After the Caucus: reaction and discussion in a polite manner

The place for anything at all...

Are you still going to vote like you indicated on the previous thread?

No. I switched (say why, pls.)
3
33%
I'm sticking with my first choice (say why, pls.)
6
67%
2 - Doesn’t really care either way
0
No votes
3 - They’re pretty cool I guess, but they aren’t an obsession
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 9

User avatar
RedEye
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3400
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:45 pm
Custom Title: Master of Meh
Gender: Male
Mood: Meh...
Location: Somewhere between here and Wolf Bend, Montana.

After the Caucus: reaction and discussion in a polite manner

Post by RedEye »

Vrikatsma suggested this. Makes sense. The Iowa Caucus is over, dead and buried.
Now we enter a period of Warm Winds and frankly hot air as the Presidential election settles down to the lowest and commonest denominator: the Nominee!

Let's play nice and remember that opposing opinions are the mark of a civilized Pack. No name calling, please. No spamming. No Flaming.
Let's keep going like we did on the Caucus thread. :)

:D
RedEye: The Wulf and writer who might really be a Kitsune...
User avatar
RedEye
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3400
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:45 pm
Custom Title: Master of Meh
Gender: Male
Mood: Meh...
Location: Somewhere between here and Wolf Bend, Montana.

Post by RedEye »

Okay: to start- I won't vote for Obama because he's doing the same thing that Bill Clinton did before election day: promising everybody everything,
We all know how that ended. :roll:

On the other paw, I would vote for Obama if it was a choice between Hillary and Obama. Hillary = more Bill Clinton. :(

And the Republican party doesn't seem to have anyone I'd trust with the option of playing "Global Thermonuclear War" for real.... :P
RedEye: The Wulf and writer who might really be a Kitsune...
User avatar
MattSullivan
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 6:54 am
Location: AMERICA, bitches! :P

Post by MattSullivan »

*You and me, baby we ain't nuthin but mammls, so let's caucus like they...uh...CAULK on the fox news channnnnelllll* :headbanger: :headbanger: :headbanger:

unfortunatly, you also need to consider that a president needs enough backbone to PRESS that button if we're under attack.
Image
ravaged_warrior
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 10:33 pm

Post by ravaged_warrior »

I'm actually liking Obama, I think he could do pretty well.

Ah, and just to add some stuff to the topic, here's some Foreign Affairs articles written by some of the candidates:

Renewing American Leadership - Barack Obama
Rising to a New Generation of Global Challenges - Mitt Romney
America's Priorities in the War on Terror - Mike Huckabee
Security and Opportunity for the Twenty-First Century - Hillary Clinton
An Enduring Peace Built on Freedom - John McCain
A New Realism - Bill Richardson
Toward a Realistic Peace - Rudy Giuliani
Reengaging With the World - John Edwards

There may be more, but I didn't see any more. I'm going to be honest and say I only read Obama's, but I honestly didn't know about these until my dad handed me the July/August 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs today for me to read it. I just thought those would be useful for the topic.
"We used to laugh at Grandpa when he'd head off and go fishing. But we wouldn't be laughing that evening when he'd come back with some w**** he picked up in town."
-Jack Handey
User avatar
Terastas
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 5193
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 4:03 pm
Custom Title: Spare Pelican
Gender: Male
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Post by Terastas »

I said that I'm "staying firm," but more accurately, I was originally torn between three candidates. One of them was Bill Richardson, who dropped out. The second was Hillary Clinton, who lost me by the way she went right after Obama at the first NH debate as if she was threatened by him, which to me serves as a possible indicator of a personal agenda.

