Can Obamacare be Fixed?

[itfitzme]

Nah... most all modern governments are coercive in nature. Ours certainly is.



I have plenty of empathy for others. That's why I'm opposed to forcing my will (or yours) on them via government. Community and altruism flourish as voluntary acts, not as mandates.

Oh, bs... I am sure you "feel" like you have empathy. But when it comes down to actual action your "empathy" doesn't go any further than that you're perceiving others as like you and as long as there are no real costs.

You are mistaking narcissistic projection as empathy.

Basic to conservatives is the dream of being alone in the world and free of responsibility. They view other people as obstacles to overcome.

I think that it's a shame that it's not possible to give them their dream.

Actually, they can. People still homestead in the Alaska wilderness. Not only can they enjoy their self reliance, independent living dream, after a year of so, the state sends them a check from the oil rights. It is the best of both worlds, independent living and socialism. It is perfect for them.

They really have no excuse except that they really don't want to back up their bs with actual action.

New Book Offers How-to Tips for Aspiring Homesteaders | Alaska Public Media

How to successfully live off the grid in remote areas is the subject of a new book called “The Alaska Homesteader’s Handbook: Independent Living on the Last Frontier.”

Alaska Land Offerings

"The State of Alaska Sells State Land for settlement and private ownership. ... This program is similar to the previous remote parcel and homestead offerings."

The Homestead Act in Alaska

Someone picked up 2.5 acres for $5000 1057 GLENNALLEN AREA I 203336 $5,000 2.50
Kristina M Epperson Rush John Williams Brian S Epperson

http://dnr.alaska.gov/mlw/landsale/472IOTCwinners.pdf

I don't know if it is as accessible as it was ten years ago, still there really is no excuse for the economic narcissists except they really don't mean what they claim to mean.

And with global warming, it is getting better and better.

 

[itfitzme]

I have no idea what you two are going on about, but it has nothing to do with my views. And you've yet to show how limited government equates to tyranny. It is quite an elaborate strawman though. Please continue.

You have yet to present anything specific or to show how government is equal to tyranny.

All you have done is strayed away from specific details of the PPACA and gone to abstract nonsense where everything is equal to socialism and tyranny.

The fact that you have no clue what is being talked about just demonstrates what I've been saying, that your a narcissistic sociopath. In order to learn from others you have to have some basic level of empathy so that you can understand what they are saying. I know what you think you are talking about.... so the problem is on your end.

 

[Bern80]

My opinion is that while democracy, rule by majority, is not flawless, it's the best government possible. Because if you empower fewer people than democracy, a minority, it has to be determined which minority to empower. In the extreme case a minority could be one person. A dictator.

The basis of democracy is that mischief starts small and grows. If the power to hire and fire representatives is based on a majority, that is the greatest protection possible to prevent a nefarious movement from gathering power in government.

I personally don't think that there is any better example of this principle than the recent rise and fall of conservatism. It's fundamentally a propaganda based cult product of 24/7/365 Republican propaganda. As powerful a force as we've encountered.

Yet it has been defeated by majority rule.

That's really just a matter of one's perspective and bias. One could just as easily state that the propaganda of liberalism has won the day by majority rule. It's not hard to see why liberalism is more appealing to people. It's the government version of the easy button. Most liberal policies absolve people of personal responsibilites. This is certainly reflected in Obamacare. Who wouldn't want that?

Liberalism has displaced conservatism primarily because conservatism in practice failed miserably. Look at the trajectory of the country under Bush policies. Look at the country under Obama's. Of course, in order to do that one has to turn off Fox and turn on news.

Conservatism failed because it's a completely self serving religion. It has no consideration for national issues. And national issues are what we have government for.

While it's just plain fun messing with conservative minds here, most of what's said is simple truth.

Fox is Republican 24/7/365 propaganda.

Government and business are complementary to each other.

We do have wealth inequality here that is extreme to the point of dysfunction.

We do have a mediocre health care non-system here that is a huge economic anchor and ACA is an effective first step in addressing it.

AGW is real and costly and the IPCC is the body of science that will empower politics to find the least expensive path by it.

The transition to fuel and waste free energy is necessary, and a very long and expensive project, and we've run out of time to waste.

