America's coming civil war -- makers vs. takers Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/op

[gallantwarrior]

I think it has a lot to do with the revisionist history that Glenn Beck and his ilk have perpetrated on the poor dumb schmucks in Tea Party land.

That top bracket has tracked pretty exactly the rise in pay for major sports figures, entertainers and CEOs alike.. Got a problem with that?

Today's CEOs are presiding over companies that are 4 to 10X LARGER than they used to be. Caterpillar in the 70s (where that graph starts) was a Medium size business in Peoria with almost ALL American workers. Today it has 20 factories worldwide and 30 business segments. YES -- the compensation needs to go up.. Just like it did for Kobe Bryant.

We don't make basketballs anymore.. But Rawlings serves a larger world. So they reap larger profits. The moral of that story is --- become a MBA or an Industrial Designer -- not a factory worker. Jobs are changing -- manufacturing AS IT IS --- will not support a middle class.

NO MAINSTREAM POLITICIAN is telling you the truth about the future of careers in this country. It's NOT about Green Fantasies or simple tax structure. All of you are being manipulated by the 2 parties and THEIR special interest in gaining power.

Most people don't have a problem with what sports figures or Hollywood notables make because it's obvious what these people bring to the table. Contrast that with upper management in most large corporations. It's generally a fraternity of greedy cronies whose philosophy of success is I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine.

Sports figures and Hollyweird notables bring NOTHING of significant value to the table. They live in a fantasy world, they portray fantasy worlds for those who are too stupid, weak, unimaginative, or just plain lazy to make their own world full of adventure. LIFE is an adventure, try living it for yourself and you might be surprised at the rewards you would reap. I will admit, sports figures and Hollyweird notables are certainly among the despised 1%, so why are the libshits not trying to rob them blind?

 

[Moonglow]

the only thing that was mentioned was not allowing rich people to deduct certain items from their taxes. Even Ronald Reagan wanted to do this.

 

[Listening]

SO...the federal government has a right to intervene when people's rights are being deprived.

Which is exactly what insurance cartels have been doing by denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, denying treatment to people needing expensive life saving procedures because of bogus post-claims underwriting, and purging employer accounts, if a small business has an employee, who suddenly has have a lot of treatment, or is in an accident.

Your first statement is absolutely amazing.

The answer is no.......

Because the U.S. Constitution only protect certain rights.

Other so called "rights" might be granted by the states (prior to Roe....abortions were legal in some states....but it should be noted that the states that allowed them did not call them rights....but they certainly saw certain rights (such as choice) as being in play).

But Health Care or the access to Health Care is not an enumerated right and never has been.

You wondered off the path already. Where are these facts you keep claiming you have ?

 

[Bfgrn]

Sorry guys.

Your Atlas Shrugged wet dream isn't going to happen, no matter how many hyperbolic op-eds you can find.

And your 'Let's Be Europe' ain't gonna happen either. No matter how many hyperbolic op-eds you can find.

See, works both ways. When y'all (left and right) get that through those dense heads of yours, the country - the one we all claim to care about - will be better off.

Who? But the most leftist of the Dems have been saying "let's be Europe"? The only thing most of us have been saying is this....EVERY one of our global competitors do not force the workforce to pay for their healthcare...which puts their businesses at a significant advantage over us...our global competitors also help their citizenry with education. They also have no problem with investing in their infrastructure.

Not one of us is saying that these things need to be implemented wholesale and immediately. But if we want to compete with the rest of the world, we need to get on the ball. Lastly...the American people buy up most if the shit that the world produces...we need to pay our workforce at the level that will sustain the gravy train.

That's all anyone is saying.

There are many first world countries that provide health care for their citizens. It gives them a huge advantage in the marketplace...They are kicking our asses because of it.

Here is someone who knows...

2008
Health Care
Health care: an issue that cries out for leadership.

Health care in this country is in shambles. At a cost of almost $12,000 a year for the average family, the system is bankrupting families and it's bankrupting companies - specifically my old industry. Take General Motors. They're currently paying out $1,525 per vehicle for health care. Compare that to the $201 Toyota is paying and it sounds even more absurd. And what about those families and individuals who can't afford insurance at all? Junior breaks his arm and all of a sudden, a fall off a bike is an $8,000 trip to the ER.

