OBAMA approval PLUMMETS to a dreadful 40%

[Viper1]

Ail said:

osamanobama said:

yes, and they had supermajorities in both houses, if the wanted to get something done they could have, but the election was coming up, so they pandered. and they would have been even more destroyed in the election if they raised taxes.

wealth gap has only been increasing since we started all these social programs, they dont work, privatize them, and they will provide a better service for a lower cost.

and we keep doubling and doubling spending on our monopoly on eduction yet scores havent gone up for nearly 50 years, that should tell government something. we should eliminate the department of education, one of the least of reasons is because its unconstitutional.

and our healthcare system is the best in the world, thats why we have the highest survival rates of nearly every medical conditions. could it get better, you bet, you get government red tape out of the way and you will have it. get medical mal practice reform, allow people to buy insurance across state lines etc

Err ?

Right now the social programs are not designed to make a profit, and as most know they are actually making a loss.

Now lets say you privatize them.

That means there will be companies in between that will be looking to make a profit.

Now go ahead and explain me what is going to be the benefit for citizens to have companies making a profit out of their retirement money ????

 

Right now : 100$ go in, 110$ go out.

your proposal :

100$ go in, some company makes a 20% or so profit.

80$ go out...

Now go ahead and tell people that live only on social security that you propose to cut their revenue by 30%............

 

As for global healthcare, last I remember the US were only ranked 20 or so worldwide on the quality of their healthcare system...

There are actually states where the life expectancy is going down while in most european countries it is still increasing by 3 months/year or so...

Privitzing it would have the funds placed in an interst drawing account or invested in solid yeild securities and stocks.   Therefore, you get a profit on the provider and lower costs.   And that's just to start.

The bigger area of concern isn't funding vs spending.  But rather inflated costs.   A hospital can charge $5 per Tylenol (the exact same over the counter Tylenol that costs you 11 cents at CVS) because it knows the inurance carrier (including the entitlement programs) will pay it.  The consumer rarely ever bargains these fees unless they are paying out of pocket.   With a truly free market and privatized service, those insurance companies would fight tooth and nail to reduce costs so they can attract more customers.

Note that I'm pointing out the problem being government involvement in the entire insurance system, not just SS.  To truly see results in the system on either end, you have to deal with the problem overall.  You can just do SS or just government involved insurance.  You ahve to fix both.  But in doing so, health care costs would drop by quite a lot.

And don't forget the investing part.   A good insurance company would pass on good investment savings on to the customer as part of their business plan.

richardhutnik said:

Viper1 said:

Did not a president initiate the 2 wars without congressional approval?  Are we not in Libya wholly against the requests of Congress?  Is the President not the Commander In Chief of the military?

Bush tax cutes - has he even tried to remove them?  Has he worked to educate the congress properly on why we need to remove them?

All Obama does is do what Obama wants and then spout rhetoric peppered with logical fallacies to give us a warm fuzzy feeling and all contrary to his campaign stances.

As for the private health insurance industry...haha, private.  It's not been truly private since the early 70's.Ever notice that the segments of the health industry that the government has no involvmeent in are actually getting cheaper every year and providing better services every year?   The correlation is not coincidental.  It's free market economic law.

There is NOTHING that is going to happen with "educating" anyone on the GOP side.  You talk about needing to let the Bushg tax cuts lapse and it gets spun as "Obama is raising taxes".  It goes nowhere ever:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/04/obama-i-refuse-to-renew-bush-tax-cuts-for-rich/1

Republicans said they will battle to maintain tax rates for all Americans.

"The one area that we know we're not going to get very far on is the idea that we're going to raise taxes on the very people that we expect to invest in our economy and to help create jobs," said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

 

I personally prefer a flat consumption tax.   Taxing income is an idiotic concept to begin with.  Impossible to make it fair for all.