These are all simple but inconvenient truths. The Fox propaganda obscures them. That's why it has and will fail. And why conservative politicians are nationally unelectable.

They earned the disrespect that they are shown daily by the American people.

The problem with your list is that the tenents of actual conservatism aren't reflected in any of those. It can as easily be stated the MSNBc is liberal propoganda 24/7/365. That isn't to say Republicans don't have things to answer for, but Republican, the political party, and conservatism the ideology are different things. Republicans are guilty of all kinds of things from being too liberal to engaging in crony capitalism.

But don't be so naive as to think conservatism is losing out because it's a bad idea. It reality hasn't been tried much. Nor should we fool ourselves into thinking liberalism will result in utopian society. The evidence is already there that all it does is make people more dependent on government. I wouldn't pat myself on the back over liberalism winning the day. I don't ask myself why it is favored by the majority. I asked why it would not be. Again who wouldn't want to absolve themselves of life's responsibilities and just have someone else deal with our issues, like paying for health care, redistributing wealth instead of having to actually earn it, etc.?

 

[itfitzme]

This link provides a better formatting for the PPACA

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3590/text

 

[Bern80]

The most prolific misunderstanding by the economic narcissists is in the following incorrect rules.

a) All companies must make a profit
b) Competition drives prices down to costs.

Not only are the two completely wrong, they are incompatible with each other. Selling at cost is to realize no profits.

The reality is that where there are profits, it isn't a true free market system. The free market model says that where profits exists, competition is attracted until companies sell at cost. If to much competition is in the market, one or more fails until the remaining companies are able to meet costs. This is the most basic functionality of the free market system.

That's true, but there's a difference between driving to cost and saying the outcome is required to sell at cost.

 

[dblack]

I have no idea what you two are going on about, but it has nothing to do with my views. And you've yet to show how limited government equates to tyranny. It is quite an elaborate strawman though. Please continue.

You have yet to present anything specific or to show how government is equal to tyranny.

Because I've made no such claim.

 

[PMZ]

That's really just a matter of one's perspective and bias. One could just as easily state that the propaganda of liberalism has won the day by majority rule. It's not hard to see why liberalism is more appealing to people. It's the government version of the easy button. Most liberal policies absolve people of personal responsibilites. This is certainly reflected in Obamacare. Who wouldn't want that?

Liberalism has displaced conservatism primarily because conservatism in practice failed miserably. Look at the trajectory of the country under Bush policies. Look at the country under Obama's. Of course, in order to do that one has to turn off Fox and turn on news.

Conservatism failed because it's a completely self serving religion. It has no consideration for national issues. And national issues are what we have government for.

While it's just plain fun messing with conservative minds here, most of what's said is simple truth.

Fox is Republican 24/7/365 propaganda.

Government and business are complementary to each other.

We do have wealth inequality here that is extreme to the point of dysfunction.

We do have a mediocre health care non-system here that is a huge economic anchor and ACA is an effective first step in addressing it.

AGW is real and costly and the IPCC is the body of science that will empower politics to find the least expensive path by it.

The transition to fuel and waste free energy is necessary, and a very long and expensive project, and we've run out of time to waste.

These are all simple but inconvenient truths. The Fox propaganda obscures them. That's why it has and will fail. And why conservative politicians are nationally unelectable.

They earned the disrespect that they are shown daily by the American people.

The problem with your list is that the tenents of actual conservatism aren't reflected in any of those. It can as easily be stated the MSNBc is liberal propoganda 24/7/365. That isn't to say Republicans don't have things to answer for, but Republican, the political party, and conservatism the ideology are different things. Republicans are guilty of all kinds of things from being too liberal to engaging in crony capitalism.

But don't be so naive as to think conservatism is losing out because it's a bad idea. It reality hasn't been tried much. Nor should we fool ourselves into thinking liberalism will result in utopian society. The evidence is already there that all it does is make people more dependent on government. I wouldn't pat myself on the back over liberalism winning the day. I don't ask myself why it is favored by the majority. I asked why it would not be. Again who wouldn't want to absolve themselves of life's responsibilities and just have someone else deal with our issues, like paying for health care, redistributing wealth instead of having to actually earn it, etc.?

I don't know anyone here who doesn't believe that capitalism is a great tool. Like a hammer. What would we do without hammers. Of course quite marginalized on screws.