Despite all of this, none of our politicians will touch the issue. Oh sure, they'll talk about it during campaign season, but once the votes are cast, it's the forgotten issue again. The last time anyone proposed real reform was in 1993, and that plan went nowhere. Fourteen years later, Hillary Clinton's failed plan is still used as an excuse to continue ignoring the problem. That's disgraceful.

I suggest you listen carefully to the '08 candidates' "plans" for health care. Let's see if any of them have the political courage to really tackle it this time around. I don't want band-aid ideas either. I want concrete solutions - and I want to hold these guys to their promises.

 

[francoHFW]

NO civil war coming, just more heart attacks for brainwashed angry old white men. Change the channel.

So, what is Romney hiding? Even Pubs want to know LOL

 

[Listening]

....don't really care what John Roberts says....

That you and other extremists refuse to acknowledge the principle of judicial review renders this and similar debates pointless.

Horsecrap.

The 18th amendment was law....then it was repealed with the 21st.

No sooner had Citizens United been rendered than Sharod Brown (a total asshole if ever there was one.....but I agree with him on this one issue) started a movement to "overturn" it (which is the wrong term to utilize....he wants to combat it).

No law is ever cast in concrete to the point it can't be altered. The fact that John Roberts is wrong does me no good in my arguments against ACA. That fact that he rendered a decision (right or wrong) has no impact on my ability to take another run at getting things the way I believe they should be.

Extremists ?

Another poison term you use to justify your own interest in not being part of the process, but instead blathering about what you this is right as being right.

 

[Listening]

And your 'Let's Be Europe' ain't gonna happen either. No matter how many hyperbolic op-eds you can find.

See, works both ways. When y'all (left and right) get that through those dense heads of yours, the country - the one we all claim to care about - will be better off.

Who? But the most leftist of the Dems have been saying "let's be Europe"? The only thing most of us have been saying is this....EVERY one of our global competitors do not force the workforce to pay for their healthcare...which puts their businesses at a significant advantage over us...our global competitors also help their citizenry with education. They also have no problem with investing in their infrastructure.

Not one of us is saying that these things need to be implemented wholesale and immediately. But if we want to compete with the rest of the world, we need to get on the ball. Lastly...the American people buy up most if the shit that the world produces...we need to pay our workforce at the level that will sustain the gravy train.

That's all anyone is saying.

There are many first world countries that provide health care for their citizens. It gives them a huge advantage in the marketplace...They are kicking our asses because of it.

Here is someone who knows...

2008
Health Care
Health care: an issue that cries out for leadership.

Health care in this country is in shambles. At a cost of almost $12,000 a year for the average family, the system is bankrupting families and it's bankrupting companies - specifically my old industry. Take General Motors. They're currently paying out $1,525 per vehicle for health care. Compare that to the $201 Toyota is paying and it sounds even more absurd. And what about those families and individuals who can't afford insurance at all? Junior breaks his arm and all of a sudden, a fall off a bike is an $8,000 trip to the ER.

Despite all of this, none of our politicians will touch the issue. Oh sure, they'll talk about it during campaign season, but once the votes are cast, it's the forgotten issue again. The last time anyone proposed real reform was in 1993, and that plan went nowhere. Fourteen years later, Hillary Clinton's failed plan is still used as an excuse to continue ignoring the problem. That's disgraceful.

I suggest you listen carefully to the '08 candidates' "plans" for health care. Let's see if any of them have the political courage to really tackle it this time around. I don't want band-aid ideas either. I want concrete solutions - and I want to hold these guys to their promises.

This means nothing in the argument that health care is found in the Constitution. It simply isn't.

This is, at best, a Hasty Generalization intended to somehow justify something in the current space that was not put there in the way you would have liked.

Or have you given up arguing that it was in the Constitution ?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh...you mean like you guys? Trying to undo programs that have been in older for damn near a century? For trying to turn the clock back to the robber-baron days that were the norm before the FIRST great depression?

Yeah...a true patriot would not want to revisit those days.

Blah blah blah blah
WTF The way your president is taking this country will start a war. Every true patriot will stand up and stop the tyranny or your president just like they stopped the tyranny of King George.