So unless Obama does something really stupid between now and February 5th, he's got my vote.
User avatar
Aki
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2595
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:06 pm
Custom Title: Wolfblood
Gender: Male
Location: Massachusetts

Post by Aki »

I like Obama, alas, my birthday fell on June 24, rather than some earlier date that would've left me at voting age, so I can merely support him, not vote. He's got some stances on issues I really don't like, but, the republicans all kinda suck, some of them really suck, and I don't like Hillary. And aside from Obama and Hillary, I doubt there's any democrat who can get the nomination.
Image
User avatar
MoonKit
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2955
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:00 pm
Custom Title: That Girl With The Ferrets
Gender: Female
Mood: Indifferent
Location: In Hiding

Post by MoonKit »

RedEye wrote:Okay: to start- I won't vote for Obama because he's doing the same thing that Bill Clinton did before election day: promising everybody everything,
We all know how that ended. :roll:
Yeah but all presidential candidates do that. If we get even half of what Obama promises then we shall be better off then with any of the others. But that is kind of how I see it too. Everybody has to accept that all they promise wont get done because it is unrealistic. So far, I have to say Obama has got my vote. 8)
You are the only light there is for yourself my friend
User avatar
Terastas
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 5193
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 4:03 pm
Custom Title: Spare Pelican
Gender: Male
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Post by Terastas »

I'm sort of regarding Obama's promises the same way I took Deval Patrick's promises when he was running for governor in Massachusetts. He We all knew that Mitt Romney had virtually raped the state financially and Patrick had a big list of changes he planned to make, but it wasn't until he got into office that we found out Romney had left us thrice times more screwed than we'd thought we were, and as a result, he had to choose one or two priorities and put the rest on hold.

Obama will probably do the same thing: Promise everything, then once he knows how absolutely screwed the Bush regime left us, we'll find out what's going to have to wait. His priorities I'm betting will be ending the war in Iraq and fixing the broken economy (which sort of go hand in hand), then once the country's back on its feet, we'll start talking about health care reform and tax relief.
User avatar
Kelpten
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 7:23 pm

Post by Kelpten »

Hmmm.... I turn eighteen on November 15. 11 days after the election. Lucky me, huh? So I haven't followed this campaign very closely. My parents are both republicans and I live in a fairly republicany area, but I like a few of the things the democrats say too. As for the finance problems; war artificially accelerates the economy, so the moment we pull out of war we're headed towards another depression. In fact, we've been in near perpetual war since the Great Depression, and that's the reason. World War 2 ended the first one, and since that we've just coasted on debt and the war market. War is expensive for the government, but it is good for the economy.

But I degress from the topic. If I could vote I would vote for...No idea :D .
Lukas
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 1604
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 9:29 pm
Custom Title: living
Gender: Male
Mood: Indifferent
Location: Lakeland,Florida
Contact:

Post by Lukas »

Kelpten wrote:Hmmm.... I turn eighteen on November 15. 11 days after the election. Lucky me, huh? So I haven't followed this campaign very closely. My parents are both republicans and I live in a fairly republicany area, but I like a few of the things the democrats say too. As for the finance problems; war artificially accelerates the economy, so the moment we pull out of war we're headed towards another depression. In fact, we've been in near perpetual war since the Great Depression, and that's the reason. World War 2 ended the first one, and since that we've just coasted on debt and the war market. War is expensive for the government, but it is good for the economy.

But I degress from the topic. If I could vote I would vote for...No idea :D .
well we still have Afghanistan, or have we all forgotten that?
Image
(for every afro avatar, a funky man loses his hair, please, think of undercover brother)
User avatar
vrikasatma
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:59 am
Custom Title: Sometimes, ya just gotta say ... BLEEEE!!
Gender: Female
Additional Details: Digg: Gemfinder
Dragon Cave: http://dragcave.net/user/Xocowolf
Twitter: @Xocowolf
Mood: Busy
Location: EugeneOR
Contact:

Post by vrikasatma »

When Richardson tapped out, I gravitated towards Obama. I'll be helping with his campaign in Oregon and I will vote for him in the primary. I'm joining his camp because I like the way he's running a clean, accentuate-the-positive campaign. He isn't playing the Mud-sling Game and that deserves support.

Plus, I just found out that Rudy Giuliani's daughter supports him...gotta love that :)

Most of the Richardson camp is swinging towards Edwards. I would too but I think he'd sink the economy by driving more jobs overseas. If between now and November, Congress makes that illegal and reins in the big corps, I might consider voting for him but as things stand now an Edwards administration would alienate a lot of employers.