I believe in accountability. Demonstrated success that can be rewarded with more responsibility. That’s why I love democracy. The ultimate in political accountability.

Business at the moment is failing the country. By the only measure that really counts, growth. But instead of accountability, what do we hear? Pitiful whining by the professional mourners recruited by Fox propaganda for their business partners, the Republican Party.

Even worse, we are rewarding failed and failing business leaders lavishly. Like royalty. For screwing customers and employees for the one group that adds zero value. Shareholders.

Business is broken. Government was, but has been recovering.

Of course as a Fox addict, you have no idea of what's going on. You hear the opposite of what's going on 24/7/365. Why? That makes you useful to the people who are failing, so that they can avoid accountability.

In today's competitive world, America can't afford failure. The path away from it involves massive accountability changes.

That's what informed people in America are working on.

 

[itfitzme]

I have no idea what you two are going on about, but it has nothing to do with my views. And you've yet to show how limited government equates to tyranny. It is quite an elaborate strawman though. Please continue.

You have yet to present anything specific or to show how government is equal to tyranny.

Because I've made no such claim.

The problem is that you have yet to present anything accurate and precise enough, anything specific enough, anything of substance, to have any real meaning. All of your presentation is simply emotional bs.

So, as you’re style sets your standard of specificity, then by those standards the following statements are examined for meaning.

“ it's used as a leverage point to inject the socialist ethic.”
“Statists won't be satisfied until we're under their thumb(s”
“Obviously, anyone who doesn't endorse the coercive state”
“Nah... most all modern governments are coercive in nature. Ours certainly is.”
“ I'm opposed to [/b]forcing my will (or yours) on them via government[/b]”
“and government intrudes on more and more areas of our life, political differences become intractable and democracy disintegrates.”
The bottom line is that you haven’t been specific enough so anyone reading your bs is left in the position of having to figure out what it is that you are talking about. That is your fault. And, PMZ gave you some choices, some avenue to be more specific.

Still, as I read it, it is reasonable to classify what you have presented under the heading of “tyranny”. If you want it different, then present something of substance.

I find it tremendously funny as I recall a line from First Knight, "What I offer you is freedom; freedom from Arthur's tyrannical dream; freedom from Arthur's tyrannical law; freedom from Arthur's tyrannical God."

 

[itfitzme]

The most prolific misunderstanding by the economic narcissists is in the following incorrect rules.

a) All companies must make a profit
b) Competition drives prices down to costs.

Not only are the two completely wrong, they are incompatible with each other. Selling at cost is to realize no profits.

The reality is that where there are profits, it isn't a true free market system. The free market model says that where profits exists, competition is attracted until companies sell at cost. If too much competition is in the market, one or more fails until the remaining companies are able to meet costs. This is the most basic functionality of the free market system.

That's true, but there's a difference between driving to cost and saying the outcome is required to sell at cost.

What?

 

[Flopper]

It should be obvious that if one wants to discuss "Can Obamacare be Fixed?", the very least would be to

a) Go to https://www.healthcare.gov/marketplace/

b) Read the table of contents of http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...fdsys/pkg/BILLS.../pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf or https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3590/text

The current Congressional hearings struck me as a bit stupid given that anyone can go to the website and find out directly. The other absurdity occurred to me when I thought about how much easier meetings at work always were by comparison to Congressional hearings. In one hour, we listed the problems, people took tasks, due dates were assigned, and we were done. My spouse nearly fell off the chair laughing at the comparison. The Congressional hearings are simply a joke.

As far as the healthcare market place is concerned, the first question is "what state are you in?" If you pick California, you are given the link to the California market place. If you pick Kansas, you are not sent to an official state marketplace because Kansas didn't create one.

So, whatever the issues might be with healthcare.gov, it is pretty meaningless as if you are complaining then your state governor and legislator had every opportunity to make one and didn't bother. If you are not willing to do the work, given the opportunity, then you really have no right to complain.

