Repubs won't fund health care changes if they take over
in [Golf]
|
From: John B. on 5 Aug 2010 19:09 On Aug 5, 5:02 pm, Moderate <nos...(a)nomail.com> wrote: > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Aug 5, 2:05 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > >> "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>news:2841737e-0248-42b5-9b1c-15fcf2f1f5ce(a)k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com.... > >> On Aug 5, 9:24 am, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > >>> "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>>news:52959449-caff-4a47-8bde-3619e3e5bd71(a)m1g2000yqo.googlegroups.com.... > >>> On Aug 4, 5:46 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > >>>> "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>>>news:0bfb8dd8-47d3-4bbb-9047-ed16d676c930(a)s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com.... > >>>> On Aug 4, 3:52 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > >>>>>news:alangbaker-CD69E0.11575304082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > >>>>>> In article > >>>>>> <a78ef6da-c403-4b76-8952-6a6acd495...(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > >>>>>> dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > >>>>>>> I've had quite a while to think about Bummer Care. Callous or > > > > > > > > not, > >>>>>>> that's my opinion. > >>>>>>> Probably the majority of people in the US agree that the Bummer > >>>>>>> Care > >>>>>>> is a bad plan and not worth what it will cost in $. There's not > >>>>>>> even > >>>>>>> any conclusive proof that it will be better at saving any of > > > > > > > > those > >>>>>>> innocent lives you are worried about. It doesn't even kick in > > > > > > > > for > >>>>>>> 10 > >>>>>>> years. Wanna bet that the government finds a way to raid that > > > > > > > > fund > >>>>>>> too > >>>>>>> (like others)... and it never actually kicks in at all? > > >>>>>> Nope. > > >>>>>> That's not my point. > > >>>>>> Someone says: "This will cost lives", and your reply is: "Meh.". > > >>>>>> Justify it to yourself any way you like. > > >>>>> The majority of Americans didn't want Obama care. A majority of > >>>>> Americans > >>>>> have opposed all of Obama's major policies. The polls aren't > > > > > > secret. > >>>>> It > >>>>> isn't a surprise that Obama is polling at 41% approval if all of > > > > > > his > >>>>> major > >>>>> policies were against the wishes of the majority of Americans. > > >>>>> It will be refreshing to have a government of the people by the > > > > > > people > >>>>> for > >>>>> the people instead of a government of the government by the > > > > > > government > >>>>> for > >>>>> the government. > > >>>>> The saving lives line is a canard. We all die. > > >>>> If a majority of Americans have opposed all of Obama's major > > > > > policies, > >>>> then why did a majority of Americans elect him to be president? He > >>>> said during the campaign that he wanted to do health care, he > > > > > wanted > >>>> to do a stimulus package, he wanted to do financial services > > > > > reform. > >>>> So what happened? Did people change their minds about what they > > > > > wanted? > >>>> *********************************************************** > > >>>> I don't know why anybody voted for Obama. I am certainly not a mind > >>>> reader. > >>>> I can read the polls and so can you. > > >>> I know why people voted for him. What I don't understand is why he's > >>> being beaten up for doing exactly what he said he would do. You got > >>> any insight into that? > >>> ******************************************************* > > >>> Really? If you know why people voted for him then you have a leg up > > > > on me. > > >>> He didn't do exactly what he said. His health care bill didn't make > > > > health > >>> care more affordable. He money give away hasn't helped the economy. > > > > He > >>> didn't fix immigration. He hasn't reduced corruption. He hasn't > > > > reduced > >>> spending. > > >> You talk as though his presidency were in the past. The health care > >> bill was not supposed to make health care more affordable the minute > >> he signed it. You don't know that the stim. pkg., hasn't helped. > >> Without it, the economy might be even worse than now. He hasn't > > > gotten > >> to immigration reform yet. He didn't say he was going to reduce > >> spending. > >> ********************************************************* > > >> With the amount of money spent in the stimulus plan we should be > > > seeing > >> better results. The government run GM is going to be a complete > > > disaster. > >> The GM Volt is going to make the Edsel look like a good idea. So I > > > may > >> sound like I am talking about the past, but I am not. > > >> Obama has gotten to Immigration reform; He stopped it. > > >> Obama most assuredly said he was going to reduce spending. > > > GM and Chrysler are in operating in the black and paying back the $60 > > billion in bail-out money they got. If they had gone out of business, > > the effect on the economy would have been catastrophic -- millions of > > people out of work. It could have sent us into a depression. > > What would have happened in that private investors would have gotten > pieces of it, cut the waste and started making money. Capitalism is not > the boogie man. Why didn't they do that with Enron or MCI or Lehman Bros. or Bear Stearns? They had plenty of time to do it with GM and Chrysler before Obama took office.
From: John B. on 5 Aug 2010 19:11 On Aug 5, 6:43 pm, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <a816adec-ed6b-496b-915b-5f8a95ebecc4 > @x25g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > > > ********************************************************* > > > > With the amount of money spent in the stimulus plan we should be seeing > > > better results. The government run GM is going to be a complete disaster. > > > The GM Volt is going to make the Edsel look like a good idea. So I may > > > sound like I am talking about the past, but I am not. > > > > Obama has gotten to Immigration reform; He stopped it. > > > > Obama most assuredly said he was going to reduce spending. > > > GM and Chrysler are in operating in the black and paying back the $60 > > billion in bail-out money they got. If they had gone out of business, > > the effect on the economy would have been catastrophic -- millions of > > people out of work. It could have sent us into a depression. > > Assumptions with no basis in fact. Do you see how that goes both ways. > > GM and Chrysler should have been left to their own fate in the public > sector. Bad businesses should fail regardless of the ramifications to > one or many political ideologies. The ramifications would have been to the country, not to any political ideology.
From: bknight on 5 Aug 2010 19:15 On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 18:43:49 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >In article <a816adec-ed6b-496b-915b-5f8a95ebecc4 >@x25g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... ********************************************************* >> GM and Chrysler are in operating in the black and paying back the $60 >> billion in bail-out money they got. If they had gone out of business, >> the effect on the economy would have been catastrophic -- millions of >> people out of work. It could have sent us into a depression. >> > >Assumptions with no basis in fact. Do you see how that goes both ways. > >GM and Chrysler should have been left to their own fate in the public >sector. Bad businesses should fail regardless of the ramifications to >one or many political ideologies. Holy cow! How about the ramifications to the millions of families that would be negatively affected for years? Are you aware of how foolish this is? I'm sure that you would've backed Obama had he let them fail, especially with the resulting soaring unemployment numbers. Needless to say that you would damn him either way. BK
From: dsc-ky on 5 Aug 2010 19:51 On Aug 4, 9:50 pm, Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:00:59 -0700 (PDT), dsc-ky > > <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > >> Yes, but most of us think it is something worth fighting... > > >Up to a point... then the costs become too high. > a > Our current system is the most expensive system in the world - with or > without Obama's changes. If costs becoming too high is an > important issue, we need health care reform. > > -- > "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, > than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace > to the legislature, and not to the executive department." > > - James Madison I agree, but the Bummer solution is not a good one in my opinion...
From: dsc-ky on 5 Aug 2010 19:54
> the president > has less power than people think. > That is true, but probably less true than 10 or 15 years ago... that's what needs to be watched carefully. |