Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Fat wrote: Bob,
You've still got to make the connection that Israel is merely a division of the US Army/Navy/Marines/Coast Guard/Air Force. It is the best defence spending that we make, did you not see my post yesterday of how the Saudi's still provide the most financial aid to Al-Queda????
So why did bush invade Iraq?
Your party is full of ignorance and deception.
What about a investment in the American people??
|
|
nature
climber
Tuscon Again! India! India! Hawaii! LA?!?!
|
|
I disagree locker.
Shrub will go down as the worse president in history. Obama... he'll probably rank right about in the middle.
But as far as potential for another.... The Ditz doesn't stand a chance at being elected. Remember the VP debate where they held her hand. She'd get no such treatment if the Repubnican'ts let her run. She'd be shreaded by Obama. But I do support her running.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Fat...you and your kind (Bookworm) on this site are just plain hypocrites...the wars were no paid for, aid to Israel is not paid for, the Bush prescription plan was not paid for and now your piece of sh#t party is willing to extend tax cuts to the upper two percent that are not paid for.
Locker wrote: She is an absolute fuking DITZ...
Birds of feather flock together.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Tom is right. Wall Street knows capitalism doesn't work over any extended period of time. They are trying to extract all they can before the sh#t hits the fan.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
Republicans got hosed by Obama.
They CAVED big time.
They voted to DENY extending unemployment benefits in the House and Senate.
And now Obama has made them FLIP FLOP and agree to pay for them.
What a bunch of weak ass, no principled, LOSERS.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
FASCIST OBAMA, PURE AND SIMPLE:
December 7, 2010
Will the Next President & Congress Rescue Us From ObamaCare?
By Nat Hentoff
Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize winner in economics and an influential New York Times columnist, also has a blog, "The Conscience of a Liberal." On ABC's This Week (Nov. 14), during a discussion on balancing the federal budget against alarming deficits, he proclaimed the way to solve this problem is through deeply cost-effective health care rationing.
"Some years down the pike," he said, "we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes." That would mean the U.S. Debt Reduction Commission "should have endorsed the panel that was part of the [Obama] health care reform."
Sarah Palin was one of the first, and the most resounding, to warn us of the coming of government panels to decide which of us - especially, but not exclusively, toward the end of life - would cost too much to survive.
She was mocked, scorned from sea to shining sea, including by the eminent Paul Krugman for being, he said, among those spreading "the death penalty lie" as part of "the lunatic fringe." (Summarized in "Krugman Wants 'Death Panels,'" Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, Nov. 15.)
Soon after he had left the ABC studio, someone must have alerted Krugman that - gee whiz - he had publicly rooted for death panels!
Swiftly, on his blog, Krugman admitted he had indeed said those dreaded words, but:
"What I meant is that health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they're willing to pay for - not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we're willing to spend for extreme care."
"Extreme care," Professor Krugman? To be defined by government commissions, right?
Noel Sheppard of media watchdog Newsbusters was not fooled by the professor's attempt to extricate himself from embarrassment.
"As the government has deep budgetary problems," Sheppard reminded Krugman, "the cost-benefit analysis will naturally morph toward financial restraint thereby further limiting a patient's options and therefore his or her rights."
Are these Obamacare cost-benefit boards and commissions - for example, the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board penetratingly judging Medicare's cost-effectiveness (without judicial review) - not going to determine whether certain Americans are going to continue living?
'Fess up, Krugman, you owe Sarah Palin an apology for so often scandal-mongering her. Also, professor, aside from the abortion wars, don't most Americans agree that the most fundamental of all our rights is the right to life? Not the government's right to our lives.
When you said "death panels" on that Sunday morning, you knew and meant what you were saying. As an economist dedicated to deficit-reduction you were not lamenting the coming of death panels. Clearly, you were affirming their inevitability under President Obama's determination to prevent government subsidization of "extreme care."
As you said on ABC, this is "reality therapy."
Wesley Smith, who has been the Paul Revere of investigating and documenting the radical root of Obamacare - government's invasion of the doctor-patient relationship - has revealed how far Obama's Medicare czar, Dr. Donald Berwick, intends to go in order to foreclose the great majority of our visits to our doctors' offices.
In his regular fact-based commentary ("Secondhand Smoke," Nov. 16), Smith's headline is: "Berwick Wants to Do Away With 80% of 'Dinosaur' Patient/Doctor Office Calls."
He reports that in Berwick's Escape Fire: Lessons for the Future of Health Care - which he wrote in his former role as head of the Institute for Health Care Improvement - Berwick promised us that "healing relationships ... can be fashioned in many new and wonderful forms if we suspend the old ways of making sense of care."
