|
Post by series6 on Sept 27, 2008 14:25:30 GMT -5
Get ready to scream but I was a delagate for Mitt Romney when I was in Nevada.
I'm not completely buying into my party's line that Obama as little experience and McCain corners the market. Good people will surround themselves with the best they can find to serve the country.
While I was misbehaving back in the late 60's and early 70's he was in The Hilton. While I respect McCain's service to the Country, the Presidency isn't a crown to be bestowed for years of service. McCain is too liberal for my tastes too, but that's why I'm supporting him. He has a record of working with the "loyal opposition" which we need. I supporting him because of my inability to be flexible with Liberals. I draw lines and I point fingers too. I'm hoping that after years of drifting apart and the all the acromony, someday we'll all remember we're Americans first. I am exhausted with partisanship and finger pointing.
OK...Now take your shots..
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 14:33:14 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 Bill, You almost had me there for a second until you compared Insurance to the failed Social Security and Medicare programs. I am not disputing the accuracy of 30%. What I am disputing is the right to limit profit. I think the free market will reduce that percentage if the government will just stay out. My business is keeping around 8% which means I have to keep my company's gross revenue down to $3 million and stop growing my company in order to avoid O'bama's tax on the rich. That in turn keeps me from hiring more people and keeping cash circulating in the local and for that matter national economy.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 14:35:39 GMT -5
Get ready to scream but I was a delagate for Mitt Romney when I was in Nevada. I'm not completely buying into my party's line that Obama as little experience and McCain corners the market. Good people will surround themselves with the best they can find to serve the country. While I was misbehaving back in the late 60's and early 70's he was in The Hilton. While I respect McCain's service to the Country, the Presidency isn't a crown to be bestowed for years of service. McCain is too liberal for my tastes too, but that's why I'm supporting him. He has a record of working with the "loyal opposition" which we need. I supporting him because of my inability to be flexible with Liberals. I draw lines and I point fingers too. I'm hoping that after years of drifting apart and the all the acromony, someday we'll all remember we're Americans first. I am exhausted with partisanship and finger pointing. OK...Now take your shots.. Shoot at me too. I can find no flaw in your statement.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 14:56:49 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 I guess I need to parse my words a little more. If I raise my rates and my customers feel that they can get a better deal elsewhere then I feel that I sent my customer to my competitor. I not only believe in giving no tax breaks but that taxes should be used only for national security. I know it is too late. The cat is already out of the bag. That is the result of your government being here and ready to help you. By the way, I don't like the government very much but it is the best one in the world.
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 27, 2008 16:18:47 GMT -5
Larry, the SS and Medicare programs have not failed. The Bushies tried (and will succeed if nothing changes) to bankrupt Medicare while enriching the drug companies with the drug program. Why else would it be illegal to buy drugs in Canada or the Medicare system be prohibited from dealing directly with the drug companies? Last I heard, SS is now good for 47 years.
Larry, no need to parse words. Time to face the truth, the conservatives sold us out to enrich the fat cats. Why else would a company get a tax break to move production to another country???
If taxes are to used only for national security, where do you draw the line? Is the Interstate system needed for national security? We'd be in a real pickle if we had to face another big war without interstates, railroads, shipyards, phone system, steel mills, airlines, airports, (place your most unfavorite industry here, we need them all). Which ones should we allow to fail? The reason we settled on the Sherman tank in WWII is that was the biggest tank that could be transported by rail. Can a sickly population fight a war?
