Political Discussion

[banca rotta]

Disclaimer: Before anyone jumps to the wrong conclusion I believe the Banana thing is implying that we are a Banana Republic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic

[jacko]

Healthcare is not free. They pay for it via taxes. What is exactly do you mean by 'Freedom'? Not to pay your health bill and stiff the hospital?

You sort of made my point. I was one of the sheep that drank Bush 2's kool-aid. In hindsight I now see the results of Bush's policies at the same time Ron Paul made pretty accurate predictions on what would happen under Bush and Fed policies.

The truth you ask? That would be the facts not my opinion. Bush and the rest of them made their own bad predictions as well as Obama and Biden saying 2 years ago we would be in recovery which we are not!

Ron Paul said many things 10 years ago, most of which have happened as he said it. I would say that's the truth.

People like yourself prefer free healthcare vs. Freedom which is the only reason you don't like RP. I promise you in the end you will get neither.

Just ask the Europeans how their free healthcare is working out for them since they are a model for most who think like you. They are going deeper in their depression due to their debt crisis.

[helpmeout]

My favorite America is where the constitution is upheld. This is the America that RP will be good for. He won't be good for the other America's however. Too bad.

Mine, too. Which is why I won't vote for Paul.

[helpmeout]

You sort of made my point. I was one of the sheep that drank Bush 2's kool-aid. In hindsight I now see the results of Bush's policies at the same time Ron Paul made pretty accurate predictions on what would happen under Bush and Fed policies.

I know. It is rather obvious from your posts that you are ultra rightwing conservative. BTW, I don't drink anyone's kool-aid. Including Paul's.

BTW, all the doom and gloom predictions during a bursting economy are bound to come true at some point. Just like all of the positive predictions during a recession are bound to come true at some point.

People like me prefer freedom. Don't ever presume to think that you know what I prefer. You can only say what YOU would prefer. The reason why I don't Paul is because he would be bad for America.

BTW, there is no such thing as free healthcare. And not all countries with "free" healthcare are going into a deeper depression.

Your opinions are not facts. And all you have spouted are your opinions.

[shark66]

As to your premise about universal healthcare and Europe I believe you are wrong. Generally most Europeans are much happier with their system then we are.

They are happier only because they don't know different, for the most part. Having experienced several European varieties of universal health care, I'd take my chances with the corrupt U.S. system any day of the week...

As to Paul -- he is correct about our empire dragging us down and corruption with the Feds. Unfortunately, some of his other ideas are too far out there for mainstream.

What exactly is "mainstream" ? The idiocy of political correctness that will be this country's grave? Sad are the times in which Mark Twain's books are removed from public school libraries because they contain "the word"...

Good luck to us all.

[msm859]

You sort of made my point. I was one of the sheep that drank Bush 2's kool-aid. In hindsight I now see the results of Bush's policies at the same time Ron Paul made pretty accurate predictions on what would happen under Bush and Fed policies.

The truth you ask? That would be the facts not my opinion. Bush and the rest of them made their own bad predictions as well as Obama and Biden saying 2 years ago we would be in recovery which we are not!

Ron Paul said many things 10 years ago, most of which have happened as he said it. I would say that's the truth.

People like yourself prefer free healthcare vs. Freedom which is the only reason you don't like RP. I promise you in the end you will get neither.

Just ask the Europeans how their free healthcare is working out for them since they are a model for most who think like you. They are going deeper in their depression due to their debt crisis.

The problem with your premise is you are not asking the follow up question. Why was Bush wrong? Because supply-side economics does NOT work. The fact that so many Republicans are still trying to sell if shows how "naive" people are.

Why was Obama wrong about turning the economy around? Because he did not appreciate the depth of the problem we were in. The continuing growing income inequality and decimation of the middle class will turn us into a third world country. Until the foreclosures stop are economy can not fully turn around.

As to your premise about universal healthcare and Europe I believe you are wrong. Generally most Europeans are much happier with their system then we are.

As to Paul -- he is correct about our empire dragging us down and corruption with the Feds. Unfortunately, some of his other ideas are too far out there for mainstream.

[banca rotta]

The truth is that Paul is not good for America, at all. His policies would hurt America.

