tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post1536132015055729795..comments2024-01-02T07:48:42.623-05:00Comments on Comics And...Other Imaginary Tales: The Best and The Rest March 23Jimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00352163584546054887noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-61858702603175289342010-03-25T08:53:13.052-04:002010-03-25T08:53:13.052-04:00Thomm - We disagree, time will tell if the bill st...Thomm - We disagree, time will tell if the bill stands.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352163584546054887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-53047505491606479472010-03-25T08:03:20.528-04:002010-03-25T08:03:20.528-04:00So no bill is what it's about if it has an unr...So no bill is what it's about if it has an unrelated rider? That would pretty much mean that all legislation is not what it's about. Very few bills are passed without something attached. Besides, your statement is merely a diversion from the substance of the bill, which is about health care.<br /><br />Here's the thing. You say the health care legislation is a government takeover. How? The government is requiring that people buy insurance from private health providers and if the people can't afford it, providing money to the people to do so. If a person can afford it and doesn't or doesn't use the aid to get it, the person is taxed/fined. If that's a government takeover, then so's your house, if you have a mortgage. The government gives you a huge tax break for your mortgage interst payments, essentially paying you to encourage home ownership.<br /><br />I presume you're not saying that the student loan change is a government takeover, with which I would agree. The old system was basically the feds guaranteeing the money on the loans and paying the banks a bunch of fees for administering the loans. The new system just cuts out the middle man of unnecessary fees to the banks.<br /><br />I appreciate Lee's pain here in saying he even partially agreed with me. :-)<br /><br />I disagree that there was no cooperation on the Democratic side. They did try to have the GOP participate in crafting the bill but all they got was "no." Hell, the Dems even dropped the public option and made the bill very private health industry friendly, which should have gotten a lot of GOP agreement. The non-cooperation here is very one sided, and there's no cramming in this bill any more than there is in any other bill that's not passed unanimously.Red Dognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-5877365969318461682010-03-24T10:31:26.675-04:002010-03-24T10:31:26.675-04:00Lee: Health Care needed to be fixed, but a bad fix...Lee: Health Care needed to be fixed, but a bad fix is not a good thing. Many other ideas were floated around and many other more limited fixes were suggested. This was not about Health Care it is about expanded government. <br /><br />Doing nothing is not the bigger sin when the something new is worse. I'm sure your wife would not like you trying something new :)<br /><br />Personally I think incremental fixes would have made more sense. Again it really wasn't about Health Care and if it was, why was the Student Loan program changed with this bill?Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352163584546054887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-16598436545026894462010-03-24T09:29:20.312-04:002010-03-24T09:29:20.312-04:00I have to agree with Thomm on this one.... to an e...I have to agree with Thomm on this one.... to an extent. The problem was that health care was broken. While I might not agree with the entirety of Obama's plan, no one else came up with any solutions!<br /><br />The Democrats rammed it down our throats and all the Republicans did was say no. <br /><br />If the idiots (and I refer to all of them) had even attempted to work together then maybe, MAYBE, we would have gotten something reasonable.<br /><br />Doing nothing is a bigger sin in my book than at least trying something new.Leenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-69081192656250623802010-03-24T09:15:29.982-04:002010-03-24T09:15:29.982-04:00Thomm - I will never convince you of what you beli...Thomm - I will never convince you of what you believe to be true so trying to do so is a waste of time. <br /><br />A national take over of health care is socialism by definition, how else would you care to define it. If the law stands we will only be able to truly judge it by the passage of time. Personally I see this as tipping point taking the country down a road that will cause us to become more like many of the European countries, which can have pluses and minuses, but for me it is not the right choice.<br /><br />Healthcare is not a right in my mind and this bill did not fix it as much as it created more problems. It is about the expansion of the government and that is not a good thing in my mind. <br /><br />Bush expanded the government with Homeland Security, now Healthcare and the beat goes on.<br /><br />Influence versus control is another discussion.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352163584546054887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-41964543859879780532010-03-24T07:51:29.959-04:002010-03-24T07:51:29.959-04:00Say what you will about the legislation, one thing...Say what you will about the legislation, one thing all this has done is tarnish the image of "The Greatest Generation". Seniors have largely come across as totally self-absorbed and unconcerned about anything but making sure they have their benefits, the rest of the country be damned. Not that all seniors have been like that, but the most voiciferous.<br /><br />You know, you never did explain how the legislation is socialist. That's like the talking heads, who just throw out "bad" words to scare people without actually explaining how the term applies. Highway maintenance is more socialist than this plan, given that most of the highway activity is government agencies, whereas the health plans are run by private companies. <br /><br />Just bandying about socialist as you have means you're labeling Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton as socialists just because they advocated for a national health plan. Just because a person isn't afraid of government doesn't make that person a socialist.<br /><br />Also, government influence in my life is not synonymous with government control of my life. Lots of things and people have influence in my life. Only my own decisions control my life.Red Dognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-36977170249758264892010-03-24T07:18:57.452-04:002010-03-24T07:18:57.452-04:00As do I!As do I!Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352163584546054887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-18452155891609943242010-03-24T00:11:32.141-04:002010-03-24T00:11:32.141-04:00Geeze, thanks for leaving us with this mess Daddy....Geeze, thanks for leaving us with this mess Daddy... I blame my parents! *cough*Gwenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14840270045390557504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-65112237968195105282010-03-23T08:04:07.848-04:002010-03-23T08:04:07.848-04:00Of course you disagree, but you prefer government ...Of course you disagree, but you prefer government control of your life and I do not. I don't care whose idea it is, a bad idea is a bad idea. Marching out dead people who had an "R" after their name means nothing to me as I certainly don't consider myself a Republican or a Democrat. <br /><br />I'm glad to see you think I'm buying into the talking heads, but you are buying into the other side if you think this brings about competition with the insurance companies. <br /><br />If the bill stands time will tell who is right. Right now I know we both think we are right.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352163584546054887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33311991.post-65489145227004528822010-03-23T07:54:21.895-04:002010-03-23T07:54:21.895-04:00Please explain how the health care reform, which u...Please explain how the health care reform, which uses increased competition between private insurers, is socialist? There is no government run insurance involved, a la the already existing Medicare or Medicaid systems. In fact, the passed legislation is largely based on the plan proposed by Richard Nixon in 1974. Are you saying Nixon was a socialist?<br /><br />Don't listen to talking heads. They're all about outrage and ratings, not thinking.<br /><br />Of course, where you see the end of the USA, I see the improvement of the USA, but that's prognosticating, and who's to say who's right until much further down the road? I would say that no one should buy into the idea that the USA is a failure if it doesn't continue to overwhelmingly dominate the rest of the world. That's an unrealistic expectation, and something that's not all that good for the world. US policy since WWII has been to improve the rest of the world to reach US standards. We shouldn't be wringing our hands in despair when we actually succeed at that. Just because the UK isn't the world dominator it once was doesn't mean that the UK has failed. Same for the US if we go that route.Red Dognoreply@blogger.com