Bill
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 27, 2008 17:01:00 GMT -5
Larry, forgot to ask, why would you try to avoid Obama's tax on the rich? If you screw up and make 251K instead of 129K, you'll still have more money. You just give Barack a little more on the amount over 250K.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 17:18:41 GMT -5
Larry, the SS and Medicare programs have not failed. The Bushies tried (and will succeed if nothing changes) to bankrupt Medicare while enriching the drug companies with the drug program. Why else would it be illegal to buy drugs in Canada or the Medicare system be prohibited from dealing directly with the drug companies? Last I heard, SS is now good for 47 years. Larry, no need to parse words. Time to face the truth, the conservatives sold us out to enrich the fat cats. Why else would a company get a tax break to move production to another country??? If taxes are to used only for national security, where do you draw the line? Is the Interstate system needed for national security? We'd be in a real pickle if we had to face another big war without interstates, railroads, shipyards, phone system, steel mills, airlines, airports, (place your most unfavorite industry here, we need them all). Which ones should we allow to fail? The reason we settled on the Sherman tank in WWII is that was the biggest tank that could be transported by rail. Can a sickly population fight a war? javascript:add(" ","") Bold Bill Thank goodness I am not a conservative. I am way more to the right of that. As I stated, the cat's out of the bag. I am not interested in letting a program fail. It can't be fixed from here. I would however like to prevent the further demise of democracy and capitalism. The crazy thing is that this election outcome will be determined by the undecided. If they haven't decided by now I can't trust them to decide my fate. Social security has failed more than once. Each time the government reached into my pocket to extend it a little farther. Even the founders of social security did not intend for it to amount to over 15 percent of my earnings. I would however not object to the removal of the cap as long as everyone paid the same percentage since we are going to have the program any way. I could make a list of arguments for restricting Medicare from buying drugs or negotiating with the drug company or buying in Canada or Mexico. Mexico? Why not just go ahead and buy drugs from China, you know the country that brought us poisoned pet food? I know that this is an argument that I can not win. I would have about a much luck as if I tried to change your religious belief and I ain't even going there.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 27, 2008 17:31:20 GMT -5
Larry, forgot to ask, why would you try to avoid Obama's tax on the rich? If you screw up and make 251K instead of 129K, you'll still have more money. You just give Barack a little more on the amount over 250K. Bill One reason is that I grubbed and scraped for thirty years to be able to make the money I do and I don't feel that someone who didn't earn it should be my partner and share my money. I also don't trust politicians math which says I wouldn't have to pay more. I do understand the reasoning though. I just kinda feel like Paul McCartney once said about the British tax rate being the reason he filed his taxes here. He said "I earned it. May I please get to keep a little of it". I think I should have the right to keep a little of it.
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 28, 2008 8:20:16 GMT -5
Larry I made a very nice living working for the man, for nearly 20 years, hourly then salary. Over that time the buisness I was in kept buying each other until there was only one left. Sort of limited my options at that point which became very clear when I was offered a position running 25% of the field service division [25% of the US] and what amounted to a pay cut due to the relocation. This last merger was not a good thing IMO, we were a company that was making money/not in debt and after the compation bought us it was a company deep in debt, lots of folks were out of work and this new company is now the only one left providing the service. The government had to aprove the merger and did, so guess it is all perfectly legal, but was it right. My guess is a few at the top made a lot of money pulling the deal off, putting a lot of folks out of work and the resulting company deep in the hole and from what I have seen in the past the debt load will result in more folks out of work and a reorginization of the company at some point. Read this last part as more MBAs come in tell them how to fix it and exit with lots of cash.
How is this good for america how is it good for anyone except the few at the top who got the pay out.
Now the MI...... we are going to pay for the bail out of criminal actions. You can bet there was fraud involved in many of the subprime loans. I know people who were in this buisness and they saw it everyday and knew they were dealing with as they call it bad paper. Somewhere down the road this whole mess is going to be subject to an investigation most likley from the top down and no one is going to know anything about fraud. Free and open market for you no need for the government to protect us.
How is it both Mcain and Obama seen and warned of this whole mess years ago and yet when ask what to do about it in front of the whole country have little to nothing to say. Would seem they have had time to think about it. f**k all niether one has a plan of their own, they both sure got a lot to say about just most anything else and how they are the be all end all to fix those issues.
The question I would have like to seen ask during the debate.
