US Downgraded

Well Dixie, thanks for admitting what I have said all along...conservatives and Republicans want to END Social Security and Medicare. So from this point forward, don't try to paint it any other way.

We TRIED a charity only approach...it FAILED. Before Medicare, 66% of seniors lived below the poverty line, today it's 14%. Before Medicare, 50% of seniors had NO health insurance and more than 25% were estimated to go without medical care due to cost concerns. Many DIED without treatment. Since the advent of Medicare, "the health of the elderly population has improved, as measured by both longevity and functional status," said one study published in the journal Health Affairs. In fact, according to the study, "life expectancy at age 65 increased from 14.3 years in 1960 to 17.8 years in 1998 and the chronically disabled elderly population declined from 24.9 percent in 1982 to 21.3 percent in 1994." ref

Charity is great, but it will never cover everyone. Maybe you also believe the elderly need to beg for assistance. How dignified for people who worked their whole life raising and supporting a family...how reassuring to someone on a fixed income that they MIGHT get some help.

You folks on the right continue to exhibit NOTHING that would classify you as human. Raised by wolves...

Sorry, but I didn't say I wanted to END Social Security or Medicare. It doesn't matter if I want to end it or you want to keep it, when the 70 million boomers hit the roles, it's going belly up... the money is just not there to pay for it. I've advocated for a system where younger people who already know this is a scam, they are throwing their money down a rat hole every week, because they will never see a dime of it.... those people, should be able to 'opt out' of the SS and put their money in a 401k type account instead. Additionally, I do believe there is a great deal of fraud and misappropriation happening in Medicare, specifically in the area of "Disability." I know a good many moochers, who have no apparent physical malady, and enough mental capacity to know how to get a free check and cash/spend it. You can go to the doc and complain your back hurts... can't work... chronic pain.... and you can get on disability! If you have kids, they can get on disability too! Everybody in the family can get a free government check each month, and never have to work a lick! Ain't that GREAT? We're paying for it! And when anyone dares to suggest we look into this, or examine what the hell we're doing, they are hooted down by a bunch of idiot socialists who are hellbent on destroying America.
 
Well Dixie, thanks for admitting what I have said all along...conservatives and Republicans want to END Social Security and Medicare. So from this point forward, don't try to paint it any other way.

We TRIED a charity only approach...it FAILED. Before Medicare, 66% of seniors lived below the poverty line, today it's 14%. Before Medicare, 50% of seniors had NO health insurance and more than 25% were estimated to go without medical care due to cost concerns. Many DIED without treatment. Since the advent of Medicare, "the health of the elderly population has improved, as measured by both longevity and functional status," said one study published in the journal Health Affairs. In fact, according to the study, "life expectancy at age 65 increased from 14.3 years in 1960 to 17.8 years in 1998 and the chronically disabled elderly population declined from 24.9 percent in 1982 to 21.3 percent in 1994." ref

Charity is great, but it will never cover everyone. Maybe you also believe the elderly need to beg for assistance. How dignified for people who worked their whole life raising and supporting a family...how reassuring to someone on a fixed income that they MIGHT get some help.

You folks on the right continue to exhibit NOTHING that would classify you as human. Raised by wolves...

Sorry, but I didn't say I wanted to END Social Security or Medicare. It doesn't matter if I want to end it or you want to keep it, when the 70 million boomers hit the roles, it's going belly up... the money is just not there to pay for it. I've advocated for a system where younger people who already know this is a scam, they are throwing their money down a rat hole every week, because they will never see a dime of it.... those people, should be able to 'opt out' of the SS and put their money in a 401k type account instead. Additionally, I do believe there is a great deal of fraud and misappropriation happening in Medicare, specifically in the area of "Disability." I know a good many moochers, who have no apparent physical malady, and enough mental capacity to know how to get a free check and cash/spend it. You can go to the doc and complain your back hurts... can't work... chronic pain.... and you can get on disability! If you have kids, they can get on disability too! Everybody in the family can get a free government check each month, and never have to work a lick! Ain't that GREAT? We're paying for it! And when anyone dares to suggest we look into this, or examine what the hell we're doing, they are hooted down by a bunch of idiot socialists who are hellbent on destroying America.
 
Sorry, but I didn't say I wanted to END Social Security or Medicare. It doesn't matter if I want to end it or you want to keep it, when the 70 million boomers hit the roles, it's going belly up... the money is just not there to pay for it. I've advocated for a system where younger people who already know this is a scam, they are throwing their money down a rat hole every week, because they will never see a dime of it.... those people, should be able to 'opt out' of the SS and put their money in a 401k type account instead. Additionally, I do believe there is a great deal of fraud and misappropriation happening in Medicare, specifically in the area of "Disability." I know a good many moochers, who have no apparent physical malady, and enough mental capacity to know how to get a free check and cash/spend it. You can go to the doc and complain your back hurts... can't work... chronic pain.... and you can get on disability! If you have kids, they can get on disability too! Everybody in the family can get a free government check each month, and never have to work a lick! Ain't that GREAT? We're paying for it! And when anyone dares to suggest we look into this, or examine what the hell we're doing, they are hooted down by a bunch of idiot socialists who are hellbent on destroying America.

