By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - OBAMA approval PLUMMETS to a dreadful 40%

HappySqurriel said:
Stats87 said:
mrstickball said:
Mr Khan said:
Complete opposite of what should happen, of course. Single payer, complete annihilation of this whole "human health = profit" abomination we have going now

It's a service like education that is part of our package of human rights, and one that should therefore be provided centrally

And look at the amazing American system of non-profit governmental schools. You know, the ones that graduate 35% of students in some cities.

Just because you believe its a right and should be centralized does not mean that it will run efficiently in America. The education system is proof of it.

In Canada, our drop out rate is only 8.5% and our school system is predominantly made up of public schools.

Run entirely by the provinces, who primarily delegate all decisions to small regional educational boards ...

My mistake, I didn't realize at first that this was specifically about control at a federal level. Although, the federal government is not entirely disassociated in Canada either.

That said, the pitfalls of American public education cannot be simply pinned on federal involvement. There seems to be a pattern in the USA that the public option suffers when a private one is also available.



Around the Network
Stats87 said:
HappySqurriel said:
Stats87 said:
mrstickball said:
Mr Khan said:
Complete opposite of what should happen, of course. Single payer, complete annihilation of this whole "human health = profit" abomination we have going now

It's a service like education that is part of our package of human rights, and one that should therefore be provided centrally

And look at the amazing American system of non-profit governmental schools. You know, the ones that graduate 35% of students in some cities.

Just because you believe its a right and should be centralized does not mean that it will run efficiently in America. The education system is proof of it.

In Canada, our drop out rate is only 8.5% and our school system is predominantly made up of public schools.

Run entirely by the provinces, who primarily delegate all decisions to small regional educational boards ...

My mistake, I didn't realize at first that this was specifically about control at a federal level. Although, the federal government is not entirely disassociated in Canada either.

That said, the pitfalls of American public education cannot be simply pinned on federal involvement. There seems to be a pattern in the USA that the public option suffers when a private one is also available.

It's primarily a cultural issue, which i will grant has its own advantages, namely in that we get to higher heights (our top universities being better, having access to higher classes of medical care in many instances), but with the disadvantage of inequality, and another disadvantage of public programs often being taken advantage of as they're offered.

There has to be a way to even the two out, without losing either advantage



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Stats87 said:
HappySqurriel said:

Run entirely by the provinces, who primarily delegate all decisions to small regional educational boards ...

My mistake, I didn't realize at first that this was specifically about control at a federal level. Although, the federal government is not entirely disassociated in Canada either.

That said, the pitfalls of American public education cannot be simply pinned on federal involvement. There seems to be a pattern in the USA that the public option suffers when a private one is also available.

The difference betwen private and public options in education is markedly different than that of health care. Public education is a near monopoly with 90% of students being enrolled in the public option (vs. 25% in medicare/medicaid, give or take). Many states have even higher numbers of public school students, with no correlation between improvements in states that banned homeschooling or alternative educational paths.

Additionally, having been homeschooled my entire life, I can tell you that its an outright falsehood to say the public option suffers because of altenative education's existence. My family's tax dollars still went to public education (and still does). No state has ever been robbed of educational dollars due to private options existing. The fault of our school systems lies in the parents, teachers, and system that exists, not because a private boogeyman exists that is stealing students or dollars. In reality, many private options exist because the public option has been a failure. Where I live, charter schools are increasing because few students are passing their classes in the public schools, and scandal after scandal ensures that there is very little desire to keep their kids in failing schools.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Mr Khan said:
Stats87 said:

 

It's primarily a cultural issue, which i will grant has its own advantages, namely in that we get to higher heights (our top universities being better, having access to higher classes of medical care in many instances), but with the disadvantage of inequality, and another disadvantage of public programs often being taken advantage of as they're offered.

There has to be a way to even the two out, without losing either advantage

Canada actually has a lot of exceptional private secondary schools, what he don't have are the same kind private universities. Our private universities are only a handful and almost entirely religious.

On the medical front, we do have advanced private clinics and what not, but they are there as a convienience to those that can afford them.



osamanobama said:
Bong Lover said:
osamanobama said:

also not to mention that letting people keep their own money doesnt add to the deficit, but pretending it does.

government never gets the amount in revenue that they predict from tax increases, and in this case getting rid of the obama tax cuts (we had i vote on these tax rates not to long ago, i seem to remember obama was in office, and he suported it along with his super majorities in both houses of congress) changes behavior people shift their money around, also businesses will be less productive, higher less people, etc, therefor will pay less taxes, than say they had a thriving business with lots of employees. so raising taxes would not only have a detremental impact on economic growth but tax revenue too (there will be a ever so slight increase in tax revenue, though it wont even put a scratch on a microscopic dent on our debt)

I am sure that is what you remember, but in the real world these cuts were set to expire at the end of 2010. The republicans threatened with a government shutdown if the Bush tax cuts were not extended. Same tactics, same result as the current debacle in Congress, and yes, America is suffering as a result.

The way I see it there are two possible ways forward for the USA. Either you continue with very low levels of government spending, but then you have to stop trying to provide social services even remotely similar to the rest of the Western world. Alternatively, increase funding and strengthen the social safety net. Right now the US is stuck in a position where they think they can provide social security, basic health care, public education and a stable infrastructure without paying for it. Most Americans probably don't realize that the quality of health-care and education in the USA is absolute shit compared to most other developed western countries. The infrastructure is following the same trajectory. The only area where the former superpower is not being outperformed by the rest of comparable countries is in military power. Who knows how long that will last though?