So here are some samples of the states that have their own site

Alabama No
Alaska No
Arizona No
Arkansas No
California Yes
Colorado Yes
Connecticut Yes
Delaware No
DC Yes
Florida No
Georgia No
Hawaii Yes
Idaho No
Illinois No
Indiana No
Iowa No
Kansas No
Kentucky Yes
Louisiana No
Maine No
Maryland Yes
Massachusetts Yes
Michigan No
Minnesota Yes
Mississippi Yes
Missouri No

So if you live in any of these states,

California,Colorado,Connecticut,DC,Hawaii,Kentucky,Maryland,Massachusetts,Minnesota,Mississippi

it simply isn't a problem because your state made the effort. And the odd thing, for all the conservative ranting about state rights and responsibilities, if they really meant it they would a) have made their own state site or b) not complained because they didn't want it anyways.

I think it's pretty clear the designers did not take into account the traffic on the site. They have been making some changes and in a few weeks it will become tolerable. However, it could have been done so much better.

There are political aspects that are a lot harder to fix than the technical ones. In Red states there was little if any support for the exchanges. Many of the these state insurance commissions approved only a few companies for listing. In order to create a large coverage gap of about 5 million, republican governors opted out of the medicaid expansion blocking coverage for tens of thousands of their own people even thou there was no impact on state budget. The federal government picks up all cost of the expansion for the first few years, then picks up 90%. Fixing these problems is going to be a lot harder than fixing website code.

 

[Bern80]

Liberalism has displaced conservatism primarily because conservatism in practice failed miserably. Look at the trajectory of the country under Bush policies. Look at the country under Obama's. Of course, in order to do that one has to turn off Fox and turn on news.

Conservatism failed because it's a completely self serving religion. It has no consideration for national issues. And national issues are what we have government for.

While it's just plain fun messing with conservative minds here, most of what's said is simple truth.

Fox is Republican 24/7/365 propaganda.

Government and business are complementary to each other.

We do have wealth inequality here that is extreme to the point of dysfunction.

We do have a mediocre health care non-system here that is a huge economic anchor and ACA is an effective first step in addressing it.

AGW is real and costly and the IPCC is the body of science that will empower politics to find the least expensive path by it.

The transition to fuel and waste free energy is necessary, and a very long and expensive project, and we've run out of time to waste.

These are all simple but inconvenient truths. The Fox propaganda obscures them. That's why it has and will fail. And why conservative politicians are nationally unelectable.

They earned the disrespect that they are shown daily by the American people.

The problem with your list is that the tenents of actual conservatism aren't reflected in any of those. It can as easily be stated the MSNBc is liberal propoganda 24/7/365. That isn't to say Republicans don't have things to answer for, but Republican, the political party, and conservatism the ideology are different things. Republicans are guilty of all kinds of things from being too liberal to engaging in crony capitalism.

But don't be so naive as to think conservatism is losing out because it's a bad idea. It reality hasn't been tried much. Nor should we fool ourselves into thinking liberalism will result in utopian society. The evidence is already there that all it does is make people more dependent on government. I wouldn't pat myself on the back over liberalism winning the day. I don't ask myself why it is favored by the majority. I asked why it would not be. Again who wouldn't want to absolve themselves of life's responsibilities and just have someone else deal with our issues, like paying for health care, redistributing wealth instead of having to actually earn it, etc.?

I don't know anyone here who doesn't believe that capitalism is a great tool. Like a hammer. What would we do without hammers. Of course quite marginalized on screws.

I believe in accountability. Demonstrated success that can be rewarded with more responsibility. That’s why I love democracy. The ultimate in political accountability.

Business at the moment is failing the country. By the only measure that really counts, growth. But instead of accountability, what do we hear? Pitiful whining by the professional mourners recruited by Fox propaganda for their business partners, the Republican Party.

Even worse, we are rewarding failed and failing business leaders lavishly. Like royalty. For screwing customers and employees for the one group that adds zero value. Shareholders.

Business is broken. Government was, but has been recovering.

Of course as a Fox addict, you have no idea of what's going on. You hear the opposite of what's going on 24/7/365. Why? That makes you useful to the people who are failing, so that they can avoid accountability.

In today's competitive world, America can't afford failure. The path away from it involves massive accountability changes.

That's what informed people in America are working on.