Since there's more then one "America" this too maybe true. For instance there's the America that you and many others cherish that like halloween you get free stuff from your neighbors. There's an America where criminals get away with murder. There's an America where banksters inflate the currency supply and bankrupt the middle class.

My favorite America is where the constitution is upheld. This is the America that RP will be good for. He won't be good for the other America's however. Too bad.

[banca rotta]

Yep, he is still crazy and naive.

Who is still crazy and naive??? For those of you that are having trouble understanding my point it's very simple. If you go back ten years and people whether they are politicians, or economists, authors, lawyers, etc. and they all made predictions wouldn't it be natural to see who made the best calls and trust that person?

Most of these guys made speeches and we found out they either lied or were clueless. RP called it better then everyone else I feel. As for who you vote for that's up to you. I prefer someone who's at least honest, but that's just me I guess.

[banca rotta]

So because we don't agree with you we are stubborn and blind? I have to laugh because whenever I read your doom and gloom posts I am reminded of Bush II, you know, the guy who got in front of the UN and said "You're either with us or against us". Anyone who didn't agree with him was not only "against us" but if American, was unpatriotic. The truth? According to who? You?
The truth is that Paul is not good for America, at all. His policies would hurt America.

You sort of made my point. I was one of the sheep that drank Bush 2's kool-aid. In hindsight I now see the results of Bush's policies at the same time Ron Paul made pretty accurate predictions on what would happen under Bush and Fed policies.

The truth you ask? That would be the facts not my opinion. Bush and the rest of them made their own bad predictions as well as Obama and Biden saying 2 years ago we would be in recovery which we are not!

Ron Paul said many things 10 years ago, most of which have happened as he said it. I would say that's the truth.

People like yourself prefer free healthcare vs. Freedom which is the only reason you don't like RP. I promise you in the end you will get neither.

Just ask the Europeans how their free healthcare is working out for them since they are a model for most who think like you. They are going deeper in their depression due to their debt crisis.

[helpmeout]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLd_...ayer_embedded#!


Very well said Dr. Paul


I am just so sorry and ashamed that I never knew him 10 years ago. My whole paradigm would have shifted early on.

Sadly I was as stubborn and blind as so many of you still are.

We also owe the media blame for not putting the truth out there.

So because we don't agree with you we are stubborn and blind? I have to laugh because whenever I read your doom and gloom posts I am reminded of Bush II, you know, the guy who got in front of the UN and said "You're either with us or against us". Anyone who didn't agree with him was not only "against us" but if American, was unpatriotic. The truth? According to who? You?
The truth is that Paul is not good for America, at all. His policies would hurt America.

[jacko]

Yep, he is still crazy and naive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLd_...ayer_embedded#!


Very well said Dr. Paul


I am just so sorry and ashamed that I never knew him 10 years ago. My whole paradigm would have shifted early on.

Sadly I was as stubborn and blind as so many of you still are.

We also owe the media blame for not putting the truth out there.

[banca rotta]

Ron Paul predictions in 2002.......Still think he's crazy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFLd_...ayer_embedded#!


Very well said Dr. Paul


I am just so sorry and ashamed that I never knew him 10 years ago. My whole paradigm would have shifted early on.

Sadly I was as stubborn and blind as so many of you still are.

We also owe the media blame for not putting the truth out there.

[banca rotta]

It seems Kelly Clarkson is supporting Ron Paul.

A note to the "Ditto Head, Fair and Balanced Fox News followers" when you google search this info Fox news is stating that she lost fans because of this endorsement while CNN or the "Clinton News Network" stated she gained support for this.

Personally I will agree with the CNN gang since we all know Fox is carrying Romney's water because they still support the Party over the USA.