Of course, with the two party system currently in place, the only real choice Americans have is is they want to abolish the safety net quickly or slightly slower.

 

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

I see, we can just make up facts to fit to our arguments? The Democrats did not have a super majority in either house when the tax cuts were extended. If they did, the tax cuts would not have been extended for households making more than $250,000 a year.

The wealth gap has been escalating since the introduction of supply side economics in the early 80's. There is absolutely no credible connection between the New Deal and the current huge increase in the wealth gap.

Finally, the health care system in the USA is the best in the world only in the minds of Americans. It is true that for extremely complicated surgery the top talent is in America, but this does very little to benefit most people. The truth is that healthcare in the USA is of very poor quality at a very high price in the general case. I've lived in both America and overseas and have seen the differences first hand many many times. But, my observations are just isolated examples. If you care to investigate your belief that survival rates are higher in the US than other Western countries the numbers are freely available. You'll see that except for a marginally better survival rate for breast cancer, the US scores low in almost all categories. At a much higher price per patient none the less.



Around the Network
Stats87 said:
HappySqurriel said:
Stats87 said:
mrstickball said:
Mr Khan said:
Complete opposite of what should happen, of course. Single payer, complete annihilation of this whole "human health = profit" abomination we have going now

It's a service like education that is part of our package of human rights, and one that should therefore be provided centrally

And look at the amazing American system of non-profit governmental schools. You know, the ones that graduate 35% of students in some cities.

Just because you believe its a right and should be centralized does not mean that it will run efficiently in America. The education system is proof of it.

In Canada, our drop out rate is only 8.5% and our school system is predominantly made up of public schools.

Run entirely by the provinces, who primarily delegate all decisions to small regional educational boards ...

My mistake, I didn't realize at first that this was specifically about control at a federal level. Although, the federal government is not entirely disassociated in Canada either.

That said, the pitfalls of American public education cannot be simply pinned on federal involvement. There seems to be a pattern in the USA that the public option suffers when a private one is also available.

Actually, education is entirely within provincial jurisdiction; and the only involvement in education from the federal government is indirect financing through tansfer payment ... and even with how much better the Canadian education system is, we're still "failing" far too many students being that (depending on the study) around 15% to 20% of high-school graduates are functionally illiterate and (while not well studied) a similar or larger portion of highschool graduates are functionally innumerate.

Now, the federal government having some involvement in the educational system does not doom the system, but it is foolish to think that you can create a uniform system that can address the challenges of a small rural school and an inner city school.



thx1139 said:
I will answer Viper1 and mrstickball.

1st off Viper1, what makes you think a new President can just walk in and unilaterally stop the 2 wars without congressional approval. What makes you think he could easily kill the Bush tax cuts? What makes you think he could just cancel Medicare Part D? This isnt how the US Govt works. 

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.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

osamanobama said:
Bong Lover said:
osamanobama said:

also not to mention that letting people keep their own money doesnt add to the deficit, but pretending it does.

government never gets the amount in revenue that they predict from tax increases, and in this case getting rid of the obama tax cuts (we had i vote on these tax rates not to long ago, i seem to remember obama was in office, and he suported it along with his super majorities in both houses of congress) changes behavior people shift their money around, also businesses will be less productive, higher less people, etc, therefor will pay less taxes, than say they had a thriving business with lots of employees. so raising taxes would not only have a detremental impact on economic growth but tax revenue too (there will be a ever so slight increase in tax revenue, though it wont even put a scratch on a microscopic dent on our debt)

I am sure that is what you remember, but in the real world these cuts were set to expire at the end of 2010. The republicans threatened with a government shutdown if the Bush tax cuts were not extended. Same tactics, same result as the current debacle in Congress, and yes, America is suffering as a result.

The way I see it there are two possible ways forward for the USA. Either you continue with very low levels of government spending, but then you have to stop trying to provide social services even remotely similar to the rest of the Western world. Alternatively, increase funding and strengthen the social safety net. Right now the US is stuck in a position where they think they can provide social security, basic health care, public education and a stable infrastructure without paying for it. Most Americans probably don't realize that the quality of health-care and education in the USA is absolute shit compared to most other developed western countries. The infrastructure is following the same trajectory. The only area where the former superpower is not being outperformed by the rest of comparable countries is in military power. Who knows how long that will last though?

Of course, with the two party system currently in place, the only real choice Americans have is is they want to abolish the safety net quickly or slightly slower.

 

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...



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Viper1 said:
thx1139 said:
I will answer Viper1 and mrstickball.

1st off Viper1, what makes you think a new President can just walk in and unilaterally stop the 2 wars without congressional approval. What makes you think he could easily kill the Bush tax cuts? What makes you think he could just cancel Medicare Part D? This isnt how the US Govt works. 

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.

 



Mr Khan said:
Complete opposite of what should happen, of course. Single payer, complete annihilation of this whole "human health = profit" abomination we have going now

It's a service like education that is part of our package of human rights, and one that should therefore be provided centrally


You do know that nonprofit health insurance isn't any cheaper then regular health insurance, right.

If your talkign about privatising EVERYTHING....

I'd look at what countries spend what on bio-technology and who makes the big breakthroughs.

Equality of care really doesn't mean a thing when the care is below the standard level that could of been had under the old system.

The USA is just about the last bastion of proper medical research funding and breakthroughs.