Our ammo is going to increase a lot more than the GOPs See, in 2006, they ran on "scary liberals are going to take power if you vote D!" now if those scary things don't happen...what are they going to run on...the big theme of the GOP was and is ...
11-13-2006, 10:09 PM
| #21 | ||||
| Banned  Progressive Philadelphia, PA 
| Our ammo is going to increase a lot more than the GOPs See, in 2006, they ran on "scary liberals are going to take power if you vote D!" now if those scary things don't happen...what are they going to run on...the big theme of the GOP was and is Terror and Taxes If, in 2008 and 2010, the average american goes "gee...my taxes weren't raised...and I don't feel less safe than I did in 2005..." you guys got nuthin It looks to me like the Democrats are setting themselves up for another 40 years of power...the only Republicans that can beat a Democrat are McCain and Rudy...and Rudy is liberal and McCain...once he gets elected you don't know how he's gonna act, by looking at 2000 you can guess it would be to side with Democrats on most of their issues | ||||
     |
|
11-13-2006, 10:14 PM
| #22 | ||||
| Administrator  libertarian Oklahoma
| Originally Posted by Thorgrim 
So answer the question, who will get their taxes raised? | ||||
| |
|
11-13-2006, 10:45 PM
| #23 | ||||
| Banned Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 Most likely: Those making over $200,000 a year
In Estates: Those with a non-agricultural estate over 2 million, those with a mostly agricultural estate over 5-10 million | ||||
| |
|
11-13-2006, 10:52 PM
| #24 | ||||
| Administrator libertarian Oklahoma
| Originally Posted by Thorgrim So you're guessing? Why are you guessing? Because there has been NO official plan put forth by the democrats, members of their party like yourself who are plugged in and in tune with party leaders do NOT know the answers to these questions. Thats not a knock on you, it is however, a knock on the leadership of the party. I saw several democrats on TV last week all asked the same question and not ONE SINGLE answer! Its so damn frustrating that we can't get something ironed out, some sort of tentative plan from the democrats with regards to the economy other than "bush sucks" well newsflash bush doesn't suck at the economy its doing very well. He does suck at domestic spending which has had a negative impact on the economy but overall the economy has done very well the last 4 years especially the last 3 years. I want some sort of plan that I can read with regards to the economy and it just flat out doesn't exist. That is a HUGE problem IMO.
| ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 12:37 AM
| #25 | ||||
| Banned Progressive Philadelphia, PA
| The contract with america did include a plan to solve every american's problem...and the GOP in 1994 did set out a plan to solve AA, Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Foreign Policy with every nation etc etc They haven't even been in office one day and you're already knocking the leadership I am sure they have several plans in competition right now, and are waiting to see how the initial footsteps go in regards to Bush's reaction to the "first 100 hours" and then ofcourse Iraq...when you take Iraq off the budget that changes everything However, this is politics, not a documentary...they are not about to run in 2008 as the party who tried to raise taxes on the wealthy to help the debt and failed...that just sounds pathetic on several levels... | ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 01:08 AM
| #26 | ||||
| Limited government ftw.  Paleolibertarian
| I knew Democrats would try to push universal health care again. But when people take a look at other country's medical care standards, it will be a big loser for the Dems | ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 08:23 AM
| #27 | ||||
| Banned  Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Malkin gets bleeped on O'Reilly  Anyway, somewhat relavent to this thread, since she does mention Hillarycare. Thorgrim, pay attention, even she realizes that the failed healtchare plan in the early 90s led to the Republican Revolution Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Michelle gets bleeped on O’Reilly | ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 08:48 AM
| #28 | ||||
| Lurker Democrat
| Times have changed since '94.for one thing, we now have about 50 million people in this country without health insurance. This system has needed fixing for some time, and ignoring the problem, as republicans have done since they've been in power, is no longer an option. The crooked,greedy drug and insurance companies have written our health care policies long enough. American companies are having a tough time competing with foreign companies, because American companies have the added expense of providing health care to their employees. All one has to do is look at GM and Toyota, for example. The details of health care reform need to be hashed out, but it's turning into a major issue in this country. This time, you're going to see big business on the side of health care reform. People have finally figuured out that they are paying three times the $$$ for Rx drugs than they should. Republicans can bury their heads in the sand and refuse to contribute to the solution, all the while yakking about God, guns, and flag-burning, which is what I expect. If they ever get smart, and I have my doubts about that, they'll nominate somebody like Mitt Romney in '08, who has done something positive about health care in his own state. One thing's for sure, health care reform will be a major issue in '08. 50 million people have a stake in it,and "staying the course" with no plan to improve health care just ain't gonna cut it. | ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 08:58 AM
| #29 | ||||
| Lurker Democrat
| Ironic that your "namesake", Nixon, was actually trying to get a universal healthcare plan enacted, "flaming Liberal" that he was....  | ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 10:26 AM
| #30 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by Vietvet Yes, times have changed.
We're far enough along now to recognize that a socialist society isn't what has made this country great. | ||||
| |
|
11-14-2006, 10:56 AM
| #31 | ||||
| Administrator libertarian Oklahoma
| Originally Posted by Vietvet How about looking at the real problem, the real reasons why we're paying more for Rx drugs than the rest of the world. How about looking at all the factors instead of taking a tiny piece of the picture, treating it as the problem and further screwing up the system? Why not look at the entire picture to find a REAL solution instead of making things worse? Health care reform may be necessary but socialized medicine is a joke and all this bullshit about "lowering prescription drug prices" is just that bullshit. Until the entire problem is looked at it wont get properly fixed, PERIOD.
| ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 08:44 AM
| #32 | ||||
| Lurker Democrat
| Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 That's a typical RW knee-jerk reaction to any kind of health care reform: Label it "socialized medicine" and keep going with the status quo. OK, let's look at the "real problem."Why ARE we paying more for RX drugs than the rest of the world? I don't see an answer to that in your post. Have you ever considered the remote possibility that maybe, just maybe, the drug companies are ripping us all off?? Why do you think retirees are going to Mexico or Canada to by Rx drugs? Well, when you consider that you can buy the same drug in Canada for about 1/3rd oof what you pay in the US, you might start growing a clue as to what's going on here. We have a major problem with the health care system in this country. If you don't consider the fact that 50 million people are uninsured to be a problem, then you've got your head buried in the sand. What is your solution, just keep doing what hasn't been working? Just keep health care costs rising, with no controls whatsoever? I don't think so. That's the same way the right prefers to deal with everything from global warming to the war in Iraq. Just ignore all the bad news, and everything will be fine.
So, do you have a plan to do anything about what's wrong with the system? Personally, I would like to see a private-sector partnership with the Federal Government, to provide every American citizen with the exact same opportunity to participate in the very same program that our elected Senators and Representatives, INCLUDING REPUBLICANS, enjoy right now. It's called the Federal Employees Benefit System. Every year, you have a choice of about 10 different insurance policies. It's not a "single payer" system, and it's not "socialized medicine." If it is, then, Republicans in Congress don't seem to have a problem with it, as long as they are the only ones who have access to it. I have it, as a Federal retiree. I've had it for years, and it's worked very well for my family and me. I'd like to see my grown kids have it as well. Again, it's easy to just dismiss any ideas on serious health care reform as "socialized medicine." It's a little more difficult to actually STUDY the ideas thereby gaining the knowledge it would take to intelligently discuss the issue.BTW, what I described above is pretty close to what the so-called "Hillary Care" idea was all about. Kerry offered a similar plan during the '04 campaign. When you have private insurance companies like Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Aetna, Pacificare, Prudential, etc. participating in this program that has been available to Federal employees for years and years, it can hardly be labled "socialized medicine", except by people who simply are too lazy or ignorant to actually study the proposals that have been put out there. | ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 08:46 AM
| #33 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by Vietvet Typical LW knee-jerk reaction...
 You really have no idea what pharmaceutical companies do, do you? You want to know the real reason why healthcare costs are so 'high'? I'll tell you; government regulation. Healthcare is the most regulated industry in the nation, and it's a fiasco. More regulation is like trying to put out a flame with gasoline. | ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 09:02 AM
| #34 | ||||
| Lurker Democrat
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz Ho Hum.
 every time any kind of health care reform is brought up for debate, the right's stock answer is: Label it socialism, dismiss the problem as one that doesn't exist, and continue down the same old road, with head planted firmly where the sun don't shine. Predictable, ignorant, and boring. And NOT a soultion. You can't come up with a solution if you don't even recognize the glaring fact that there is a problem. | ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 09:05 AM
| #35 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by Vietvet Is this your admitting that you don't know why prices are so high?
We don't need more, we need less. That is the solution. | ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 09:11 AM
| #36 | ||||
| Administrator libertarian Oklahoma
| Originally Posted by Vietvet
You really need to do more reading on the subject of healthcare as well as R&D in the field along with costs and why they're so expensive. Also keep in mind that 80% of medical breakthroughs come from the good ol' USA. Many of the treatments offered here are NOT offered under any socialized medicine/government run healthcare systems. Why? Because they're deemed too expensive. You wanna know why drug prices are higher here? Because we subsidize drug prices for hte rest of the countries on the face of the planet. Here's a quick lesson in how it works. Company XYZ has spend 1.5 billion on R&D for their new pill, lets say they expect to have a approximately 200 million in distribution costs associated with this pill. This brings the total up to 1.7 billion. This company expects to distribute 1 billion pills before their patent runs out in 5 years. The cost excluding distribution and R&D to produce each pill is estimated at 25 cents and the company estimates they will distribute the 1 billion pills adding another 250 million dollars to the cost of the pill. Necessary cashflows for this particular pill are 2.5 billion dollars to make a profit and meet R&D demands for the future. Now the company goes to Canada and says hey we have this new pill that could greatly aid in helping people in your country. The price is 2.50/pill, Canada says no way it cost you 75 cents to produce each pill we're not giving you 10 times that! So Canada offers 40 cents for 25 million pills, at this point the R&D is "sunk cost" and if you know anything about business you pretty much have to ignore it at this stage of the game. 40 x .75 = 30 million dollars Next the company moves on to the EU (I'm lumping the entire EU in here because each country would be different and I'm not writing this for 11ty billion countries). The EU says this is a great pill we will give you 1 dollar per pill and we want 400 million of them. 400x1 = 400 million dollars Next on the list is Australia. Australia wants 30 million pills at a cost of 1.33 each each. 30 x 1.33 = 40 million Next up is Asia (once again lumping some countries here) They want 180 million pills at 1 dollar each. 180 x 1 = 180 million dollars. At this point a total of 650 million pills have been purchased for a total of 650 million dollars. That means to meet cashflow goals the company needs 1.85 BILLION more dollars. Why? Because no one has paid them for their extensive and tedious R&D. Finally the US comes along and theres demand for 350 million pills. 350 million pills and with 1.85 billion dollars left to raise the US gets charged 5.28/pill. Why? Because the companies would lose money, do you know what happens when a company continually loses money? They go out of business! 1) The system as refused to modernize and is for the most part extremely ineffecient in dealing with patient data and records. 2) We need to leverage technology to help streamline the manual process throughout much of the medical system. 3) We need to make sure other countries are paying OUR companies fair prices for our drugs. 4) You can't merely treat symptoms of our medical problem and expect it to go away. 5) Put consumers back in the loop on what it actually COSTS for medical care. Sure premiums have gone up but many americans are buffered by excellent insurance and dont see the real costs just a "premium" 6) Charge all everyone at least 20 bucks each time they go to the dr for anything other than a yearly physical. 7) Not everyone can have the "senators" package because the congress has 300 million people funding the healthcare for 535 individuals, do the math | ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 09:13 AM
| #37 | ||||
| Lurker Democrat
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz Oh, I see. The government has put strict regulations on the drug companies to keep their prices no less than three times what they charge in Canada? Boy, I'll bet the drug companies are really PISSED about that! Damned "liberals" in the government anyway!
 Are you serious or just clueless?Do you have any "real world" experience with the health care system in this country to speak of? I have, and I've probably forgotten more than you'll ever know about it. I've also worked in hospitals and clinics, and I know something more about the way drug companies push their products. I could enlighten you, but know-it-alls can't be educated. | ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 09:32 AM
| #38 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by Vietvet
 I guess it's good that you're honest in that you don't remember much of anything you're talking about.
| ||||
| |
|
11-16-2006, 09:37 AM
| #39 | ||||
| R-CH2-CH3  Republican
| Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95
|