When the basis of your argument is something you can't prove (I'm a FOX addict) you start to look kind of silly. The truth I don't watch much of any of the them. There's your conservative news outlets like FOX and there's your liberal ones like MSNBC and CNN. The big difference though is at least FOX is honest about who they are. For the most part they admit they're conservatives while you have MSNBC who doesn't seem to have the pride to admit their liberal bias and are trying to pass themselves off as objective journalists.

As a liberal kool aide drinker you believe government is getting 'better'. Better at what I have no clue. Anyone with a level of objectivity can see otherwise when we have a President who has so brazenly ignored the limitations of his office and lied repeatedly.

 

[itfitzme]

When the basis of your argument is something you can't prove (I'm a FOX addict) you start to look kind of silly. The truth I don't watch much of any of the them. There's your conservative news outlets like FOX and there's your liberal ones like MSNBC and CNN. The big difference though is at least FOX is honest about who they are. For the most part they admit they're conservatives while you have MSNBC who doesn't seem to have the pride to admit their liberal bias and are trying to pass themselves off as objective journalists.

As a liberal kool aide drinker you believe government is getting 'better'. Better at what I have no clue. Anyone with a level of objectivity can see otherwise when we have a President who has so brazenly ignored the limitations of his office and lied repeatedly.

"As a liberal kool aide drinker you believe government is getting 'better'."

Strawman, hyperbole, ad hominum.....all at one time too.

Oh, and "FOX is honest about who they are" hardly, their slogan is "Fair & Balanced".

And when you are standing with your right shoulder to the wall, everyone is to the left. Fox viewers are the most ill informed of all viewership. Every news media presents the info that their subscribers want. That's a fact. The more left or right leaning the viewership, the more left or right leaning the media. So if the viewership really want's to be lied to, to hear what they want to believe, the media will give them that. And unbiased studies of news media puts Fox up front in being divorced from reality.

You are about to say that the studies have a liberal bias? That'll work for you.

http://www.salon.com/2012/04/10/foxs_misinformation_effect/

http://www.uky.edu/AS/PoliSci/Peffley/pdf/475 PIPA MisperceptionsofIraqWar_10_02_03.pdf

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/12/17/umd-report-regular-viewers-of-fox-news-more-lik/174484

 

[itfitzme]

Kaiser is a good source of info on national health care costs.

Health Costs | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

Health care spending has dropped in growth rate from 8% to 4%. Premium cost growth is down to 4%. 23% of the decline is due to changes in the system.

Of course, it really is kinda amazing that there is any effect, seeing as the body of the PPACA hasn't really been in effect yet.

What most annoyed me about health insurance was that every time I changed companies, I'd end up with a completely different list of providers. The average employee length of stay is about 3.8 years. For most, it isn't a problem. But if you have a particular long term health issue, it is a problem as it takes quite a while for a doctor to get to know a patient personally. 15 minute appointments, 7 hours a day and we are talking about 30 patients a day. Do that for five days and the doctor will see 150 in a week. That is a lot of people and medicine, like everything else, is a volume efficiency program in our economy. See a doctor once every three months and you are one in 150*12=1800 people. See him or her once a year and we are talking being one in 7800. I've never been in a volume people business so I find that actually quite amazing.

 

[itfitzme]

The most fundamental effect on prices is simply supply.

In July of 2002, someone did a study on nurses.

http://www.ahcancal.org/research_data/staffing/Documents/Registered_Nurse_Supply_Demand.pdf

A shortage was anticipated

The projected shortage in 2020 results from a projected 40 percent increase in demand
between 2000 and 2020 compared to a projected 6 percent growth in supply. Demand
will grow steadily at a rate of 1.7 percent annually, a relatively modest growth rate when
compared to the 2.3 percent annual growth in demand projected by the Department of
Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics. Factors driving the growth in demand include an 18
percent increase in population, a larger proportion of elderly persons, and medical
advances that heighten the need for nurses. In contrast, the projected growth in supply is
expected to reach a peak of only 10 percent by 2011 and then begin to decline as the
number of nurses leaving the profession exceeds the number that enter.

Subtitle C of the PPACA includes

Subtitle C--Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce
Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds.
Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program.
Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs.
Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs.
Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps.
Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics.

Subtitle D of the PPACA includes the following sections;

Subtitle D--Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training
Sec. 5308. Advanced nursing education grants.
Sec. 5309. Nurse education, practice, and retention grants.
Sec. 5310. Loan repayment and scholarship program.
Sec. 5311. Nurse faculty loan program.

