or B-KRaP.
If that little experiment works, we'll know they were right.
If not, the only ones who suffer had it coming.
Its interesting that Kennedy's "lifelong goal" was universal
healthcare, and now its overwhelming unpopularity may (hopefully) be instrumental in giving his old Senate seat to
the first Republican in 30 years, and eliminate the Dems super-majority in the Senate, and possibly derail
Obamacare. Poetic justice if it happens that way.
Well, the good news is that
Kennedy's seat went to Brown. That breaks the democratic super majority. I suspect regardless of when they swear
Brown in, the health care bill is DOA.
A very liberal state voting in a republican is a sure message from
voters. The message being that we are fed up and their jobs are at stake.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
The handwriting on the wall will
be how the Dems handle their reaction to Brown's win. Push back with dirty tricks and there might be a revolution.
Back off, and they'll lose fewer seats in November.
Interesting Mass. demographic: It stacks up with I think
around 36% Dem, 12% Rep, with the rest being Independent, or whatever that state's word for them. Brown had to
take almost all Independent voters to win, and this is a State which BO took by 26 points.
Obama has not even
made his first state of the union address, and his constituency has fallen apart.
Just as an aside, I'd like to
express one opinion.
There is a difference between "Health Insurance" and a "Health Plan." Too often these two
items are lumped together.
Health Insurance is for *unexpected catastrophic accident or illness* IMO.
A
Health Plan is day to day wellness care. Prescriptions, doctor visits, etc.
Where I think one problem is, is
that they tried to do it all at once, in one swell foop. Not a good idea. If they'd stuck to one or the other, kept
it simple (and understandable) they may have had better success. And if they had set things up to phase in over
time, slowly, step by step, everyone could see where things were going, where the problems were, what *needed* to be
done next. If anything really needed to be done at all.
The health care in this country does suck. It needs
help. But they're approaching it like the politicians they are. People so out of touch with the *real* "average
American" it's scary. We need a better way to do things, but at this rate, it'll never happen, at least in my
lifetime. Not sure if that is good or bad...
Last edited by Rbt; 01-21-2010 at 05:22 PM.
The opposite of love isn't hate.
It's apathy.
Your right, they are completely
out of touch. They also think our pockets are bottomless. If they would stop trying to find ways to reach deeper
into them and do things to improve the employment picture, things would be better.
That's very generalized, I
agree. NAFTA, excessive regulation and taxation drove many companies offshore. They need to be attracted back to the
US by providing a climate where they can earn a profit while paying a decent wage. Punishing the large corporations
for being large corporations is self destructive. Entice well paying jobs back to the US and many things will
improve right away, including the ability of millions to afford health care.
Taxation is a problem at the
individual level as well. The government does not create jobs, consumerism creates jobs. Every dollar the government
takes is that much less for the economy and it is strangling our ability to compete on the world stage. Look at even
something as small as my business. A 35% reduction in my tax burden would allow me to hire another person, that
would be a salesperson. Because other companies would also have more money they would also be hiring and buying
technology services from people like me. In the end, it would mean more products bought and sold and more people put
to work. Tax revenue would actually increase!
Not that I think the government needs more money. In reality, our
government has become too large and sucks too much money for entitlement programs both at the individual level and
the corporate level. I do not believe any business should be bailed out. Let them fail. It may hurt on the short
term but the well run companies would be that much stronger in the long term. It also would reduce our tax burden,
putting more money into the economy. People should not believe they have a right to indefinate support. They need to
realize it is a helping hand to get them back on their feet. And it should only come with requirements for job
training and hunting.
All that would lower unemployment and contribute to the ability of more people to pay
their own way. Then we can talk about who really needs help and who doesn't. It takes too long, right? Wrong! The
democrats were going to start taxing us right away, which would have slowed the economy more, but not provide
services for several years. My way would not add taxes, which would reduce jobs, it would increase jobs by cutting
taxes. The time we could start providing medical services would come a lot sooner and be better funded.
I don't
believe the government should be in control of our health care, they have demonstrated their incompetence too many
times already. That's another detail to work out later.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks