RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:27:28 PM

ladyneedshelp

Posts: 78
Joined: 4/18/2011
Status: offline

I do not know what world u live in cloudboy, bit history shows that spending has risen under every president. The deficet by the end of carters years was 500 billion. During Reagans years it doubled. During clintons years it doubled again. (And he had a ballanced budget! ) When Bush took over the deficit had risen from 500billion in 79' to 1 trillion. The government was spending about the same amount of an increase....just over a half a trillion more during each term......till 06' when the dems took control and it jumped another quarter trillion.....then the 'crisis came and spending exploded.
As far as I can see......there was not any one party do ALL the spending ....though the biggest jump in spending happened on the democrats watch. And they ain't done.......they not only want to spend more.....obamacare is going to cost us megabucks..... And please anyone who believes it will come in on budget does not live in the real world ..... The government has never underestimated anything!!! ( And this is one case that can be laid squarely on the feet of the democrats! ). Thru all of this there were tax increases and tax breaks....the spending continued along a steady increase. Till 2006 that is then it jumped STRAIGHT UP on the graph...STRAIGHT FUCKING UP. And they predict it to continue to climb STRAIGHT UP for several more years.....then obamacare kicks in.....

When so many loose jobs government income goes down.....not as many people paying in! And what is rich......if u have a million? Half a million? 250 a year.....? I have heard some democrats say a hundred thousand..? If we tax the evil rich 100% it might take care of the immidate deficit.....but if spending does not change we will be right back in the same situation only there will not be any rich.....nor will there be jobs.... (For those who are slow.....the rich create jobs nor the government.....the government has no money unless they take it from the earners). Oh and by the way....Bush pissed away the slurplus by giving tax cuts to the people who paid the money, from the bottom up! ACROSS THE FUCKING BOARD!!! There is a limit to how much can be spent before the credit house crumbled!

(in reply to cloudboy)

Post #: 41

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:33:07 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

The government has never underestimated anything!!! ..

Not quite. Bush's Prescription Med plan has come in under cost projections, primarily because of its effective doughnut hole design.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to ladyneedshelp)

Post #: 42

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:36:14 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Or ineffective donut hole design, as it were.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 43

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:38:25 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Or ineffective donut hole design, as it were.

? It has proven to be by far the best design in corporate plans as well.

And you might want to revisit the other thread and correct your mistake about there being 3 recessions under Bush.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 44

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:38:51 PM

ladyneedshelp

Posts: 78
Joined: 4/18/2011
Status: offline

The banking queen barney also had to protect his boyfriend who was a CEO with Freddie Mac...he took a total of 90 million in bonuses..... But its all Bush's fault!

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 45

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:39:27 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Others already addressed that. I try not to make CM a work project. I'm busy enough.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 46

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 8:39:54 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

The banking queen barney also had to protect his boyfriend who was a CEO with Freddie Mac...he took a total of 90 million in bonuses..... But its all Bush's fault!

Well, I don't know if he was Barney's bf, but if he was, I know who the top was!

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to ladyneedshelp)

Post #: 47

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 9:23:46 PM

ladyneedshelp

Posts: 78
Joined: 4/18/2011
Status: offline

According to the reports he was..... and he bailed on the banking queen and Freddie Mac about the time Bush started calling for some oversite.....he should have trusted his lover to protect him...........he could have doubled his take. And ya know willbe ....its ok to pay out millions in bonuses and cook the books to look solvent cos they were only trying to help the poor get houses they could not afford! Geeese......why anyone whole question such pure motives.......astounding! Being as they hold over 80% of the housing loans.....they could never be in finanical trouble....this many forclosures only affect the evil rich loan holders..

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

The banking queen barney also had to protect his boyfriend who was a CEO with Freddie Mac...he took a total of 90 million in bonuses..... But its all Bush's fault!

Well, I don't know if he was Barney's bf, but if he was, I know who the top was!

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 48

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/20/2011 9:26:16 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

According to the reports he was..... and he bailed on the banking queen and Freddie Mac about the time Bush started calling for some oversite.....he should have trusted his lover to protect him...........he could have doubled his take. And ya know willbe ....its ok to pay out millions in bonuses and cook the books to look solvent cos they were only trying to help the poor get houses they could not afford! Geeese......why anyone whole question such pure motives.......astounding! Being as they hold over 80% of the housing loans.....they could never be in finanical trouble....this many forclosures only affect the evil rich loan holders..

ldo!