"Do you have any concerns that the four men who are working on the bail out have recieved a combined $20 million from the indusrty the bail out is assisting?"
|
|
blue
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by blue on Sept 28, 2008 8:36:39 GMT -5
Larry, comparing Obamas tax rate with the UK tax rate of the period you speak, is really apples and oranges. Obama would have you paying the rate that was paid in the 1990's, whatever that was. McCartney was talking about the then current tax rate of 90%. That certainly guaranteed he would keep just a little of it.
The SS "failures" you speak of were due to mandated increased payouts, not increased overhead or mismanagement. Not a fault of the SS Administration.
If you are truly a believer in small gov't and that gov't should get out of our lives, why not allow you to buy drugs anywhere? How does that relate to national security? Doesn't that smack of Big Brother knowing what is best for you?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 28, 2008 19:39:36 GMT -5
Larry, comparing Obamas tax rate with the UK tax rate of the period you speak, is really apples and oranges. Obama would have you paying the rate that was paid in the 1990's, whatever that was. McCartney was talking about the then current tax rate of 90%. That certainly guaranteed he would keep just a little of it. The SS "failures" you speak of were due to mandated increased payouts, not increased overhead or mismanagement. Not a fault of the SS Administration. If you are truly a believer in small gov't and that gov't should get out of our lives, why not allow you to buy drugs anywhere? How does that relate to national security? Doesn't that smack of Big Brother knowing what is best for you? Bill I wasn't making a comparison but rather saying let me keep a little. The government is getting too much already. As for buying overseas drugs I agree with you too. I agree so much that I think the government should get out of the way of street drugs. We have been fighting this war on drugs so long that the money saved could have paid for this bail out if you believe that the government should be in charge of our housing and the related financial affairs of this deal. Yes, it looks like big brother to me. Before you start telling me that there would be more druggies and more drug related deaths I will say I disagree but it doesn't matter. We should have the right to abuse ourselves if we want to. Now for my paying a bigger part of the part of my profit over 250k: I used to work for hourly pay. Although my pay was not that high I did work with some highly skilled labor that made great money per hour. Each year after a certain amount of income they began to refuse time and a half overtime work. Yes, they would still have cleared more take home pay but their time was devalued by the portion that they actually cleared. They were taking home more money but their time was more valuable to them than the difference in pay.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 28, 2008 20:36:43 GMT -5
Jim, What kind of work did you do? I know it is tough after 20 years to be left out in the cold. The problem shows itself again in the shape of government approval. I believe the government should have stayed out of it completely but since they didn't they should have made the new owners buy out the employees who they treated unfairly. Unfortunately we are not guaranteed fairness but rather freedom. I know that getting the government out of everything is only a Utopian dream and can not practically be done. I understand regulating monopolies and interstate commerce and lots of other things which are too numerous to count. These things are necessary to protect the smaller businesses and individuals from the large and powerful. I just think we should try to stay as close to the ideal as possible because each time we ask the government to protect us we are giving up some of our freedom.
This bail out will be screwed up one way or the other and we have no control over it. The candidates as well as the members of congress who are doing this deal don't have even a basic understanding of economics. I am not sure Bernakie and Paulson understand either. I guess maybe I don't scare too easily because I would have gambled on not doing the bail out. There is no guarantee that it will even work. I keep thinking of Y2K. The world was going to fall apart when the computers found out there were too many centuries for their programs. I would have put this deal in the Y2K category. It might have thrown us into a depression. I don't know and neither does congress.
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 29, 2008 9:41:33 GMT -5
I worked in the industry that provides video services to hotels. Spectravision, On Command and Lodgenet may be names you are familiar with.
|
|
|
Post by lgurley on Sept 29, 2008 15:31:28 GMT -5
Wow!! Those guys in congress actually voted against this 700 billion charity case. Some of them actually did what the people wanted. Guess what? The world didn't fall apart. The stock market posted the biggest number drop ever but percentage wise it was not as bad as the adjustment in "89. The sky didn't fall and Y2K didn't end the world.
|
|
|
Post by Jim E on Sept 29, 2008 17:57:49 GMT -5
Oh nuts... Bill help meeee.... I think I am turning re-re-re- pub--- I cannot even say it, oh f**k
|
|