[chrisdfw]

Your focus is too much on the micro effects of government to you personally. No one wants to pay taxes, but to live in a civilized society we have to. The real question is what is the "right" amount. I would suggest the tax "rates" we had under Clinton were the right amount. They gave us the balance of enough revenue to balance the budget and not too high to stifle the economy. The social programs you complain about are not even on the radar of what our current problem is. It is the decimation of the middle class -- because they are the true job creators and the backbone of our economy. The increasing concentration of wealth in a few and the corporate takeover of the government is the problem. As to you leaning Republican because you feel your paycheck is "safer" - it isn't. The ONLY ones the Republicans care about is the top 1/10 of the top 1%. Unless you are in there, your economic interest are not served by the Republicans. They are bent on destroying the middle class which will destroy this country. Mitt Romney does not want to disclose his tax returns because (among other reasons) everyone will see what a low tax rate he pays vs the rate the middle class pays, since I have no doubt most of his income is from capital gains. The worst part is he thinks he pays too much and wants to eliminate the capital gains tax and inheritance tax, so he and his kind will be able to dominate the country while everyone else struggles to survive. Today 400 families have more wealth than the bottom 150 million people. If this trend continues it will only be a question of when we start are own French Revolution.

I don't feel the only question is the right amount, what the money is being spent on makes a big difference to me. I don't want to pay to protect france, to fund health care for other people, to pay for section 8 housing, or bonuses for wall street executives.

The real financial problem can be traced to social programs, namely, medicare and medicaid. They are growing at a unsustainable rate and the projected liabilities will dwarf everything if we don't stop it. But there is a bigger issue that just the financial and that is whether the government should be taking money from one citizen to give a handout to another.

And I agree about the corporate takeover of government. But I don't think the answer is to give more power to the government (the ones under the thumb of the corporations?), to me the answer is smaller government. If the government had less power, the corporations wouldn't be able to benefit so much. The more power the government gets the more money will be funneled into giant corporations that can afford to meet the regulatory burden. For example, the beloved democrats (it seems here that is the part of choice) put in a new burdensome requirement for 1099s on small business in the health care bill. Walmart has an army of accountants to meet the requirement, it is small businesses that would suffer. There is example after example of regulations that burden small businesses and people who want to get into business, that cause no problem for citibank, exxon and the like. The more regulations we have, the more we stifle competition and benefit the ones that already have the money (like those 400 families).

I see the same problems you see, I just see different solutions. Preferably ones that don't involve taking more money out of my pocket to give to someone else.

Many of the high earners are corporate CEOs who invented nothing, but managed to have the right pedigree to get the board friends to give them a ridiculous salary and obscene stock option grants, even backdating them. To me the solution is not to tax these guys at a higher rate, but rather to stop these clowns from stealing the money from the stockholders (the real victims here) in the first place. Sensible regulation should enforce the property right of the shareholders, and require actual approval of the stockholder for these pay packages (not these proxy vote and board approval jokes). But we won't see that, not from the politicians (any of them), the only thing I see is the government suggesting higher taxes to get their hands on the money, which does nothing to return it to the rightful owner, rather just shifts more money and power to government. (owned by corporations, remember) I think we need to fix the problem and prevent the obscene theft of shareholder property, not just try to tax it.

I think the founders had it right when they set the government up with the power to apportion tax among the states. We went way off course when we allowed the income tax. Once the federal government got that power and its hands on that money, the balance of power shifted, and now corporations have bought that power. Most people think the answer is to give the corporate owned government even more money. I don't think that is the answer.

[msm859]

Your focus is too much on the micro effects of government to you personally. No one wants to pay taxes, but to live in a civilized society we have to. The real question is what is the "right" amount. I would suggest the tax "rates" we had under Clinton were the right amount. They gave us the balance of enough revenue to balance the budget and not too high to stifle the economy. The social programs you complain about are not even on the radar of what our current problem is. It is the decimation of the middle class -- because they are the true job creators and the backbone of our economy. The increasing concentration of wealth in a few and the corporate takeover of the government is the problem. As to you leaning Republican because you feel your paycheck is "safer" - it isn't. The ONLY ones the Republicans care about is the top 1/10 of the top 1%. Unless you are in there, your economic interest are not served by the Republicans. They are bent on destroying the middle class which will destroy this country. Mitt Romney does not want to disclose his tax returns because (among other reasons) everyone will see what a low tax rate he pays vs the rate the middle class pays, since I have no doubt most of his income is from capital gains. The worst part is he thinks he pays too much and wants to eliminate the capital gains tax and inheritance tax, so he and his kind will be able to dominate the country while everyone else struggles to survive. Today 400 families have more wealth than the bottom 150 million people. If this trend continues it will only be a question of when we start are own French Revolution.