Register
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34
  1. #1
    ArcticSplash's Avatar
    ArcticSplash is offline Dixie Normus
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Couch Surfing in Kensington
    Posts
    11,105

    Default Paul Ryan, GOP Congressmembers in the Hot Seat - Kill Medicare

    House Republicans regroup after Medicare anger - Politics - Capitol Hill - msnbc.com

    Well the screaming matches between seniors has started.

    The Tea Party knew this was gonna happen. I'm sitting back with the popcorn to see how far this goes before they cave.

  2. #2
    geoffrobinson is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ArcticSplash View Post
    House Republicans regroup after Medicare anger - Politics - Capitol Hill - msnbc.com

    Well the screaming matches between seniors has started.

    The Tea Party knew this was gonna happen. I'm sitting back with the popcorn to see how far this goes before they cave.
    Unfortunately for seniors, you can't argue and scream with math and demographics.

  3. #3
    Bob_Head's Avatar
    Bob_Head is offline Immoderat0r
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by geoffrobinson View Post
    Unfortunately for math and demographics, you can't argue and scream with seniors.
    Fixed.
    Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine.

  4. #4
    Dayman's Avatar
    Dayman is offline Champion of the Sun
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Kensington/Fairhill/St. Hugh's
    Posts
    5,380

    Default

    I'd love to see the government eliminate every single entitlement program (even for soldiers), just so I can see former Tea Partiers rise up in the socialist revolt.

  5. #5
    StrangeTanks's Avatar
    StrangeTanks is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kensington
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    I think it would be pretty enlightening to publish congressmen net worths and benefits.

    Basically, I think you would see:

    Tax breaks for us.
    Lifetime benefits for us.
    Less work for us.
    The rest of you should be happy being chattel to protect quarterly earnings.

  6. #6
    Marc is online now bier dimpfe
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    QV
    Posts
    949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayman View Post
    I'd love to see the government eliminate every single entitlement program (even for soldiers), just so I can see former Tea Partiers rise up in the socialist revolt.



    lol

  7. #7
    geoffrobinson is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayman View Post
    I'd love to see the government eliminate every single entitlement program (even for soldiers), just so I can see former Tea Partiers rise up in the socialist revolt.
    No one is trying to eliminate them. Just make them sustainable, which is going to be really hard to do given current demographics. The irony is that seniors are making it more likely they will be eliminated by fighting these changes.

  8. #8
    JCO4O1 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post



    lol
    That is the biggest problem with entitlements. Once you have them, it is near impossible to get rid of them. The left is very good at turning entitlements into "rights".

    It is just plain sad that even reforming these entitlements to make them more sustainable is seen as attacking those people that Paul Ryan is trying to save.

  9. #9
    Marc is online now bier dimpfe
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    QV
    Posts
    949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCO4O1 View Post
    That is the biggest problem with entitlements. Once you have them, it is near impossible to get rid of them. The left is very good at turning entitlements into "rights".
    emphasis added.

    I think, to be intellectually honest, that should, more broadly, read "politicians". All sides have their bases and constituents that they dare not threaten, jeopardize or otherwise weaken the entitlements thereof.

  10. #10
    JCO4O1 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    emphasis added.

    I think, to be intellectually honest, that should, more broadly, read "politicians". All sides have their bases and constituents that they dare not threaten, jeopardize or otherwise weaken the entitlements thereof.
    While your point sadly has some truth to it... I think generally speaking ending entitlements comes primarily from the right only. Is there anybody on the left calling for the end to any entitlements?

  11. #11
    StrangeTanks's Avatar
    StrangeTanks is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kensington
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    The problem with entitlements or whatever semantics you use is that you run into a financial vs moral dilemma.

    For example assuming your not going to let someone die on the street. Its cheaper to give a homeless person an apartment and food than to deal with the eventual medical costs associated with exposure and malnutrition.

    On the other hand you have the moral dilemma, its not fair to give one person food and an apartment while making others pay for it.

    This is just a simplified example, don't jump down my throat about drug abuse and bad choices ect.

    These are the choices that are being presented to folks. Unfortunately, my opinion is that the republican party is simply putting forth its same old agenda of rigging the system to guide as much wealth as possible towards as few people as possible. Just look at things such as medicare plan b, the drug benefit plan. A plan which strictly prohibits negotiating prices with manufacturers. What a windfall for a few individuals. The examples go on and on.

  12. #12
    JCO4O1 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StrangeTanks View Post
    The problem with entitlements or whatever semantics you use is that you run into a financial vs moral dilemma.

    For example assuming your not going to let someone die on the street. Its cheaper to give a homeless person an apartment and food than to deal with the eventual medical costs associated with exposure and malnutrition.

    On the other hand you have the moral dilemma, its not fair to give one person food and an apartment while making others pay for it..
    You didn't mention the other option, charity. The government is simply too large to know who needs what charity. Smaller, local charities do a much better job. They can tell who is on hard times, and who is milking the system.

