|
Post by Jim E on Sept 26, 2008 18:53:40 GMT -5
This should be very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 26, 2008 20:04:04 GMT -5
Grab your ass and hang on tight. You are going for a ride.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 26, 2008 21:29:32 GMT -5
Grab your ass and hang on tight. You are going for a ride. Ouch! This debate hurts. McCain can't debate and O'bama is just plain wrong and he is good at it. I think he is even sincere and that is the scary part. A misled man with the ability to excite the people who just don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 26, 2008 23:03:43 GMT -5
Well I think they both did ok, niether did much of anything to hurt themselves. I do think Mcain needed to do better if he wants to move ahead, in particular since his VP choice is about to go in front of god and everyone and talk. I do agree that Obama is a better debater but he really did not knock Mcain out.
To be honest I do not care for either one of them.
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 26, 2008 23:13:19 GMT -5
Larry, what was Obama wrong about? I didn't notice anything and the talking heads I have seen have not mentioned either guy having their facts wrong.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 26, 2008 23:19:02 GMT -5
Watching it again... oh my I think Obama might have knocked him out. Mcain refering to dead polititions is not going to connect him with younger voters.
thinking there is more of the Obama spew I agree with the whole Iraq deal was a mistake and I really think Obama is right we narrowed the focus to that and ended up getting it in the neck
The Palin debate is going to kill them. Saw Biden on an after debate interview... he is going to verbally field dress her
|
|
|
Post by skywords on Sept 27, 2008 0:49:33 GMT -5
McCain is a good man but Obama just makes too much sense. Did you see the look on McCain's face when Obama threw a vexatious attack back in his face by referencing the Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran song that McCain sang?
Obama will get our standing in the world back where it needs to be in order to form alliances.
He talks about the monstrous trade deficit that is killing our economy and has a plan.
I'm sorry but four more years of this crap I can't take. Obama my moneys on you.
I hope he can overcome the racists vote.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 7:33:07 GMT -5
Larry, what was Obama wrong about? I didn't notice anything and the talking heads I have seen have not mentioned either guy having their facts wrong. Bill At the time I wrote this the debate was only half over. I was not remarking on the facts but rather the interpretation thereof. The Annenberg people at FactCheck.org found during the debate that both of them made factual errors but I did not consider those to be of major signifigance. I disagree with O'bama's philosophy. If there was a laundry list of incorrect statements by the candidates the spin masters would twist them back into the "everyone knows that's not what he meant" category. I watched the talking heads on two different networks and obviously they went to different debates. I am just so tired of the "I never said that because never or always doesn't mean not really ever or absolutely always" defense. I know that I am a hard hearted conservative and it is not easy to watch poor hungry people without jobs and the ambition to try to succeed actually not have good health insurance and a house they can't afford. I just can not find it in my copy of The Constitution that anyone has the right to have this stuff. I do however put my money where my mouth is by giving charity on an individual basis in an amount which exceeds the amount the liberals claim I would have to pay. Now I have to justify my remarks by stating that not all unemployed people are bad or lazy and I am not using code words to mean race. I would personally vote for a person of a different race or sex, however just not the ones that the liberals offered up. Incidentally I do not like McCain much either. He is too liberal for me.
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 27, 2008 9:29:46 GMT -5
Larry, I tend to agree with you the Constitution does not give anyone the right to medical care or ownership of a home. I don't think anyone is advocating guaranteed home ownership. That is more of an attempt to sell the bailout to Joe 6 pack in order to save Wall Street. If they were worried about home ownership, interest rates would be frozen to the introductory teaser rate, which the buyer usually could afford. But that will not give Wall Street the "grease" it needs, so it will not happen.
As to guaranteed health care, we pretty much have it and it is not going to go away. The problem is it is in a very efficient form. If a person has health insurance at work, it puts the employer at a monetary disadvantage. To the people that do, the much talked about Doctor-patient relation is non-existent. It is a Doctor-patient-insurance company relationship. As the insurance company holds the purse strings, the decisions are not always in the best interest of the patient. People that do not have health insurance, and no money, get their health care for "free" at the Emergency Room, with the tab picked up by the various gov't entities and the guy that has no insurance but some money. To top off the situation, the insurance companies keep 30% of the premiums, negotiate deals with the hospitals so the guy with no insurance pays additional to make for the shortfall brought about by this agreement. So what is a person to do? This sure ain't working.
Why not allow people to choose between a gov't insurance program or a private insurance program, with the "premiums" picked up by the gov't? The overall tab will be the same, probably lower because the insurance companies will have some real competition. As near as I can tell, that is the essence of Obamas health care program.
I say either adopt a universal health care program or cut out all assistance. That includes gov't programs and insurance companies. That would put everything back on an even keel. Maybe poor people could then afford health care.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 27, 2008 9:53:33 GMT -5
I flipped between CNN and Fox for after coverage, know fox is republican slant not sure what CNN is regarded as just wanted to see what at least two sets of heads had to say.
Both these guys will say what their target group wants to hear but actions once elected rarely match what they say they will or want to do.