However...some of Richardson's supporters are getting a "Bill Richardson for VP" petition going, in advance of a possible VP campaign. I'll be involved in that, too. Any ticket with Richardson as a running mate would, in my opinion, be golden.
User avatar
MattSullivan
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 6:54 am
Location: AMERICA, bitches! :P

Post by MattSullivan »

Problem is, the Bush administration has done such a WRETCHED job, that most people will vote for "change" IE a black man or a woman, even if it's not a qualified candidate. That's what scares me. Most people can't even name one policy that Hillary or Obama support. They just want "change"

That's no reason to vote for someone. However, even if someone is voted in on "change, they couldn't POSSIBLY do a worse job that Bush.
Image
User avatar
vrikasatma
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:59 am
Custom Title: Sometimes, ya just gotta say ... BLEEEE!!
Gender: Female
Additional Details: Digg: Gemfinder
Dragon Cave: http://dragcave.net/user/Xocowolf
Twitter: @Xocowolf
Mood: Busy
Location: EugeneOR
Contact:

Post by vrikasatma »

[Nods] I'm not on the Change side of the debate. Whichever candidate we go with (except possibly Hillary — and since she'd be the first woman President, that's open to debate), it'll be a change, and that is directly due to the fact you pointed out. Bush has gotten us into such a pickle that even if the winning candidate enacts one in ten of their campaign promises, conditions will improve.

Remember the California recall election a few years ago? This is basically the same situation, writ large. Gray Davis and his lieutenant Governor were so slimy that even a rank political amateur like Schwarzenegger — a social liberal/fiscal conservative Republican at that — could only be an improvement.

I'm not on the Experience side anymore, even though my original draw was to the more experienced candidate. But to me, Richardson's "accentuate the positive" style of campaigning was at least as important as his credentials.

But a point was made in one of the debates: Change and Experience aren't mutually exclusive. Basically right now, I'm going on "Which candidate is running a positive campaign?" Edwards and Hillary are pulling out the histrionics, Obama isn't. We saw in Iowa that drama llamas are sofa king outta here.
User avatar
RedEye
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3400
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:45 pm
Custom Title: Master of Meh
Gender: Male
Mood: Meh...
Location: Somewhere between here and Wolf Bend, Montana.

Post by RedEye »

One of my biggest worries in this election is the sheer number of people who will vote-not for a Preaident who is any good-but as a "Social Statement against the Bush administration". Talk about Drama Llamas...
We don't need "Social Statements"-or the sixth-graders that promote them. We need a studied and reasoned choice of who we are going to trust with the keys to the red button and the middle east as well as Afganistan.
In both Iraq and Afganistan, we are in a no-win position as long as we don't realize that these people do not think like we do. Their system is very much different, and our trying to change it is largely a waste of time.
If either government lasts six months after a pull out, I'll be very surprised. As long as Iran is literally next door to Iraq, there will be a steady stream of fundamentalists trying to take down the "Western Corruption" running the country.
This is NOT a good thing. The best we can hope for is that both countries are so bankrupted that they cannot pose a danger to the United States for at least ten years.
We also need to realize that our Economy is artificial. It can be controlled so as to prevent an after-war depression; but it will take nerves of steel to do so. One thing that will be vital is the control of Job departure from the U.S. We are currently in a defense deficit of nearly six months: that is, it would take six months for the factories gone "Offshore" to restart here; should a real, Global War break out, and "Imports" of necessary items of commerce and defense become impossible.
Social Items are also a ticking time bomb. As this country grows older, the demand on Social Security will grow ever stronger, and the money won't necessarily be there to meet the obligations set out in the Social Security Act. Reductions of benefits will not work; since every price increase makes the retirement dollar that much weaker. Eventually, we may have to debase the currency to keep up-at least on paper.
Then there are the Constitutional issues. I'm not talking Second amendment here: I'm talking the increase of surveillance and reduction in personal liberties under such things as the Patriot Act, the War Prisoners Act, and similar. The Constitution has truly become a "Fair Weather" document, to be ignored whenever those in Power feel threatened.
Every "Threat" leaves the Constitution a little weaker and the Power structure a little stronger. Eventually, our rights will be subject to the whim of the Government; to be restricted or abriged at desire and not restored, ever.
We need a President that will at least not speed up the destruction of the principles we were taught in school as our Rights...and I really don't see any of the frontrunners who fit that description.
Every one of them endorses the "Safe Drivers License" bill, wherein we must for the first time prove that we are Citizens, the assumption being that we aren't. That worries me. Having to provide "Papers" showing we are who we claim to be is a big step toward a Controlled Society (Dictatorship).
Then there are the Executive Orders: Fiat directives that bypass both legislative and court controls and give the President virtual Dictatorial control over each one of us.

