Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: A Dose of Reality

  1. #1

    A Dose of Reality

    Republicans had control of the house, senate and presidency from 02'-06'. During those years the party conducted two unfunded wars while cutting taxes at the same time. In the history of the United States there has never been another time when this country conducted a war (let alone two) and cut taxes at the same time. And since these wars were conducted on credit, future generations would be forced to pay one way or the other.

    The cost of those wars, beyond the loss of lives, is well into the hundreds of BILLIONS.

    And now that same party that had total control of the government through those years is now trying to take back complete power on the promise of fiscal responsibility. Many (not all) of those same politicians who were in congress during those years are still there today and can be seen on tv talking about debt and responsibility-with straight faces.

    The democrats were voted back into power and promptly squandered away the opportunity to lead. They greatly added to the debt without convincing the voters that any of the spending worked. So they changed nothing; in fact it was business as usual in Washington.

    Now the population is clamoring for change again and that means changing back to the party that failed us before the current party failed us. This cycle has gone on for decades. And while the sheeple continue to defend "their" party in a game of which is bad verses worse, America continues to slip away from the average American.

    Here are two prescient quotes from a long time ago by a Republican who had a pretty good idea about how to run this country;

    "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war".

    "The provision of the Constitution giving the war making power to Congress was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons. Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us."


    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 07-09-2012 at 05:52 PM.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    Republicans have control of the house, senate and presidency from 02'-06'. During those years the party conducted two unfunded wars while cutting taxes at the same time. In the history of the United States there has never been another time when this country conducted a war (let alone two) and cut taxes at the same time. And since these wars were conducted on credit, future generations would be forced to pay one way or the other.

    The cost of those wars, beyond the loss of lives, is well into the hundreds of BILLIONS.

    And now that same party that had total control of the government through those years is now trying to take back complete power on the promise of fiscal responsibility. Many (not all) of those same politicians who were in congress during those years are still there today and can be seen on tv talking about debt and responsibility-with straight faces.

    The democrats were voted back into power and promptly squandered away the opportunity to lead. They greatly added to the debt without convincing the voters that any of the spending worked. So they changed nothing; in fact it was business as usual in Washington.

    Now the population is clamoring for change again and that means changing back to the party that failed us before the current party failed us. This cycle has gone on for decades. And while the sheeple continue to defend "their" party in a game of which is bad verses worse, America continues to slip away from the average American.

    Here are a two prescient quotes from a long time ago by a Republican who had a pretty good idea about how to run this country;

    "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war".

    "The provision of the Constitution giving the war making power to Congress was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons. Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us."


    All true. I have hope however that this is a new GOP refocused by the TEA Party on sticking to their promises of smaller government and fiscal restraint. If we were just going to go back to the Bush era big spending GOP then all would be lost regardless. I think prudence says that things will be different this time as the stakes are much higher.

    The real scary thing about the budget issue is that the baby boomer entitlement explosion has only just begun. Over the next 10-15 years the entire baby boomer generation will enter retirement. We should have been anticipating that explosion is costs but politicians mostly ignored it. Democratic leadership under the progressive wing of the party have literally refused to acknowledge the problem.
    Last edited by chiefst2000; 07-09-2012 at 11:44 AM.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    Republicans have control of the house, senate and presidency from 02'-06'. During those years the party conducted two unfunded wars while cutting taxes at the same time. In the history of the United States there has never been another time when this country conducted a war (let alone two) and cut taxes at the same time. And since these wars were conducted on credit, future generations would be forced to pay one way or the other.

    The cost of those wars, beyond the loss of lives, is well into the hundreds of BILLIONS.
    The Wars were bipartisan. Both of them. And (D) ended one on the (R) timeline after trying and failing to extend it, and has yet to end the other 4 years in.

    The Wars are unfunded, in the same way entitlements are unfunded. Everything is unfunded....we don't have a budget, just a string of continuing resolutions and piling up Governemnt Debt. 4 years in, no budget, alot more debt, alot more "unfunded" everything.

    As for future generations paying for now, welcome to every Govt. program we have, from Wars to Entitlements. It's odd you only care about the Wars, not the Entitlements, but thats liberal progressives for ya I guess.

    Obama won for exactly two reasons:

    1. He wasn't Bush or Clinton.

    2. He was Black.

    I'll give hima third reason too, "Hope and Change", while empty meaningless phrases (just like "fairness" now), were quite the winner and resonated with uninformed voters. The fact that we got no change at all, and very little hope, is irrelevant, the youth vote ate it up.

    Obama, the least qualified President in the modern era, was a winner because Bush was viewed as such a loser. And apart from healthcare, he's been almost a clone of Bush's mishandling, economic failings, and (suprisingly) many policy positions as well.

    Obama, also perhaps suprisingly, has consistently out-fund raised the (R), including from corporate donors.

    The idea that we shouldn't put an (R) in office because "they got us into this mess" is also empty propaganda. Both parties got us into this mess, in a myriad of ways and policies and social-engineering programs and on and on and on.

    It's a shell game. (R) or (D), the pieces change, the way Government works remains the same.

    The was no change.

    There is no hope.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    The Wars were bipartisan. Both of them. And (D) ended one on the (R) timeline after trying and failing to extend it, and has yet to end the other 4 years in.

    The Wars are unfunded, in the same way entitlements are unfunded. Everything is unfunded....we don't have a budget, just a string of continuing resolutions and piling up Governemnt Debt. 4 years in, no budget, alot more debt, alot more "unfunded" everything.

    As for future generations paying for now, welcome to every Govt. program we have, from Wars to Entitlements. It's odd you only care about the Wars, not the Entitlements, but thats liberal progressives for ya I guess.

    Obama won for exactly two reasons:

    1. He wasn't Bush or Clinton.

    2. He was Black.

    I'll give hima third reason too, "Hope and Change", while empty meaningless phrases (just like "fairness" now), were quite the winner and resonated with uninformed voters. The fact that we got no change at all, and very little hope, is irrelevant, the youth vote ate it up.

    Obama, the least qualified President in the modern era, was a winner because Bush was viewed as such a loser. And apart from healthcare, he's been almost a clone of Bush's mishandling, economic failings, and (suprisingly) many policy positions as well.

    Obama, also perhaps suprisingly, has consistently out-fund raised the (R), including from corporate donors.

    The idea that we shouldn't put an (R) in office because "they got us into this mess" is also empty propaganda. Both parties got us into this mess, in a myriad of ways and policies and social-engineering programs and on and on and on.

    It's a shell game. (R) or (D), the pieces change, the way Government works remains the same.

    The was no change.

    There is no hope.
    In fairness there was some change. They changed the healthcare system from a good system with some flaws to one that costs even more money and delivers lower quality services while simultaneously hurting businesses and destroying job growth potential.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    The Wars were bipartisan. Both of them. And (D) ended one on the (R) timeline after trying and failing to extend it, and has yet to end the other 4 years in.

    The Wars are unfunded, in the same way entitlements are unfunded. Everything is unfunded....we don't have a budget, just a string of continuing resolutions and piling up Governemnt Debt. 4 years in, no budget, alot more debt, alot more "unfunded" everything.

    As for future generations paying for now, welcome to every Govt. program we have, from Wars to Entitlements. It's odd you only care about the Wars, not the Entitlements, but thats liberal progressives for ya I guess.

    Obama won for exactly two reasons:

    1. He wasn't Bush or Clinton.

    2. He was Black.

    I'll give hima third reason too, "Hope and Change", while empty meaningless phrases (just like "fairness" now), were quite the winner and resonated with uninformed voters. The fact that we got no change at all, and very little hope, is irrelevant, the youth vote ate it up.

    Obama, the least qualified President in the modern era, was a winner because Bush was viewed as such a loser. And apart from healthcare, he's been almost a clone of Bush's mishandling, economic failings, and (suprisingly) many policy positions as well.

    Obama, also perhaps suprisingly, has consistently out-fund raised the (R), including from corporate donors.

    The idea that we shouldn't put an (R) in office because "they got us into this mess" is also empty propaganda. Both parties got us into this mess, in a myriad of ways and policies and social-engineering programs and on and on and on.

    It's a shell game. (R) or (D), the pieces change, the way Government works remains the same.

    The was no change.

    There is no hope.
    I agree with most of your post, however the idea that we should put an (R) in office simply because they are not a (D) is a fool's game. And as long as we play along we are the fools. This is what happens when there are only two major parties and the special interests own them both. They own the government just as President Lincoln predicted would happen almost 150 years ago.
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 07-11-2012 at 05:06 AM.

  6. #6

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    He's very interesting to listen to every Friday on the Thom Hartmann show. Very enlightening as to the viewpoints of modern American Socialism.

  8. #8
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,570
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    Bernie Sanders always has great sound bytes because he's not beholden to any political party or, for that matter, any big time special interests. That's because he's a socialist. Not a "Obama is a secret Mooslem Socialist" socialist, an actual socialist.

    I'm all for a third party, but for God's sakes, not THAT one.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Bernie Sanders always has great sound bytes because he's not beholden to any political party or, for that matter, any big time special interests. That's because he's a socialist. Not a "Obama is a secret Mooslem Socialist" socialist, an actual socialist.

    I'm all for a third party, but for God's sakes, not THAT one.
    He is an elected politician that is not beholden to either party in 2012 so he gets points for that. Overall, I agree with a good deal of his positions (not all) and his bio is VERY interesting;

    Sanders' lifetime legislative score from the AFL-CIO is 100%. As of 2006, he has a grade of "C-" from the National Rifle Association (NRA). Sanders voted against the Brady Bill and in favor of an NRA-supported bill to restrict lawsuits against gun manufacturers in 2005.[18] Sanders voted to abolish the so-called "marriage penalty" for income taxes and also voted for a bill that sought to ban human cloning. Sanders has endorsed every Democratic nominee for president of the United States since 1992. Sanders is a co-founder of the House Progressive Caucus and chaired the grouping of mostly liberal Democrats for its first eight years.
    Sanders voted against the resolutions authorizing the use of force against Iraq in 1991 and 2002 and opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But he later joined almost all of his colleagues in voting for a non-binding resolution expressing support for U.S. troops at the outset of the invasion, although he gave a floor speech criticizing the partisan nature of the resolution and the Bush administration's actions in the run-up to the war. On April 7, 2006, in regard to the investigation of the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity, Sanders said, "The revelation that the president authorized the release of classified information in order to discredit an Iraq war critic should tell every member of Congress that the time is now for a serious investigation of how we got into the war in Iraq and why Congress can no longer act as a rubber stamp for the president."[19] Sanders supports universal health care and opposes what he terms "unfettered" free trade,[20] which he argues deprives American workers of their jobs while exploiting foreign workers in sweatshop factories.
    In June 2005, Sanders proposed an amendment to limit provisions that allow the government to obtain individuals' library and book-buying records. The amendment passed the House by a bipartisan majority but was removed on November 4 that year by House-Senate negotiators and never became law.[21] Sanders followed this vote on November 5, 2005, by voting against the Online Freedom of Speech Act, which would have exempted the Internet from the restrictions of the McCain-Feingold Bill.
    In March 2006, after a series of resolutions calling for him to bring articles of impeachment against the president passed in various towns in Vermont, Sanders stated it would be impractical to impeach George W. Bush, given the "reality that the Republicans control the House and the Senate." Still, Sanders made no secret of his opposition to the Bush Administration, which he regularly attacked for cuts in social programs he supports.[22][23][24]
    Sanders is a critic of Alan Greenspan. In June 2003, during a question-and-answer discussion with the then-Federal Reserve chairman, Sanders told Greenspan that he was concerned that Greenspan was "way out of touch" and "that you see your major function in your position as the need to represent the wealthy and large corporations."[25] Sanders said in 1998 that investment banks and commercial banks should remain as separate entities.[26]
    Republicans have attacked Sanders as "an ineffective extremist" for successfully sponsoring only one law and fifteen amendments in his eight terms in the House.[27][28] Sanders responded by saying that he had gotten "the most floor amendments of any member of the House since 1996 [passed]."[29] Former Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean has stated that "Bernie Sanders votes with the Democrats 98 percent of the time."[30]


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 07-11-2012 at 08:50 AM.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,564
    How hilarious is a thread titled "A Dose of Reality" that turned into a conversation about Bernie Sanders?

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    How hilarious is a thread titled "A Dose of Reality" that turned into a conversation about Bernie Sanders?
    Almost as hilarious as a poster believing that the concerns of millionaires and billionaires is the only reality that matters.

    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 07-11-2012 at 08:53 AM.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,564
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    Almost as hilarious as a poster believing that the concerns of millionaires and billionaires is the only reality that matters.



    And who would that be?

    A straw man right out of the Bernie Sanders playbook... do you have any concept of what you make yourself look like here?

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post


    And who would that be?

    A straw man right out of the Bernie Sanders playbook... do you have any concept of what you make yourself look like here?


    do any of us really?

    We use anonymous names on a football website to talk politics. Any idea what your avatar picture makes you look like?

    You can disagree, or agree, with my politics and that is fine either way. However since you know almost nothing factual about me it would be rather silly to ask if I cared how I am being perceived by you.
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 07-11-2012 at 09:51 AM.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    In fairness there was some change. They changed the healthcare system from a good system with some flaws to one that costs even more money and delivers lower quality services while simultaneously hurting businesses and destroying job growth potential.
    Can you define lower quality services. As a physician, i am curious as to what you consider lower quality. And please tell us how a plan that has not yet been fully implemented (not even close) has resulted in the delivery of lower quality services. Please provide hard data to support this not anecdotal evidence and not your own opinion.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    As a physician
    Are you a practicing Physician? I recall you telling us you were a Professor, a teacher/researcher, not an in-practice MD.

    Maybe I should ask you about my prostate problems Doc.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Are you a practicing Physician? I recall you telling us you were a Professor, a teacher/researcher, not an in-practice MD.

    Maybe I should ask you about my prostate problems Doc.
    Of course I practice. I see patients at the VA. I also conduct clinical research and teach medical students and residents as most physician educators do. Thats what most Professors at medical schools who are not pure PhD's do...in case you did not know.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Of course I practice. I see patients at the VA. I also conduct clinical research and teach medical students and residents as most physician educators do. Thats what most Professors at medical schools who are not pure PhD's do...in case you did not know.
    I didn't, hence the question.

    Try to remember Ken, we don't all know each others personal bios in any great detail. I know (from what you've said) that you're a Proff and an MD, beyond that, either you hadn't mentioned specifics, or I simply didn't recall them.

    So, about the prostate.....

  18. #18
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    I didn't, hence the question.

    Try to remember Ken, we don't all know each others personal bios in any great detail. I know (from what you've said) that you're a Proff and an MD, beyond that, either you hadn't mentioned specifics, or I simply didn't recall them.

    So, about the prostate.....
    I'm not a doctor, but if you have the time to sit a type out some of your longer posts here without peeing yourself, I'd say your prostate is fine

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Can you define lower quality services. As a physician, i am curious as to what you consider lower quality. And please tell us how a plan that has not yet been fully implemented (not even close) has resulted in the delivery of lower quality services. Please provide hard data to support this not anecdotal evidence and not your own opinion.
    Lower quality of care for me means two things. First as the IPAB controls costs through simply reducing compensation to physicians they will be forced to reduce the amount of time they can spend with individual patients. This is troubling as I appreciate when my doctor has the time to sit with me and discuss symptoms etc. Next once millions of people are given free Medicaid they will likely choose to use it. That will effect wait times for appointments and wait times for procedures. Couple that with the reductions in physician compensation and we could see physician shortages and a "brain drain" due to the high cost of becoming a doctor coupled with lower compensations for the profession.

    I don't need the plan fully implemented to know this will happen. Economics tells me so. The cost controls proposed through Obamacare will force primary care doctors to ration their time. When Primary Care Physicians know that they need to see 10 patients an hour to turn a profit you can believe they will do so.

    Next even before full implementation premiums have been exploding. My insurance plan has gone by the max that NYS allows for the past two years and I just got a letter that we are going up another 15.5% in 2013. We went from paying $17,000 per family in 2009 to $27,000 in 2013. For my small business that is real and painful.

    So essentially under Obamacare I am paying much more for my insurance (just wait until the mandate to accept pre-existing kicks in, rates will jump more as Insurance companies make up for all the people that choose to free ride the system and jump on a plan after they get sick) while receiving a lower quality of care. Not to mention all the new additional taxes set to hit us in 2014. None of which is beneficial to me, my business or our employees. We get the shaft as do the majority of Americans that currently buy insurance.

    To sum up Obamacare:
    Massively higher insurance premiums, new taxes to pay, new deficits to pay for and lower quality of care. I have no doubt that Obamacare is helpful to the 5-10% of folks that are going to get the free insurance but for the rest of us, 300Million plus Americans are getting the shaft so that a small percentage can free ride the system. The Progressives cleverly threw some freebies in to try and fool people in to thinking that this plan helps them. Women get free birth control. Great. They save $10 a month while spending thousands more in higher premiums and taxes. A classic sucker ploy designed to fool the masses. I'm not buying it.
    Last edited by chiefst2000; 07-11-2012 at 12:37 PM.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    Lower quality of care for me means two things. First as the IPAB controls costs through simply reducing compensation to physicians they will be forced to reduce the amount of time they can spend with individual patients. This is troubling as I appreciate when my doctor has the time to sit with me and discuss symptoms etc. Next once millions of people are given free Medicaid they will likely choose to use it. That will effect wait times for appointments and wait times for procedures. Couple that with the reductions in physician compensation and we could see physician shortages and a "brain drain" due to the high cost of becoming a doctor coupled with lower compensations for the profession.

    Reimbursements to physicians have been dropping on a yearly basis for the last 25+ years. With or without Obamacare, this trend is unlikely to change. Physicians in the private sector are already forced to increase the volume of patients seen to make ends meet. Typical outpatient office visits are 10-15 minutes. This is unlikely to change with Obamacare.

    Despite lower compensations, physicians still earn a good living. Its doubtful that there will be a "brain drain" especially when you consider the number of foreign trained physicians who come to this country to practice. The physician shortage is however a real problem. Especially in rural areas and a real shortage in internists and family practicioners. Obamacare, and to much greater degree, a true public option, is the way to change that.


    I don't need the plan fully implemented to know this will happen. Economics tells me so. The cost controls proposed through Obamacare will force primary care doctors to ration their time. When Primary Care Physicians know that they need to see 10 patients an hour to turn a profit you can believe they will do so.

    This is already happening without Obamacare. This has been the trend in medicine the last 25+ years under the failed system that you love so much.


    Next even before full implementation premiums have been exploding. My insurance plan has gone by the max that NYS allows for the past two years and I just got a letter that we are going up another 15.5% in 2013. We went from paying $17,000 per family in 2009 to $27,000 in 2013. For my small business that is real and painful.

    And you will be getting tax credits. Sorry, but if you werent so close minded and accepted a true Public Option/Medicare for all paid for by tax dollars, this wouldnt be a problem.


    So essentially under Obamacare I am paying much more for my insurance (just wait until the mandate to accept pre-existing kicks in, rates will jump more as Insurance companies make up for all the people that choose to free ride the system and jump on a plan after they get sick) while receiving a lower quality of care. Not to mention all the new additional taxes set to hit us in 2014. None of which is beneficial to me, my business or our employees. We get the shaft as do the majority of Americans that currently buy insurance.

    You do realize that right now you are paying for those uninsured (legals and illegals)who show up in the ER for their care. One way or the other you are going to pay for it. Much cheaper to have someone see his primary care MD than to show up in the ER for a cold.


    To sum up Obamacare:
    Massively higher insurance premiums, new taxes to pay, new deficits to pay for and lower quality of care. I have no doubt that Obamacare is helpful to the 5-10% of folks that are going to get the free insurance but for the rest of us, 300Million plus Americans are getting the shaft so that a small percentage can free ride the system. The Progressives cleverly threw some freebies in to try and fool people in to thinking that this plan helps them. Women get free birth control. Great. They save $10 a month while spending thousands more in higher premiums and taxes. A classic sucker ploy designed to fool the masses. I'm not buying it.
    To sum up your response: You have not shown one shred of evidence how Obamacare will result in lower quality of care.

    To sum up the Rights response to health care crisis: Repeal Obamacare but sorry we dont have an alternative plan that makes any sense (tort reform does not reduce costs as study after study has show- see Texas and selling health insurance across state lines will only increase the # of substandard policies as it will be impossible to maintain any minimal standards).


    The Real Solution: A true Public option/Medicare for all paid by tax dollars to provide basic health coverage for all that makes medical sense.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us