The only tyranny in this country comes from the conglomerate. The rest is in your Dick, AM radio twisted mind. Only a tyranny would say...you don't like our rules? Fuck you...we'll move our shit to China. Good luck in your poverty.

Go fuck yourself in your fake patriotism....it ain't selling with me.

You remind me of those Germans of 1932, some choose a dictator others didn't. you would chose the dictator SO BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS BITCH.

 

[Listening]

Same with you and your boys...everytime you call yourself a patriot.

I realize your need to defend one of your own. But what the fuck is a patriot? Everybody calls themselves one, but do patriots allow someone to fundamentally change the country?

Oh...you mean like you guys? Trying to undo programs that have been in older for damn near a century? For trying to turn the clock back to the robber-baron days that were the norm before the FIRST great depression?

Yeah...a true patriot would not want to revisit those days.

Actually, the founders somewhat indicated that if things ever got to far out of whack, we should take the streets with our guns and ammo and get them back on track.

Hope it never comes to that.......[thinking of "Don't Get Fooled Again" by The Who]

 

[JoeNormal]

That top bracket has tracked pretty exactly the rise in pay for major sports figures, entertainers and CEOs alike.. Got a problem with that?

Today's CEOs are presiding over companies that are 4 to 10X LARGER than they used to be. Caterpillar in the 70s (where that graph starts) was a Medium size business in Peoria with almost ALL American workers. Today it has 20 factories worldwide and 30 business segments. YES -- the compensation needs to go up.. Just like it did for Kobe Bryant.

We don't make basketballs anymore.. But Rawlings serves a larger world. So they reap larger profits. The moral of that story is --- become a MBA or an Industrial Designer -- not a factory worker. Jobs are changing -- manufacturing AS IT IS --- will not support a middle class.

NO MAINSTREAM POLITICIAN is telling you the truth about the future of careers in this country. It's NOT about Green Fantasies or simple tax structure. All of you are being manipulated by the 2 parties and THEIR special interest in gaining power.

Most people don't have a problem with what sports figures or Hollywood notables make because it's obvious what these people bring to the table. Contrast that with upper management in most large corporations. It's generally a fraternity of greedy cronies whose philosophy of success is I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine.

Sports figures and Hollyweird notables bring NOTHING of significant value to the table. They live in a fantasy world, they portray fantasy worlds for those who are too stupid, weak, unimaginative, or just plain lazy to make their own world full of adventure. LIFE is an adventure, try living it for yourself and you might be surprised at the rewards you would reap. I will admit, sports figures and Hollyweird notables are certainly among the despised 1%, so why are the libshits not trying to rob them blind?

You sound like a real fun guy. What do you do in your spare time, hunt illegal aliens?

 

[francoHFW]

SO...the federal government has a right to intervene when people's rights are being deprived.

Which is exactly what insurance cartels have been doing by denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, denying treatment to people needing expensive life saving procedures because of bogus post-claims underwriting, and purging employer accounts, if a small business has an employee, who suddenly has have a lot of treatment, or is in an accident.

Your first statement is absolutely amazing.

The answer is no.......

Because the U.S. Constitution only protect certain rights.

Other so called "rights" might be granted by the states (prior to Roe....abortions were legal in some states....but it should be noted that the states that allowed them did not call them rights....but they certainly saw certain rights (such as choice) as being in play).

But Health Care or the access to Health Care is not an enumerated right and never has been.

You wondered off the path already. Where are these facts you keep claiming you have ?

Not on Fox and the Pub dupe machine, so we have chumps fighting for the right to be screwed by health insurers and the greedy rich. Health care didn't exist when the constitution was written. Going to a doctor/barber(!?!) didn't help until after the Civil War.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I realize your need to defend one of your own. But what the fuck is a patriot? Everybody calls themselves one, but do patriots allow someone to fundamentally change the country?

Oh...you mean like you guys? Trying to undo programs that have been in older for damn near a century? For trying to turn the clock back to the robber-baron days that were the norm before the FIRST great depression?

Yeah...a true patriot would not want to revisit those days.

Actually, the founders somewhat indicated that if things ever got to far out of whack, we should take the streets with our guns and ammo and get them back on track.

Hope it never comes to that.......[thinking of "Don't Get Fooled Again" by The Who]

Too today liberals the founders would be traitors.

 

[Listening]

Nonsense.