You are full of shit Dixie. I have a buddy who was an electrician. He fell from a 20 foot ladder and destroyed his spine. He had a surgery where they had to go in from the FRONT to repair his spine and pull all his guts out to get to the damaged area. He had to FIGHT to get disability. They would send agents to snoop and see if he cut the grass or shoveled snow. His wife was diagnosed with breast cancer at 30, she got NOTHING (she is now deceased).

Fuck YOU Dixie and all your kind who make SHIT up to justify PUNISHMENT...
 
Well, the FIRST reason I would support the Fed running security, is because that's the one thing the Constitution clearly gives them authority and obligation to do. The government is not supposed to take care of everyone's every need from cradle to grave, that is a statist perception of government, which is the root basis for Marxism, Socialism, and Communism, but not American Constitutional Democracy. We have a unique Constitutional republic, which gives the people (not the government) control of the collective, and government is one of the tools used. The problem is, over 200+ years, we've forgotten how to use the tool... it doesn't mean the tool is broken, or we need a new tool. The Founders were smart men, they built a system which has created the greatest power ever to exist on this planet. We've only recently had the problem of pinheads wanting to adopt Statist viewpoints, and cling to the Eurotrash Socialist model of government.

So, as Bfgrn writes in msg 98, you're not in favor of social programs even if they were run efficiently.

It's refreshing to see an honest viewpoint as opposed to those who argue about waste and mismanagement when no amount of change would satisfy them and that's precisely the reason the Repubs and Dems can't work together on such things as medical care. That's why Obama and the Dems just pushed ObamaCare through because no amount to negotiation and compromise would have resulted in an agreement.

Let's hope the '12 campaign is run on such honesty.
 
Sorry, but I didn't say I wanted to END Social Security or Medicare. It doesn't matter if I want to end it or you want to keep it, when the 70 million boomers hit the roles, it's going belly up... the money is just not there to pay for it. I've advocated for a system where younger people who already know this is a scam, they are throwing their money down a rat hole every week, because they will never see a dime of it.... those people, should be able to 'opt out' of the SS and put their money in a 401k type account instead. Additionally, I do believe there is a great deal of fraud and misappropriation happening in Medicare, specifically in the area of "Disability." I know a good many moochers, who have no apparent physical malady, and enough mental capacity to know how to get a free check and cash/spend it. You can go to the doc and complain your back hurts... can't work... chronic pain.... and you can get on disability! If you have kids, they can get on disability too! Everybody in the family can get a free government check each month, and never have to work a lick! Ain't that GREAT? We're paying for it! And when anyone dares to suggest we look into this, or examine what the hell we're doing, they are hooted down by a bunch of idiot socialists who are hellbent on destroying America.

If it's such a good deal and so easy for the people to collect disability why aren't people quitting their jobs and applying?

As for SS and Medicare going belly up because the money isn't there what you're saying is the US can not afford to look after it's ill and elderly. Do you honestly believe that?
 
You are full of shit Dixie. I have a buddy who was an electrician. He fell from a 20 foot ladder and destroyed his spine. He had a surgery where they had to go in from the FRONT to repair his spine and pull all his guts out to get to the damaged area. He had to FIGHT to get disability. They would send agents to snoop and see if he cut the grass or shoveled snow. His wife was diagnosed with breast cancer at 30, she got NOTHING (she is now deceased).

Fuck YOU Dixie and all your kind who make SHIT up to justify PUNISHMENT...

It's a belief system that can be traced back to religion or, more accurately, to people who interpreted religion to suit their own greed and justify not helping others. Disease and misfortune were considered God's "will".

Occasionally, we hear reference to that when people say God never gives us more than we can handle or more than we can bear. While, in certain circumstances, it may be a comforting expression the greedy and selfish draw on it to justify their lack of helping/non-interference.
 
It's sad you people on the right HAVE to create myths to find an excuse to punish people Damo. America doesn't have a 'cradle to grave' care system. Compared to other 1st world countries, our social safety net is minimal.

But the question is; are we a civilized society or is America a jungle? SHOULD we provide care for the most vulnerable in our society?

Right, we should follow them into that debt trap. You have to be oblivious of what is actually happening in this world to continue to argue this. Suicide is not a viable economic policy. We can provide that care without government run care. And we should. Unfortunately Obamacare is designed to fail and to cripple the system we need to get it done.