We need to choose a President who will at least try to remain within the Constitution. Finding one out of the current spread is going to be dicey.
We can do it, but it will require research on our part-not what they have promised; but what they have done, will be the key.
RedEye: The Wulf and writer who might really be a Kitsune...
User avatar
vrikasatma
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:59 am
Custom Title: Sometimes, ya just gotta say ... BLEEEE!!
Gender: Female
Additional Details: Digg: Gemfinder
Dragon Cave: http://dragcave.net/user/Xocowolf
Twitter: @Xocowolf
Mood: Busy
Location: EugeneOR
Contact:

Post by vrikasatma »

Actually, I think we accomplished a lot more Afghanistan than we did in Iraq. True, the opium fields are still growing, but that can change (mainly by putting the kibosh to the CIA — the biggest drug cartel in America).

But for the most part, we attained our goals there: the Taliban are out of power, radios and music play, beards and burkas are worn by choice, children fly kites, and their Parliament, by law, must have at least 25% of their seats go to women. Even the Buddhas of Bamiyan are being rebuilt, after a fashion; an artist is recreating them in lasers powered by solar panels, with the panels being donated to the village when the artists pack up and head home.

The only thing we didn't achieve was catching Bin Ladin and rounding up Al Qaeda and that's mostly due to GWB going off on a tangent to do his "For Daddy!" vendetta in Iraq.

I won't go into the Constitutional issues, because you asked to keep this civil and I've already veered close to one of my anti-Bush rants...and don't <i>even</i> get me started on Ron Paul, either. I thought he was creepy even when I was a Libertarian.
User avatar
RedEye
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3400
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:45 pm
Custom Title: Master of Meh
Gender: Male
Mood: Meh...
Location: Somewhere between here and Wolf Bend, Montana.

Post by RedEye »

The most interesting part of this column is the repeated denunciation of the "Government" as though it were some separate entity.
Folks, WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT! We are the people who choose our Representatives, Senators and the President.
And, we are the people who let this monster get out of hand...

Yes, our National Governing Body has become fractious, willful, and disobedient to its masters and mistresses: US. Why? Because we LET IT.
We were too busy doing "our thing" to give our Government the oversight it needed. How many of you have written to your Congressional Servants; the Representatives and Senators? How many of you have told the President your thoughts on what he's doing?
How many of you have just given up and gone back to "doing your thing" and forgetting about how your country is run? :roll:

It isn't too late. I usually make a pest of myself with my two Jerk Senators and my Representative over matters pertaining to the way they do business. I'm one person. A hundred people writing to their Senators will get noticed- I assure you. A hundred people writing to the President will also get some attention. :o
Why? Because there is a table of claculation used by these people to determine that if they receive X number of letters on a specific subject, these letters represent X times fifty-five people ( because only one person in fifty-five bothers to write, in this example). A little equals a lot, in letter writing. :wink:
Then there is denial of Service: You're working for Party X and the Party decides to nominate candidate Y to office Z. You think that Candidate Y is a jerkoff, sellout, and morally the equivalent of a louse, yet you continue to work for the Party because it's the Party you belong to. :cry:
Why not just say "You've nominated candidate Y, you can Kiss my @$$" and leave. One person isn't much, but if ten to twenty percent of the campaign workers leave-the message will get through. :P You might also write an E-mail to that candidate and explain why you no lpnger will work for their election. Enough Mails (E-or snail) will get their attention, and they might modify their position as a result (more likely the Party will do it for them...they need worker-drones). :roll:
Even if you're underage, you can affect the political winds that blow: THEY don't know you're a minor...as long as you take the time to compose and write an intelligent and grammatically correct letter in your own hand, they'll listsen. They are greedy, powerhungry, and have agendas, yes: but they at least know how the system works, and know that they have to listen. Letters are votes! :howl:  :oo