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to ladyneedshelp)

Post #: 49

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 5:26:26 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

The government has never underestimated anything!!! ..

Not quite. Bush's Prescription Med plan has come in under cost projections, primarily because of its effective doughnut hole design.

It came out under projections because by law the govt. cannot negotiate the lowest prices leaving it described and accurately so...as a retail only plan. Existing insurance provides in many cases, a better price than the govt. plan.

The govt. plan wasn't to provide drugs to seniors, it was designed as usual...for a profit for the drug companies. Hey, we are here to make some fucking money people...the overriding American culture.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 50

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 7:15:23 AM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Others already addressed that. I try not to make CM a work project. I'm busy enough.

Addressed what? Nobody addressed your mistake. Don't follow the KenDoll path and lose your credibility trying to maintain something you were totally wrong about and proven to be wrong.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 51

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 8:46:25 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Well, if we say that starting with the first day and continuing on to the present his policies along with the other republicans in government caused a continuous recession we would all agree that there was only one.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 52

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 8:47:32 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Others already addressed that. I try not to make CM a work project. I'm busy enough.

Addressed what? Nobody addressed your mistake. Don't follow the KenDoll path and lose your credibility trying to maintain something you were totally wrong about and proven to be wrong.

NBER does it differently than economists at large, they call 2 others call 3 and I call 1. See post above.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 53

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 12:38:39 PM

SuzeCheri

Posts: 483
Joined: 7/19/2011
From: Outside looking in
Status: offline

quote:

Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling

I don't care if it's the Debts', the Jones' or the Smiths'. They shouldn't let an old guy up on the ceiling, it's just not responsible.

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 54

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 12:39:56 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdQDXs75Ulo

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to SuzeCheri)

Post #: 55

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 12:45:16 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

The government has never underestimated anything!!! ..

Not quite. Bush's Prescription Med plan has come in under cost projections, primarily because of its effective doughnut hole design.

It came out under projections because by law the govt. cannot negotiate the lowest prices leaving it described and accurately so...as a retail only plan. Existing insurance provides in many cases, a better price than the govt. plan.

The govt. plan wasn't to provide drugs to seniors, it was designed as usual...for a profit for the drug companies. Hey, we are here to make some fucking money people...the overriding American culture.

Too bad you dont know wtf youre talking about.

http://www.amview.com/amview_contents/news/hlcmedicare.pdf

http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/26/6/1735.full

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 7/21/2011 1:12:58 PM >

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 56

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 12:54:08 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

In the Medicare Moderation Act, the massive 2003 legislation that created the Medicare Part D drug benefit among other Medicare reforms, Congress prohibited the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) from interfering with drug pricing in the competitive market. Part D prescription drug plans — Medicare Advantage drug plans (MA-PDs) and prescription drug plans (PDPs) — would battle among themselves to cut the best deals with pharmaceutical manufacturers and pharmacies and openly compete for enrollees.
The statute at controversy, found at section 1860D-11(i) of the Social Security Act, is short and sweet:

(i) NONINTERFERENCE. In order to promote competition under this part and in carrying out this part, the Secretary:
(1) may not interfere with the negotiations between drug manufacturers and pharmacies and PDP sponsors; and
(2) may not require a particular formulary or institute a price structure for the reimbursement of covered part D drugs.

So, they may see some minor savings from this, it isn't the right way to go about this, this is pure and simple wastefulness and insurance peddlers sucking at the government tit.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 57

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 1:07:45 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

FR,
Im a suspicious bitch, but yanno it looks to me like someone is being fed their "posts" LMFAO oh the inconsistencies and obvious cut and pastes.
Next time..... go with someone who can spell before sending your drivel, so it loooks like it was written by the same person?
This is worse than suck puppets

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to mnottertail)

Post #: 58

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 1:46:30 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: ladyneedshelp

The government has never underestimated anything!!! ..