Huh? Which "old ways?" You may not have realized it, but, he emphasized, "the health care encounter as a face-to-face visit is a dinosaur." In the wondrous new world of immediate health care for everyone in need, Berwick writes, "I think it rarely means ... reliance on face-to-face meetings between patients, doctors, and nurses."
Have your computer ready, folks.
What's next, a death-clock countdown for your desktop?
"Tackled well," President Obama's cost-efficient physician-in-chief foresees, "this new framework will gradually reveal that half or more of such of our encounters - maybe as many as 80 percent of them - are neither wanted by patients nor deeply believed in by professionals ... ."
Am I a dinosaur in my apprehensiveness about troubling symptoms - and odds of survival - because I feel I need to talk face-to-face with another human being whose calling is diagnosis? As Wesley Smith says, speaking for me and, I expect, many of us:
"Doctors use face-to-face meetings for more than exams. Sometimes, a doctor [not a computer] can take one look at a longtime patient [or not longtime] and tell that something is amiss."
Because President Obama did not want Dr. Berwick to be subjected to probing questions at a congressional hearing, this czar of the future is a recess appointment, but he finally was inconsequentially heard. Will Obama, in 2012, turn out to be a recess president, in considerable part because of his messianic, unyielding devotion to Obamacare? Then, if he's in distress, when he's out of office, maybe Berwick will consent to care for him privately.
Presidents retain their health insurance for life, so Berwick will be appropriately compensated without being limited by Medicare rates. But will the next president and Congress rescue us from Obamacare?
Nat Hentoff is a nationally renowned authority on the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights. He is a member of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and the libertarian Cato Institute, where he is a senior fellow.
|
|
Jingy
climber
Somewhere out there
|
|
^^^^ Meaningless Drivel^^^^^
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Joe,
The data you cite is for 2006 in constant dollars. The taxes we're talking about are on income in current dollars. I can get the raw numbers off the Census web site, but I'm away from my office so I don't have access to my summation and other data processing programs. The mean income for all households in the U.S. was a little over $67,000.00 in 2009. I suspect the median was lower, but I can't be sure without a summation/ranking program.
Keep in mind, though, that a "household" can be one person living alone. Also, the geographic dispersion of income varies greatly. $250,000 buys a lot less in New York than it does in Peoria, and there are more $250,000 ouseholds per capita in New York than in Peoria. When I was being recruited to work at New york law firms, one of the lawyers there admitted that in New York I'd have a high income, but, as he put it, all that means is that I'll pay a lot more taxes and incur a lot more expenses to live there.
The fact remains that $250,000 is more than most households make, but I'd be willing to bet that most households that make $250,000 are living a very middle class lifestayle.
John
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
Obama kicks ass once again! Shrewd to tie in the unemployment extention with this!
There's time enough to make those Fattrad™s like Coz pay their share in the next six years!
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
I LOVE OBAMA!!!
* Leaving Gitmo open.
* No trials for terrorists
* 30,000-soldier surge in Afghanistan.
* Extending tax cuts.
* Re-upping the Patriot Act.
* Ripping his liberal base as "sanctimonious".
* Promoting missile defense against Iran.
They said if I voted for John McCain that we would see the same policies that Bush enacated -- and they were right!
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
THE LEFT IS GOING NUTS OVER OBAMA'S CAVE TO THE GOP, FROM POWERLINE:
A poll conducted by Survey USA provides a sense of the left's dismay at the tax deal President Obama agreed to. Survey USA polled 1,000 people who contributed time or money to the Obama presidential campaign. 74 percent strongly oppose the deal and 57 percent say they are less likely to contribute in 2012 to Democrats who support it.
To get a sense of the level of outrage, you can check out the comments about the poll that appear on the Democratic Underground. It looks like the Democratic left may, indeed, have to go back underground.
Obama. The Worst President Ever. Ever.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
I wonder why I have never gotten a job from a poor person?
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
You see, to liberals, people go into business not to make money and enhance their own standard of living -- nooooo -- to liberals people go into business in order to give their profits and wealth to others. You know, guys like Ted Turner and Bill Gates -- they started their businesses in order to give it away to people who don't have the initiative to get off their asses and work.
I get it now. Go into business so you can give the government the product of your hard effort. Its all so clear.
|
|
shut up and pull
climber
|
|
What is soooo funny to me is that liberals think that "rich" people (you know, those earning over $250,000, like most cop or firemen households) should be demonized, and torn down, and their wealth "redistributed" to the lazy slobs who will always vote for more welfare, regardless of where that money comes from.
Hey libs -- please, next time it is time to pay taxes, give the government more of your money. I bet you won't.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
You know, to idiots, people don't go to work to earn a living and make a place in the world for themselves and their families. They go to work to support an upper class of parasites and leeches who live off the hard work of others.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!