To the youngest members of this forum: You have the greatest chance to make good lasting changes, simply because you'll be around when the rest of are Gone Onward. Your future is what you make it.
After all, it is your Government... :evil:
RedEye: The Wulf and writer who might really be a Kitsune...
User avatar
Terastas
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 5193
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 4:03 pm
Custom Title: Spare Pelican
Gender: Male
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Post by Terastas »

vrikasatma wrote:But a point was made in one of the debates: Change and Experience aren't mutually exclusive. Basically right now, I'm going on "Which candidate is running a positive campaign?" Edwards and Hillary are pulling out the histrionics, Obama isn't. We saw in Iowa that drama llamas are sofa king outta here.
I'm not necessarily looking for the cleanest candidate, but I probably should since it ties into what I was hoping for: That as many of the Democratic candidates as possible would come together to form the presidential cabinet under the nominee. Obama hasn't burned any serious bridges thus far -- I think it's his strategy in the long run to get as many people together as possible.

And yes, "change" is such a big word right now because Bush and his buddies have done everything in their power to put the screws to the United States, so much so that anything would be a step in the right direction. God help anyone that voted for Bush because they'd "like to have a beer with him" if they ever cross my path again. :P
User avatar
RedEye
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3400
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:45 pm
Custom Title: Master of Meh
Gender: Male
Mood: Meh...
Location: Somewhere between here and Wolf Bend, Montana.

Post by RedEye »

For something Completly Dfferent...

1. Look up the Declaration of Independence. If you can, print it out.

2. Compare the charges leveled against George III (not King George, third version...) with whats going on now.

3.Ask yourself "is this what we fought for?" If not, start trying to change things...and nevermind the claims that "the World is different". People are still people, and haven't changed very much if at all.
OR
3A: "God save our Gracious Queen, God save our noble Queen, God save the queen...

You CAN make a difference. You CAN be heard. All you need to do is keep trying long enough, and work for the FUTURE. You can do it.
RedEye: The Wulf and writer who might really be a Kitsune...
Zombie
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:27 pm
Custom Title: Ribbed For Her Pleasure
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania

Post by Zombie »

:) And now for something COMPLETELY different... :lol:

You can get a pocket Constitution from the Heritage Foundation (heritagefoundation.org) less the mailing cost.

As for the whole "change" (bowel)movement, change isnt always neccesary for the better. It can actually be for the worse...MUCH worse. Ive looked at a lot of proposals from the Dems, and the more I look into them, the more and more they look like socialists or communists. This country simply cannot afford even a fraction of what they are proposing, and I love my country too much to let them muck it up. While the faux Republicans seem infinately better on most issues, I dont like, specificly, McCains liberalism, Guliani`s northeastern liberalism, or Romney`s sudden epiphany to become a conservative. How could any Republican with a soul vote for McCain when he has done so much to cripple his own party? Have they forgotten the McCain-Feingold bill so soon? There are just so many points to where he has done all in his power to weaken the party, so he shouldnt run as a Republican. He is, in fact, a RINO- Republican In Name Only, Much like California`s AH-nold.

What is Guliani`s Northeastern Liberalism? He is looser than an adult actress on so many social issues, it isnt even funny anymore. So he was in New York. Im sorry to say it, but big, friggin` whoop. He didnt do anything that any other mayor would have done, and that was walk around and survey the damage. If what he did was his example of "leadership" were gonna git hit over and over again.