Larry I agree with you or at least I think I do, nothing says we all get the american dream handed to us on a plate. But with the way things are and have been for the past few years I am not sure the dream is out there at all for the average person. From what I see the jobs out there pay $7 to 10 an hour and typically the $7 jobs are part time on the payroll withholdings no medical and the $10 jobs are most all 1099 which is the only way most small buisness can aford to operate. making that money there is no way to buy a house let alone have medical coverage. As my one buddy says "you cannot aford to live or die. So in my view the only way to get to the american dream now is to climb on top of the $7 to10 an hour folks and make a living off them. Whether you use them for labor or offer them a service. Which is why I am buying every cheap double wide I can afford as rentals.
The more I hear about the bail out the worse the idea sounds to me.
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 27, 2008 10:46:14 GMT -5
Bill the medical insurance thing is going to end up getting fixed or at the least changed. With so many people with out insurance and jobs the load is going to make it so something has to be done. I figure the gov will take it over
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 13:45:57 GMT -5
Larry, I tend to agree with you the Constitution does not give anyone the right to medical care or ownership of a home. I don't think anyone is advocating guaranteed home ownership. That is more of an attempt to sell the bailout to Joe 6 pack in order to save Wall Street. If they were worried about home ownership, interest rates would be frozen to the introductory teaser rate, which the buyer usually could afford. But that will not give Wall Street the "grease" it needs, so it will not happen. As to guaranteed health care, we pretty much have it and it is not going to go away. The problem is it is in a very efficient form. If a person has health insurance at work, it puts the employer at a monetary disadvantage. To the people that do, the much talked about Doctor-patient relation is non-existent. It is a Doctor-patient-insurance company relationship. As the insurance company holds the purse strings, the decisions are not always in the best interest of the patient. People that do not have health insurance, and no money, get their health care for "free" at the Emergency Room, with the tab picked up by the various gov't entities and the guy that has no insurance but some money. To top off the situation, the insurance companies keep 30% of the premiums, negotiate deals with the hospitals so the guy with no insurance pays additional to make for the shortfall brought about by this agreement. So what is a person to do? This sure ain't working. Why not allow people to choose between a gov't insurance program or a private insurance program, with the "premiums" picked up by the gov't? The overall tab will be the same, probably lower because the insurance companies will have some real competition. As near as I can tell, that is the essence of Obamas health care program. I say either adopt a universal health care program or cut out all assistance. That includes gov't programs and insurance companies. That would put everything back on an even keel. Maybe poor people could then afford health care. Bill Bill, I don't have a problem with choosing between a government health care plan and a private insurance plan. The problem starts when I choose the private plan and then I am taxed to pay for the government plan. Then the Insurance companies are not getting their shot at a free market. You are right, we do have it and it isn't going away. That is what happens when the government gets into the equasion. I am not sure I understand the part about the Insurance companies taking 30%. I know we all hate insurance companies until we need them but keep in mind that insurance is a for profit business and as such they should be allowed to set their rates at any level they want. If they set them too high and the Government does not compete with them the free market will bring the rates down. There will always be someone who will work on a thin margin in order to take their share of business.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 14:16:56 GMT -5
Larry I agree with you or at least I think I do, nothing says we all get the american dream handed to us on a plate. But with the way things are and have been for the past few years I am not sure the dream is out there at all for the average person. From what I see the jobs out there pay $7 to 10 an hour and typically the $7 jobs are part time on the payroll withholdings no medical and the $10 jobs are most all 1099 which is the only way most small buisness can aford to operate. making that money there is no way to buy a house let alone have medical coverage. As my one buddy says "you cannot aford to live or die. So in my view the only way to get to the american dream now is to climb on top of the $7 to10 an hour folks and make a living off them. Whether you use them for labor or offer them a service. Which is why I am buying every cheap double wide I can afford as rentals.
The more I hear about the bail out the worse the idea sounds to me.
[/quote]
Jim. I understand your frustration with the hourly wage situation but once again your part of the country was doing all right until the government sent Milliken and the other fabric mills to Mexico and China. You and I are the average person and apparently you have been taking steps just like I did to be in control of my own destiny. Working by the hour will rarely give you the income to live exceptionally well. I thought it was great when the minimum wage went up from $1.15 to $1.25 an hour. That gave me $4.00 a week to buy gas for my 51 Ford coupe. That was a whole tank. Now look at what the government has done to us.
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 27, 2008 14:17:11 GMT -5
Larry, under my plan (don't know about Obama's plan) the gov't pays a flat rate premium, you get the best deal you can, gov't insurance or private. So if you choose, your tax dollars would go to your insurance company. The companies would compete by offering better programs for the federal payment or by varying the additional premium required from the insured.
The 30% is a real number. It is the difference between the amount the insurance companies take in and pay out. That's the nationwide average. Since they all like to make huge salaries and build big fancy buildings, their overhead seems to be distressingly similar. For comparison, Social Security and Medicare operate on about 2%.
Bill
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 27, 2008 14:21:32 GMT -5
Larry, the gov't did not send mills to China, it just made it financially attractive (special tax breaks) for them to be sent them. So guess what happened. Guess who wants to repeal that tax break? But hey, he can't do that, that's a tax increase!
Bill
|
|