Not quite. Bush's Prescription Med plan has come in under cost projections, primarily because of its effective doughnut hole design.

It came out under projections because by law the govt. cannot negotiate the lowest prices leaving it described and accurately so...as a retail only plan. Existing insurance provides in many cases, a better price than the govt. plan.

The govt. plan wasn't to provide drugs to seniors, it was designed as usual...for a profit for the drug companies. Hey, we are here to make some fucking money people...the overriding American culture.

Too bad you dont know wtf youre talking about.

http://www.amview.com/amview_contents/news/hlcmedicare.pdf

http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/26/6/1735.full

Is this serious ? You site nothing more than an opinion survey to explain why the drug benefit came out less than projected on costs ?

It's in the numbers and I know several people not to mention much that has been written on the subject that the numbers are as follows:

It being of little or no price advantage at all and in fact often more for by far most prescription users of by far most typical drugs, i.e., not experimental drugs, the insured were as well or better off without using the federal benefit. Didn't mean they didn't enroll, or use it or think they got savings or not. The numbers were that the drug benefit on 90% of the most used drugs wasn't there...nada. I have procure drugs for elderly and none are in the program because their private insurance beats the price already.

Even in your own piece, anywhere from 6-10 million never did even enroll so the question is why not ? EVERYBODY enrolls in Medicare, so why not the drug program ? It is as likely and your piece suggests it isn't complicated, there was no price advantage...no matter what people think or their opinion in a survey. The numbers tell the story...there is little to no benefit in the drug benefit and by far most of the savings to users is because they otherwise received no price break at all, having no private insurance.

As for the second post, it even qualifies their conclusions based on pricing with this :

There was a gradual but substantial increase in relative utilization by the elderly between December 2005 and June 2006; it increased almost 19 percent. In the second half of 2006, as relative user cost increased, relative utilization declined by about 6 percent. The increase in relative utilization from December 2005 to July 2006, and the smaller decline in relative utilization from July 2006 to December 2006, could have been attributable to factors other than changes in relative user cost, but it is not apparent what those factors might be.

Could have been ? Plus one can discover much by comparing elderly with non-elderly but to what end ? The non-elderly do not qualify for Medicare Part D. Even when considering everything, your pieces come out with at best an improvement for about 12% (18-6) of all actual medicare qualified and enrolled.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Post #: 59

RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling - 7/21/2011 11:01:17 PM

cloudboy

Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Cloud boy, perhaps you might remember a few other things about Regan's administration. Just before Regan took office, the United States had already be relegated to a position of second place militarily behind Russia with S.A.L.T. 1. Carter had agreed to S.A.L.T. 2 but wised up at the last moment. Even still, out military was at its weakest since the demobilization after WW II. Russia had invaded Afghanistan. What was our tepid response? We boycotted the Olympics. Carter had absolutely destroyed the economy. We had hostages in Iran.

Ok.....cloudboy??? That is the shit storm Ronaldus Maxmus took the country in. At the end of his presidency, he bankrupted and destroyed the Soviet Union without a shot being fired. No one YOU know was deployed to fight the Soviets, right? Reagan took them down with competitive military spending, subterfuge and poking the Soviet Union in the eye wherever he could, 24 hours a day. He was THE LAST PRESIDENT with a pair of balls.

There is not one credible Sovietologist who would agree with your assessment. Gorbachev's reforms and glasnost had much more to do with the break up of the USSR than the actions of the US. Reagan's buildup was wasted money and tax dollars, and it was Ex. A. of the US military industrial complex overstating a threat to our national security. (A grave threat would not have collapsed like a house of cards.) It also legitimized borrow and spend policies that continued unabated for 30 years except for a brief period under Clinton.

If you want to give credit to Reagan, remember that he armed Islamic extremists in Afghanistan -- a move that came back haunt us. As a result, we've been embroiled in Afghanistan for 10 years.

To think we could have avoided spending all that money on "Star Wars" et. al. -- kept out of Afghanistan -- AND the USSR would have collapsed on its own. 9/11 arguably would never have happened.

< Message edited by cloudboy -- 7/21/2011 11:04:08 PM >

(in reply to lockedaway)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Ronald Reagan on Debt Ceiling

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.110