quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Incidentally,

[and no, I'm not denying there's a trade deficit, folks--clearly there IS]

This is an interesting NPR piece (I've linked to the transcript page, where you can also hear the audio if you choose) about the iPhone and the U.S./China trade gap.

Because imported goods are evaluated at full value, the iPhone accounts for about $2 billion of that trade deficit (that figure is disputed, but the point remains). However, the parts of the iPhone all come from U.S. companies, manufacturer on U.S. soil--the phone is merely assembled in China, a small part of it's value.

Presumably, the iPhone is just one example.

Tracing the Trade Deficit Back to the iPhone

quote:

ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl


With single-payer, everybody receives health care. Because the cost is spread out among the healthy as well as the sick, everybody pays less. Employers who outsource work to avoid paying insurance premiums would no longer have a reason to do. Older workers wouldn't be terminated and replaced with younger workers to keep company insurance premiums down. Companies would no longer be responsible for paying insurance premiums.[/color]

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
"Employers who outsource work to avoid paying insurance premiums" Uhhhhh, no. If an employer doesnt want to pay insurance premiums he says "im not paying insurance premiums anymore", he doesnt outsource the work to another company that is in the business to make their own profits. Work is outsourced when it saves the company money because the leasing company has skills and efficiencies outside the lessor's core competencies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy]You seem to miss the key word in single payer....PAYER. SOMEBODY ALWAYS PAYS THE COST.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bornslave9

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy]You seem to miss the key word in single payer....PAYER. SOMEBODY ALWAYS PAYS THE COST.

Highlight the part in her post where she says single payer is free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

The entire premise of her post is that somehow by making health care single payer you "relieve the burden of employers to pay for it". Unless she is maintaining that it somehow makes it free, the entire concept is nonsensical, because whether its paid out of corporate profits or indvidual income taxes there is no fucking difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Protectionism only sounds good. The repercussions are ugly. Remember, we're the world's third largest exporter.

Know why we're the world's largest importer? Because we're comparatively far richer.

I've seen you say this before many times, but China is now the second largest economy and gaining rapidly.

quote:

whether its paid out of corporate profits or indvidual income taxes there is no fucking difference

quote:

The healthy, many of whom are healthy largely because they invested in their own health.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl


With single-payer, everybody receives health care. Because the cost is spread out among the healthy as well as the sick, everybody pays less. Employers who outsource work to avoid paying insurance premiums would no longer have a reason to do. Older workers wouldn't be terminated and replaced with younger workers to keep company insurance premiums down. Companies would no longer be responsible for paying insurance premiums.

Wow. This is such nonsense it actually turns the stomach.

"Everybody pays less because the cost is spread" Uhhhh, no. The healthy pay more than they otherwise would. The healthy, many of whom are healthy largely because they invested in their own health.

quote:

or the brain dead leftists of this country, this is just too hard to figure out

quote:

It's funny, most people think China has the hammer over us because of all the money we owe them. But, if we can't pay them back I'd say that (we) have the hammer over (them.) Debt can be used as a "weapon" it seems.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Protectionism only sounds good. The repercussions are ugly. Remember, we're the world's third largest exporter.

Know why we're the world's largest importer? Because we're comparatively far richer.

I've seen you say this before many times, but China is now the second largest economy and gaining rapidly.

And you think protectionism is going to change that?

They've got a ways to go. Our economy is three times theirs.

Now, if Ming Dynasty China hadn't turned protectionist, they'd already own our asses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

A solution to which problem?

Jobs were being outsourced when the unemployment rate was low. Nor is that why we have high unemployment--we have dramatically increased productivity. That's why GDP is still growing.

What "flood of imported products"? Do you mean more than usual? Really? Who's buying all these goods, the unemployed?

Point is, knee jerk sound bites don't solve problems, no matter how enticing they might sound.

quote:

ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

The entire premise of her post is that somehow by making health care single payer you "relieve the burden of employers to pay for it". Unless she is maintaining that it somehow makes it free, the entire concept is nonsensical, because whether its paid out of corporate profits or indvidual income taxes there is no fucking difference.

Single-payer health care is NOT free. The difference between the cost coming from corporate profits and individual income taxes is that companies have the power of hiring, firing, age discrimination, and outsourcing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

The healthy, many of whom are healthy largely because they invested in their own health.

That's pretty debatable, without any numbers. Do you mean other than setting money aside as virtual insurance?