The doctrine of Congress’ implied powers dates back to the Foundation Era, as acknowledged by the Supreme Court in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819):

The Government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and its laws, when made in pursuance of the Constitution, form the supreme law of the land..

Garbage.

The implied powers were only to those functions for which it was created. Beyond that it is powerless (or meant to be).

There are numerous examples of how they behaved this way.

You simply chose to ignore the scope of the Federal Government because it fits your narrative.

Otherwise, taken to it's conclusion, there would be no need of states and there would have been no 10th amendment.

 

[Listening]

SO...the federal government has a right to intervene when people's rights are being deprived.

Which is exactly what insurance cartels have been doing by denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, denying treatment to people needing expensive life saving procedures because of bogus post-claims underwriting, and purging employer accounts, if a small business has an employee, who suddenly has have a lot of treatment, or is in an accident.

Your first statement is absolutely amazing.

The answer is no.......

Because the U.S. Constitution only protect certain rights.

Other so called "rights" might be granted by the states (prior to Roe....abortions were legal in some states....but it should be noted that the states that allowed them did not call them rights....but they certainly saw certain rights (such as choice) as being in play).

But Health Care or the access to Health Care is not an enumerated right and never has been.

You wondered off the path already. Where are these facts you keep claiming you have ?

Not on Fox and the Pub dupe machine, so we have chumps fighting for the right to be screwed by health insurers and the greedy rich. Health care didn't exist when the constitution was written. Going to a doctor/barber(!?!) didn't help until after the Civil War.

And women couldn't vote and blacks were slaves. And we changed that utilizing an established process.

Just because you need your government goodies to keep from working somehow justifies you throwing that process out the window and appealing to a process that also allows corporations to be called people.

You keep using the term dupe. That would be your first, middle, and last name.

With the prefix moron in front of them.

 

[Listening]

Thus the Framers never intended for an ‘originalist’ or ‘literal’ understanding of the Constitution, just as Congress enjoys implied powers to address issues ‘necessary and proper,’ so too is Congress authorized to address issues not possibly anticipated by the Founding Generation, such as the need for healthcare reform.

In summary, the argument you put forth is nothing but the twisting of the Constitution to achieve an end.

Quit simply put, there would be no need of states and the 10th amendment if those constraints were not real.

Much like our moron-in-chief constitutional scholar (which is really just a nice way of saying he is studied and twisting the meaning out of it that he needs to achieve his social objectives), this argument is blatant crap.

The founders put in place a process that would allow such adaptations. Given that the founders were living in 13 states (colonies) with a total population of 6 million people (the size of AZ) and still saw the need for decentralization, they would have been more impressed with the system they created if they got to see it really work.

The prime example is romneycare (and a different but substantial program in Tennessee called Tenncare). At the state level, nobody seems to be arguing about it. It is well within the perview of the Mass state legislature. Even the SCOTUS knocked down the commerce reach by Obama (and essentially had to rewrite the major argument to find in it's favaor). Health Care is not, as Health Care, within the scope of the Federal Government.

Now, should someone chose to raise the issue of Medicare. There is no getting around the fact that it exists as mandated by statute by the Federal Government. Does that make it constitutional ?

Does anyone really want to see that argument take place right now in front of the SCOTUS ?

 

[Steelplate]

Blah blah blah blah
WTF The way your president is taking this country will start a war. Every true patriot will stand up and stop the tyranny or your president just like they stopped the tyranny of King George.

The only tyranny in this country comes from the conglomerate. The rest is in your Dick, AM radio twisted mind. Only a tyranny would say...you don't like our rules? Fuck you...we'll move our shit to China. Good luck in your poverty.

Go fuck yourself in your fake patriotism....it ain't selling with me.

You remind me of those Germans of 1932, some choose a dictator others didn't. you would chose the dictator SO BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS BITCH.

Wow...what a well thought out and articulate response...a Nazi reference. Clueless responses from a clueless person. Hey keep on being you...

 

[Listening]

Taken from Lee Iococa: Fourteen years later, Hillary Clinton's failed plan is still used as an excuse to continue ignoring the problem. That's disgraceful.

*************************************

I COULD NOT AGREE MORE.

However, why don't we first define the problem in a way that allows solutions to be discussed going forward.