And we come now to Mr. Romney. Also a Norteastern Liberal from Taxachussets, his "eye-opening" to conservitism came only after he passed sooo many liberal social issues into law, and virtually killed the gun industry in that state. It also coincided with the coming of an election year.... Naw, I aint suspicious at all! I dont give two toots about his religion, but his liberal streak is a mile long, and he cant hide it, and Im not buying it. No sale.

Hell, for all its worth, I might as well vote for myself! How about a double border fence with landmines in between, and manned machine-gun towers? How about untying the General`s hands so they can complete their missions in Iraq and Afghanistan?

There it is, vote for me in 2008! :lol:
User avatar
MoonKit
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2955
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:00 pm
Custom Title: That Girl With The Ferrets
Gender: Female
Mood: Indifferent
Location: In Hiding

Post by MoonKit »

Thanks for making us able to vote again, by the way.

I originally was thinking of voting for Hilary since she's well spoken and had experience but now Im thinking Obama. 8)
You are the only light there is for yourself my friend
User avatar
vrikasatma
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:59 am
Custom Title: Sometimes, ya just gotta say ... BLEEEE!!
Gender: Female
Additional Details: Digg: Gemfinder
Dragon Cave: http://dragcave.net/user/Xocowolf
Twitter: @Xocowolf
Mood: Busy
Location: EugeneOR
Contact:

Post by vrikasatma »

If by "socialism" you mean universal health care...?

I look at it this way. You could have the best-armed, best-trained armed forces, the cleanest air and water, the furthest-reaching public transit system, the most efficient buildings, the best cultural events, but it doesn't do much good if people are too sick to a) Make it happen, and b) enjoy and implement it.

A nation isn't its trains, highways, electrical grids, radio stations and guns. A nation is first, composed of its people. In my view, the government's first duty is to its people. If I were in charge, first priorities would be: Health, Armed Forces, Education. Give the people healthy bodies, protect those bodies, equip the minds and spirits with knowledge and the People can take it from there.

Can't pay for universal health care? Take some money out of the Department of Transportation and privatize the highways. If we're healthy, we can earn it at our jobs and fork over the tolls. We just don't want to: we'd rather give our dearly-won and highly-devalued frogskins to Pizza Hut, Camel and Comcast. I used to say "Man, toll roads suck!" but hey, if it means my arthritis and cataracts surgery would be covered, I'll toss a dollar in the bucket every five to ten miles or so. I'd rather the highways and railroads be privatized than Social Security.

BTW, we had a President that veered close to Socialism before, his name was Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Pretty much everyone I know that lived during his administration had the most lauds to give him than any other President I know of since.

But that's neither here nor there. Universal health care can be paid for if we withdraw from Iraq. Yes, withdraw from Iraq; Bill Richardson had a solid plan that he drew up in conjunction with a redeployed logistics officer that was over there. It can be done in 6-9 months.
User avatar
RedEye
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 3400
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:45 pm
Custom Title: Master of Meh
Gender: Male
Mood: Meh...
Location: Somewhere between here and Wolf Bend, Montana.

Post by RedEye »

Good points on Socialized Medicine, vrikatsama!

Now, considering our nearly Global membership, can anyone from a country WITH Socialized Medicine comment on what it's like for them, in their country?

Egad! I'm actually acting like a moderator! Someone get me a Scotch! Before it's too late! :lol:
RedEye: The Wulf and writer who might really be a Kitsune...
User avatar
vrikasatma
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:59 am
Custom Title: Sometimes, ya just gotta say ... BLEEEE!!
Gender: Female
Additional Details: Digg: Gemfinder
Dragon Cave: http://dragcave.net/user/Xocowolf
Twitter: @Xocowolf
Mood: Busy
Location: EugeneOR
Contact:

Post by vrikasatma »

Well, let's take into consideration...

When I go for my every-three-months follow-up appointment at the cancer center, it costs $90 for a simple venipuncture — a blood test to check for embryonic tumour markers.

