quote:

but if he can advance his socialist agenda using hyperbole and disingenuity,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

quote:

but if he can advance his socialist agenda using hyperbole and disingenuity,

I am not sure about his socialism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

My point wasnt the practicality of it, but to point out how asinine his "half a heart valve surgery" is (or whatever that ridiculous statement was. I wont waste the poor pixels needed to go back to it)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

I don't see the raising-copays idea as asinine at all. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

quote:

but if he can advance his socialist agenda using hyperbole and disingenuity,

I am not sure about his socialism. He was adviser to Clinton economic policy. Clinton has been labeled as the greatest traitor of working class interest. I think he just supports the Obama administration (delusional)  basic idea of spending the country out of recession. What can you do? Just prepare for total collapse?

quote:

on. In all actuality...govt., is in fact directly...directly responsible for 1 of 4 jobs in the US...add indirectly...it's 2 in 5, likely more than that because of the increase in contracting yet no reduction in spending or direct employment by govt....until now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
But the right keeps treating federal government as if it were the culprit, leading to ever more costly policy decisions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

You’re being silly. Of course I don’t mean minting it.  I mean owning a business, employment etc.  Here are 10 ways,
http://ca.askmen.com/top_10/entertainment/top-10-ways-to-make-more-money.html

Looting = Halliburton and Wall Street - These guys are Republicans not Dems
 
We need to do what Krugman says to fix the deficit.  You can’t balance the budget only cutting spending.  60% of the deficit will be eliminated simply by ending the Bush tax cuts.  And Gates said cut defence spending so why don't they?
 

1. I was not being silly in the least.  Your post was vague and incoherent and I was taking my best shot.  What you call "making money" is more usually described as things like "expanding the economy".  What you described was NOT making money, but producing more goods and services within the economy that have tangible value.  Economic activity that adds value.

2. Glad to hear that the TARP was conceived of and approved of by the GOP and that the Dems voted against it, every single one.  Brain, the history is that the Bush administration created that abomination and sold it to Congress and that there was bipartisan support for it.  And that the Obama administration continued the policy.  I have no idea why you think that only the GOP is for it.  As a matter of fact, the most virulent opponents of it are the Tea Party, which are in the GOP, albeit uneasily.

3. You can't focus on the deficit alone.  It would be trivial to zero out the deficit by deferring all bills till next year.  The debt is the accumulation of the annual deficits, and is the real enemy.  (In calculus terms, it's the integral of the deficits.)   

Your statement that the deficit cannot be eliminated by cutting spending alone is ridiculous - obviously, if we continued to tax at the current rate and cut government spending to zero, we'd have a massive surplus.  It's completely unfeasible, but if your statement about what is possible and what isn't is supposed to include feasibility, then you misrpresented the situation.  And frankly, there is NO workable solution to the mess that is not going to be horribly painful, so that you could say that no solution is truly feasible.

Edited to add:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

You guys don’t give a sh*t about the deficit or social security as long as you make money.

Brain, do me a favor and try to use words more precisely.  You are using the term "making money" in several different ways, all at once.

1. Economic activity is a GOOD thing.  Understand that.  It provides goods and services, it pays people's salaries, it makes stockholders happy. And, yes, it does pay taxes as well.
2. You are using the term "making money" to include both economic activity, and also money which is retained after taxes.  You have a bias that rich people should pay more taxes.  Thus, you are blending a good thing (economic activity) with something that is bad in your eyes (rich people retaining money that has been in your opinion not sufficiently taxed). 
3. Taxes are nothing more than a device for converting individual money to government money, and the government's function (economically) is nothing more than allocation of resources.  You obviously feel that money used on social programs is a good thing.  You are correct in that we overspent.  The problem with hiking taxes is severalfold.  One, the rich are adept at exploiting loopholes.  Two, there is the standard conservative argument, which is that the prospect of big earnings is what drives formation and growth of companies - if it wasn't for the disproportionate rewards, everyone would want a desk job and no companies would be formed.  (I'm not buying into it 100%, but I can say that I've run two unsuccessful businesses and gave them up for "normal" jobs once I found the rewards weren't there.)  Three, you never solve someone's drinking problem by giving them more booze.  The government cannot be trusted with more money to solve their current problem until they show that they're capable of handling it properly and won't just continue to outspend.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
But the right keeps treating federal government as if it were the culprit, leading to ever more costly policy decisions.

ORLY? Do Wisconsin, New Jersey and Illinois ring a bell?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
But the right keeps treating federal government as if it were the culprit, leading to ever more costly policy decisions.

ORLY? Do Wisconsin, New Jersey and Illinois ring a bell?

Gosh, and here I thought those were STATES---which was the point I made, that it's the state and local governments that have ballooned, in size and in budgets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

How?  I'm interested to know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I can tell you in 2 words how to cut Medicare spending in half, without changing the reimbursements for procedures one iota. He gets further out in every article he writes.

Raise copays.

So you are in favor of Tax Increases....interesting

quote:

I was responding to your claim that Republicans are ignoring the STATE financing issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Certainly it is a tax. call it what you will. It will press down harder on those least able to afford the copay. What will they do? Not go to the doctor.....So what you are calling for is having Medicare only for those that can afford the copay and go to regular checkups....Nice world you live in. No thanks

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Show me a Teabagger that was against the bailout of the banks? I think you are confused

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Show me a Teabagger that was against the bailout of the banks? I think you are confused

I'm not confused in the least.  Here's one article: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/05/05/its_tea_party_time_105444.html  In it, Kathleen Parker states "But Bennett committed the ultimate sin in tea party circles. He voted for the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), aka "bank bailout," during the George W. Bush administration."  She used that to explain why the Tea Party worked to oust Bennett of Uah.

Why is it that you think that the Tea Partiers supported TARP?  Their entire stance is against government taxes/spending/intervention.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Increased copays will have the same effect on the participants of the program as would increased taxes. As I said, call it what you will the result is the same thing. I realize you stepped into the conversation with what you feel are correct statements. They aren't. But you have the right to post them. I am just coming back, again, to correct you.