  13. #13
    Marc is online now bier dimpfe
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    QV
    Posts
    949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCO4O1 View Post
    While your point sadly has some truth to it... I think generally speaking ending entitlements comes primarily from the right only. Is there anybody on the left calling for the end to any entitlements?
    That probably depends on a few definitions--i.e. left, right and entitlement--and one's perspective.

  14. #14
    StrangeTanks's Avatar
    StrangeTanks is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kensington
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCO4O1 View Post
    While your point sadly has some truth to it... I think generally speaking ending entitlements comes primarily from the right only. Is there anybody on the left calling for the end to any entitlements?
    Tax breaks to oil companies? Bush tax cuts?

  15. #15
    JCO4O1 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StrangeTanks View Post
    Tax breaks to oil companies? Bush tax cuts?
    So keeping more of the money you earn is an entitlement? Fine. That's one entitlement I'm all for.

    While I'm against subsidies in general, surely you don't think ending the subsidies for oil companies now will do any good for gas prices. If they can manage to bring gas prices down to $3 I would be all for phasing them out to ease the pain at the pump. Can we get rid of all the green subsidies too... and while we are at it, tax breaks in general? End all of the deductions and lower taxes.

  16. #16
    JCO4O1 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    That probably depends on a few definitions--i.e. left, right and entitlement--and one's perspective.
    And also the definition of of end, anybody, primarily, from, and the.

  17. #17
    StrangeTanks's Avatar
    StrangeTanks is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kensington
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCO4O1 View Post
    So keeping more of the money you earn is an entitlement? Fine. That's one entitlement I'm all for.

    While I'm against subsidies in general, surely you don't think ending the subsidies for oil companies now will do any good for gas prices. If they can manage to bring gas prices down to $3 I would be all for phasing them out to ease the pain at the pump. Can we get rid of all the green subsidies too... and while we are at it, tax breaks in general? End all of the deductions and lower taxes.
    Well, I'm sure gas prices could be brought down some in the short term if we decided to subsidize it some more, if thats the goal, might as well just hand out gas vouchers. As for green subsidies...I'm for getting rid of all the subsidies. Stop funding goofy wars to protect oil interests, stop subsidizing ethanol, stop subsidizing construction of nuclear power plants. Let the free market truly provide products and services and let the best provider win.

  18. #18
    StrangeTanks's Avatar
    StrangeTanks is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kensington
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    Oh back to the topic of Medicare and seniors.

    If the government wants to get rid of Medicare and privatize it, I think thats fine. Its a simple solution, you calculate the amount of hard earned dollars that people have put into the system and refund it to them. I don't see why thats such a big deal?

    Oh wait...duh...I forgot, the entire federal budget is essentially a giant ponzi scheme designed to take as much as it can and make huge promises. But when it comes to pay the piper the coffers are empty and you get a big ole frowny face in exchange for your investment.

  19. #19
    JCO4O1 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StrangeTanks View Post
    Well, I'm sure gas prices could be brought down some in the short term if we decided to subsidize it some more, if thats the goal, might as well just hand out gas vouchers. As for green subsidies...I'm for getting rid of all the subsidies. Stop funding goofy wars to protect oil interests, stop subsidizing ethanol, stop subsidizing construction of nuclear power plants. Let the free market truly provide products and services and let the best provider win.
    I was just pointing out that while I want to get rid of the oil subsidies, doing it now would only increase the problem with gas prices. Obama has started pointing to this because it is a popular position, but getting rid of them certainly wouldn't lower gas prices, it would do the exact opposite. Maybe once the dollar regains value, and we start to allow the oil companies to take advantage of our own natural resources, we can phase out the subsidies.

    Quote Originally Posted by StrangeTanks View Post
    Oh back to the topic of Medicare and seniors.

    If the government wants to get rid of Medicare and privatize it, I think thats fine. Its a simple solution, you calculate the amount of hard earned dollars that people have put into the system and refund it to them. I don't see why thats such a big deal?

    Oh wait...duh...I forgot, the entire federal budget is essentially a giant ponzi scheme designed to take as much as it can and make huge promises. But when it comes to pay the piper the coffers are empty and you get a big ole frowny face in exchange for your investment.
    That is exactly why we need to phase it out as soon as possible.

  20. #20
    BarryG is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Philly
    Posts
    6,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JCO4O1 View Post
    I was just pointing out that while I want to get rid of the oil subsidies, doing it now would only increase the problem with gas prices. Obama has started pointing to this because it is a popular position, but getting rid of them certainly wouldn't lower gas prices, it would do the exact opposite. Maybe once the dollar regains value, and we start to allow the oil companies to take advantage of our own natural resources, we can phase out the subsidies.
    It shouldn't have an effect on gas prices, which are priced based on supply and demand. It would only affect oil company profits.

 

 

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

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2