The Congressional health plan that members of Congress, Representatives and Senators, enjoy, costs about $150 a month in premiums. Contrast that with the $480 that I, a starving artist, pay into the state's high risk pool.

True, Americans lead very unhealthy lifestyles that contribute heavily (sorry) to heart disease and cancer, but how much does it cost to walk a half mile every day? About forty-five minutes. Turn off the damn television and go see your neighbourhood!

Bill Richardson was going to offer the Congressional health plan to every American and lower Medicaid to age 55, and bring back physical education and after-school sports. I believe Obama has a similar plan. He supports bringing all parties to the table to come up with a plan to resolve the issue of (un)affordable health care.

My feeling about health costs is that it shouldn't be market-driven. If it's market-driven, it's subject to the vagaries of the market. If the market goes up, the people can't afford it. If it goes down, providers aren't paid what they're due. Doctors and nurses and techs have as much right to a living compensation as anyone else. But, if the industry is funded by taxes, which do not wax and wane, the providers enjoy a regular paycheck that comes regardless of market conditions and doesn't increase — nor does it decrease. To me, the doctor/nurse/tech is just as necessary to the commonweal as the first-responders. Health care providers shouldn't be contractors: they're municipalities.
User avatar
Midnight
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:05 am

Post by Midnight »

I don't know if there's anyone posting here from anywhere with a truly socialised medical service. Most of the Western world has a fairly balanced mix of public and private health services; the United States is fairly much "odd one out" with a comparatively primitive public health service.

What happens in New Zealand is: your taxes pay for an adequate standard of basic health care. This covers accidents, life-threatening illnesses etc. If you want luxury treatment, non-urgent or lifestyle improvement surgery (hip replacements, etc) or lifestyle surgery (facelifts), you need to go private. The system isn't perfect (there are always people whining about waiting lists for non-urgent surgery and the occasional debacle such as a man in his early `sixties who was refused dialysis for some bizarre medical reason and as a result died shortly afterwards) but for the vast majority of people, you get what you pay for.

Administration is currently by district health boards - elected three-yearly (at the same time as local council elections) and with additional members appointed by the Ministry of Health.
Zombie
Legendary
Legendary
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:27 pm
Custom Title: Ribbed For Her Pleasure
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania

Post by Zombie »

I simply wouldnt want to trust my well-being into the hands af a bueracracy that drained the Social Security System. While I dont really have to worry about heath care (Im covered for life under the Vetrans Administration- because I EARNED it) I still go with private providers for the lion`s share of any heath issues that might pop up, such as dental or whatnot. While I did have my eye surgury done by the VA (also a big buearocratic mess) I was on a wainting list for 8 MONTHS before a slot opened up, and it was a "Get there now, or continue to wait" kind of situation. While the surjury itself was free, I still had to copay for the eyedrops I had to take afterwards ($38.00) since then, all of my medical issues, if I have any, have been taken care of by private providers.

I think heath care and costs should be market driven. Why? Because the more competition there is out there, the better it is for you. They will be scrapping it out for each customer, and it will only result in a price-lowering war to get your business. A monetary motivation.

If the industry is funded by taxes, what motivation does the provider have to get your business, knowing that they are going to get a check, whether they treat you or not? Do you have any recoure for compensation if a mistake is made? As it sits right now, NOBODY can be denied emergency care if they walk into a emergency room anywhere in America, reguardless of their ability to pay. (And personally, the Illegals that are exploiting this system are part of the reason that this is an issue at all)

Yes, a nation is not highways, rail systems and electrical grids. That is infastructure. That is what a nation needs to function to it fullest. And it needs protection, so that is (in my dead-honest opinion) why Military spending should be priority #1 when we are at war (and we are, remember?) . Everything else is secondary, and that is what should be allotted for infastructure. You seem to forget, that the government isnt spending ITS money. Its spending YOURS. You provide it with tax revenue every time you buy gas, buy groceries, pay a toll or smoke a cigarrete. Also, nowhere in the Constitution does it say that its the Governments job to feed, clothe educate and house you. There are no safeguards in place to prevent you from failing in life. You learn by failure.
Post Reply