The following examines the barriers to increasing the workforce, up to 2012.

National League for Nursing - Nursing Education Statistics

Faculty and placement is the big issue in 2012. Placement won't be in the future, not with increased demand. So that leaves faculty.

 

[Bern80]

Kaiser is a good source of info on national health care costs.

Health Costs | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

Health care spending has dropped in growth rate from 8% to 4%. Premium cost growth is down to 4%. 23% of the decline is due to changes in the system.

Of course, it really is kinda amazing that there is any effect, seeing as the body of the PPACA hasn't really been in effect yet.

What most annoyed me about health insurance was that every time I changed companies, I'd end up with a completely different list of providers. The average employee length of stay is about 3.8 years. For most, it isn't a problem. But if you have a particular long term health issue, it is a problem as it takes quite a while for a doctor to get to know a patient personally. 15 minute appointments, 7 hours a day and we are talking about 30 patients a day. Do that for five days and the doctor will see 150 in a week. That is a lot of people and medicine, like everything else, is a volume efficiency program in our economy. See a doctor once every three months and you are one in 150*12=1800 people. See him or her once a year and we are talking being one in 7800. I've never been in a volume people business so I find that actually quite amazing.

The rate of increase has dropped? Yeah we've heard that spin before. "yes it's going up, but not as much as we thought or not as fast." As if that's some kind of victory. That's kind of like when you here schools complaining about their budgets being cut because they didn't get as much MORE as they wanted.

I do agree with the annoyance of networks and what not changing with employers. That would be a good reason to get away from employer provided insurance and just have people purchase it on their own so their policies are more portable.

 

[itfitzme]

Kaiser is a good source of info on national health care costs.

Health Costs | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

Health care spending has dropped in growth rate from 8% to 4%. Premium cost growth is down to 4%. 23% of the decline is due to changes in the system.

Of course, it really is kinda amazing that there is any effect, seeing as the body of the PPACA hasn't really been in effect yet.

What most annoyed me about health insurance was that every time I changed companies, I'd end up with a completely different list of providers. The average employee length of stay is about 3.8 years. For most, it isn't a problem. But if you have a particular long term health issue, it is a problem as it takes quite a while for a doctor to get to know a patient personally. 15 minute appointments, 7 hours a day and we are talking about 30 patients a day. Do that for five days and the doctor will see 150 in a week. That is a lot of people and medicine, like everything else, is a volume efficiency program in our economy. See a doctor once every three months and you are one in 150*12=1800 people. See him or her once a year and we are talking being one in 7800. I've never been in a volume people business so I find that actually quite amazing.

The rate of increase has dropped? Yeah we've heard that spin before. "yes it's going up, but not as much as we thought or not as fast." As if that's some kind of victory. That's kind of like when you here schools complaining about their budgets being cut because they didn't get as much MORE as they wanted.

I do agree with the annoyance of networks and what not changing with employers. That would be a good reason to get away from employer provided insurance and just have people purchase it on their own so their policies are more portable.

In the sciences, it is called acceleration. It is a pretty normal metric.

The far more important question is if it is in real or nominal dollars. If in nominal dollars, then we expect it to increase at least at the rate of inflation.

And, of course, in your usual style, you don't actually have any new information to add. Why is that?

 

[itfitzme]

This was the rate over the last decade.

 

[itfitzme]

To put it in context, with the rate of inflation at 2.5%, then nominal prices increase at 2.5%. Unless wages are increasing at better than the rate of inflation, every real dollar increase in health care spending comes out of something else. It comes out of gasoline, food, clothing, transportation, Christmas or whatever.

And, in fact, at the very least we know minimum wage has not kept up with inflation.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42973.pdf

So, a deceleration of health care costs is significant.

 

[PMZ]

The problem with your list is that the tenents of actual conservatism aren't reflected in any of those. It can as easily be stated the MSNBc is liberal propoganda 24/7/365. That isn't to say Republicans don't have things to answer for, but Republican, the political party, and conservatism the ideology are different things. Republicans are guilty of all kinds of things from being too liberal to engaging in crony capitalism.