You will find I have been critical of the GOP for this since 1993. I didn't like Hilarycare (it sucked) and I don't want the fed in the health care argument (it is not in their scope). But there is a problem....a big problem.

Niether side has done s**t to really define it.

 

[Steelplate]

Who? But the most leftist of the Dems have been saying "let's be Europe"? The only thing most of us have been saying is this....EVERY one of our global competitors do not force the workforce to pay for their healthcare...which puts their businesses at a significant advantage over us...our global competitors also help their citizenry with education. They also have no problem with investing in their infrastructure.

Not one of us is saying that these things need to be implemented wholesale and immediately. But if we want to compete with the rest of the world, we need to get on the ball. Lastly...the American people buy up most if the shit that the world produces...we need to pay our workforce at the level that will sustain the gravy train.

That's all anyone is saying.

There are many first world countries that provide health care for their citizens. It gives them a huge advantage in the marketplace...They are kicking our asses because of it.

Here is someone who knows...

2008
Health Care
Health care: an issue that cries out for leadership.

Health care in this country is in shambles. At a cost of almost $12,000 a year for the average family, the system is bankrupting families and it's bankrupting companies - specifically my old industry. Take General Motors. They're currently paying out $1,525 per vehicle for health care. Compare that to the $201 Toyota is paying and it sounds even more absurd. And what about those families and individuals who can't afford insurance at all? Junior breaks his arm and all of a sudden, a fall off a bike is an $8,000 trip to the ER.

Despite all of this, none of our politicians will touch the issue. Oh sure, they'll talk about it during campaign season, but once the votes are cast, it's the forgotten issue again. The last time anyone proposed real reform was in 1993, and that plan went nowhere. Fourteen years later, Hillary Clinton's failed plan is still used as an excuse to continue ignoring the problem. That's disgraceful.

I suggest you listen carefully to the '08 candidates' "plans" for health care. Let's see if any of them have the political courage to really tackle it this time around. I don't want band-aid ideas either. I want concrete solutions - and I want to hold these guys to their promises.

This means nothing in the argument that health care is found in the Constitution. It simply isn't.

This is, at best, a Hasty Generalization intended to somehow justify something in the current space that was not put there in the way you would have liked.

Or have you given up arguing that it was in the Constitution ?

Ummm...yes it does. If the coy try is in shambles because of a corrupt and failing healthcare system that is bankrupting families across the nation....that definitely falls under the general welfare clause. It's not Welfare...as in Public Assistance....It's welfare as in "the country's best interest". And yes...it had gotten to that point. No matter what the AM radio boys tell you.

 

[Listening]

The only tyranny in this country comes from the conglomerate. The rest is in your Dick, AM radio twisted mind. Only a tyranny would say...you don't like our rules? Fuck you...we'll move our shit to China. Good luck in your poverty.

Go fuck yourself in your fake patriotism....it ain't selling with me.

You remind me of those Germans of 1932, some choose a dictator others didn't. you would chose the dictator SO BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASS BITCH.

Wow...what a well thought out and articulate response...a Nazi reference. Clueless responses from a clueless person. Hey keep on being you...

And you should talk.

Your so called conglomerate is the result of the expansion of the Federal Government. Just look at the EPA. The rules and regulations have gotten to the point that no small business (or midsized one) could ever hope to enter a market like oil refining just because of the paperwork. Big oil does not like the EPA, but does appreciate some of the protection they bring against new competition.

GM is making all that money...what does economics tell you ? We should be seeing new entrants into the car market. Last time you saw that was ?????? Why do you think that is the case.

You idiots are so busy standing in front of your beloved federal handout (oops) government that you don't realize they are right behind you and taking full advantage of the opportunities that is giving them (for gratification at your expense) knowing you are so focused on your "causes" that you don't even know what his happening to you.

 

[Listening]

Ummm...yes it does. If the coy try is in shambles because of a corrupt and failing healthcare system that is bankrupting families across the nation....that definitely falls under the general welfare clause. It's not Welfare...as in Public Assistance....It's welfare as in "the country's best interest". And yes...it had gotten to that point. No matter what the AM radio boys tell you.

I don't need the AM radio boys to tell me you don't understand the General Welfare Clause.

The General Welfare Clause was not for the countries best interest. Did your AM radio boys tell you that ?