But don't be so naive as to think conservatism is losing out because it's a bad idea. It reality hasn't been tried much. Nor should we fool ourselves into thinking liberalism will result in utopian society. The evidence is already there that all it does is make people more dependent on government. I wouldn't pat myself on the back over liberalism winning the day. I don't ask myself why it is favored by the majority. I asked why it would not be. Again who wouldn't want to absolve themselves of life's responsibilities and just have someone else deal with our issues, like paying for health care, redistributing wealth instead of having to actually earn it, etc.?

I don't know anyone here who doesn't believe that capitalism is a great tool. Like a hammer. What would we do without hammers. Of course quite marginalized on screws.

I believe in accountability. Demonstrated success that can be rewarded with more responsibility. That’s why I love democracy. The ultimate in political accountability.

Business at the moment is failing the country. By the only measure that really counts, growth. But instead of accountability, what do we hear? Pitiful whining by the professional mourners recruited by Fox propaganda for their business partners, the Republican Party.

Even worse, we are rewarding failed and failing business leaders lavishly. Like royalty. For screwing customers and employees for the one group that adds zero value. Shareholders.

Business is broken. Government was, but has been recovering.

Of course as a Fox addict, you have no idea of what's going on. You hear the opposite of what's going on 24/7/365. Why? That makes you useful to the people who are failing, so that they can avoid accountability.

In today's competitive world, America can't afford failure. The path away from it involves massive accountability changes.

That's what informed people in America are working on.

When the basis of your argument is something you can't prove (I'm a FOX addict) you start to look kind of silly. The truth I don't watch much of any of the them. There's your conservative news outlets like FOX and there's your liberal ones like MSNBC and CNN. The big difference though is at least FOX is honest about who they are. For the most part they admit they're conservatives while you have MSNBC who doesn't seem to have the pride to admit their liberal bias and are trying to pass themselves off as objective journalists.

As a liberal kool aide drinker you believe government is getting 'better'. Better at what I have no clue. Anyone with a level of objectivity can see otherwise when we have a President who has so brazenly ignored the limitations of his office and lied repeatedly.

Fox addicts are easy to spot. They are all misinformed in exactly the same ways.

Perhaps the point that you're trying to make is that government better than Bush's is a pretty low bar. He was the worst we've ever had. So we've gone from the worst to the modern Lincoln. And that's why Fox addicts are so easy to spot.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't know anyone here who doesn't believe that capitalism is a great tool. Like a hammer. What would we do without hammers. Of course quite marginalized on screws.

I believe in accountability. Demonstrated success that can be rewarded with more responsibility. That’s why I love democracy. The ultimate in political accountability.

Business at the moment is failing the country. By the only measure that really counts, growth. But instead of accountability, what do we hear? Pitiful whining by the professional mourners recruited by Fox propaganda for their business partners, the Republican Party.

Even worse, we are rewarding failed and failing business leaders lavishly. Like royalty. For screwing customers and employees for the one group that adds zero value. Shareholders.

Business is broken. Government was, but has been recovering.

Of course as a Fox addict, you have no idea of what's going on. You hear the opposite of what's going on 24/7/365. Why? That makes you useful to the people who are failing, so that they can avoid accountability.

In today's competitive world, America can't afford failure. The path away from it involves massive accountability changes.

That's what informed people in America are working on.

When the basis of your argument is something you can't prove (I'm a FOX addict) you start to look kind of silly. The truth I don't watch much of any of the them. There's your conservative news outlets like FOX and there's your liberal ones like MSNBC and CNN. The big difference though is at least FOX is honest about who they are. For the most part they admit they're conservatives while you have MSNBC who doesn't seem to have the pride to admit their liberal bias and are trying to pass themselves off as objective journalists.

As a liberal kool aide drinker you believe government is getting 'better'. Better at what I have no clue. Anyone with a level of objectivity can see otherwise when we have a President who has so brazenly ignored the limitations of his office and lied repeatedly.

Fox addicts are easy to spot. They are all misinformed in exactly the same ways.

Perhaps the point that you're trying to make is that government better than Bush's is a pretty low bar. He was the worst we've ever had. So we've gone from the worst to the modern Lincoln. And that's why Fox addicts are so easy to spot.

So we've gone from the worst to the modern Lincoln.

Wow! That's funny.