Government isn't the only answer, and in this case we can see what happens when it is applied as the only option.
 
Right, we should follow them into that debt trap. You have to be oblivious of what is actually happening in this world to continue to argue this. Suicide is not a viable economic policy. We can provide that care without government run care. And we should. Unfortunately Obamacare is designed to fail and to cripple the system we need to get it done.

Government isn't the only answer, and in this case we can see what happens when it is applied as the only option.

Damo, you are woefully misinformed. The TRUTH is the exact opposite of what you believe. The Affordable Healthcare Act is designed to put us on a more sustainable debt course. The fact S&P now believes it will be undermined by Republicans was a big part of their decision to downgrade.

From their report:

We note that in a letter to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO’s latest “Alternate Fiscal Scenario” of June 2011, updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In general, the CBO’s “Alternate Fiscal Scenario” assumes a continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.

WHAT S&P is saying is that the CBO's debt projection has now taken the path of the Alternative Fiscal Scenario, which is extending the Bush tax cuts, repeal or undermining of the cost cutting measures in the Affordable Healthcare Act and more Republican corporate ass licking.


SummaryFigure1_forBlog.png


CBO’s Analysis

The Extended-Baseline Scenario. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario. The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates very different assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP.

This scenario also reflects the assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue after 2021. In addition, the alternative scenario includes an assumption that spending on activities other than the major mandatory health care programs, Social Security, and interest on the debt will not fall quite as low as under the extended-baseline scenario.

With significantly lower revenues and higher outlays, debt held by the public would grow much more rapidly than under the extended-baseline scenario, reaching levels far above any ever experienced in U.S. history.
 
Damo, you are woefully misinformed. The TRUTH is the exact opposite of what you believe. The Affordable Healthcare Act is designed to put us on a more sustainable debt course. The fact S&P now believes it will be undermined by Republicans was a big part of their decision to downgrade.

From their report:

We note that in a letter to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO’s latest “Alternate Fiscal Scenario” of June 2011, updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In general, the CBO’s “Alternate Fiscal Scenario” assumes a continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.

WHAT S&P is saying is that the CBO's debt projection has now taken the path of the Alternative Fiscal Scenario, which is extending the Bush tax cuts, repeal or undermining of the cost cutting measures in the Affordable Healthcare Act and more Republican corporate ass licking.


SummaryFigure1_forBlog.png


CBO’s Analysis

The Extended-Baseline Scenario. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario. The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates very different assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP.

This scenario also reflects the assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue after 2021. In addition, the alternative scenario includes an assumption that spending on activities other than the major mandatory health care programs, Social Security, and interest on the debt will not fall quite as low as under the extended-baseline scenario.

With significantly lower revenues and higher outlays, debt held by the public would grow much more rapidly than under the extended-baseline scenario, reaching levels far above any ever experienced in U.S. history.

You have to be a "true believer"...

It rips 500 Billion from Medicare, it deliberately makes the penalties cheaper than the insurance for employers. It is absolutely designed to kill and cripple the system we'd need to get it done if we don't want to follow Europe into economic suicide and is designed as a "first step" towards that very unviable economic suicide pact.

We need the free market to solve the issue if we want to do something differently and aim for a different result. If the only plan is this one we will absolutely be forced into government care in the future and we already know the result of it, we are watching it play out currently in Greece and Italy.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/27/do-the-right-thing-repeal-presidents-ploy/
 
Right, we should follow them into that debt trap. You have to be oblivious of what is actually happening in this world to continue to argue this. Suicide is not a viable economic policy. We can provide that care without government run care. And we should. Unfortunately Obamacare is designed to fail and to cripple the system we need to get it done.

Government isn't the only answer, and in this case we can see what happens when it is applied as the only option.

One thing that's clear is out of the 18 countries with a higher credit rating than the US 10 have government medical. Hmmm. I wonder if there's something there?

If we look at the countries that have a better credit rating than the US and check out their social policies.

Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Isle of Man, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Swiss Confederation, United Kingdom.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...the-united-states/18-countries-credit-rating/

Countries with government medical.

Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom
http://www.gadling.com/2007/07/05/what-countries-have-universal-health-care/
 
One thing that's clear is out of the 18 countries with a higher credit rating than the US 10 have government medical. Hmmm. I wonder if there's something there?

If we look at the countries that have a better credit rating than the US and check out their social policies.
Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Isle of Man, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Swiss Confederation, United Kingdom.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...the-united-states/18-countries-credit-rating/

Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom
http://www.gadling.com/2007/07/05/what-countries-have-universal-health-care/

What is clear is of the nations of the "first world" that are in almost complete debt failure, all of them signed that economic suicide pact. The reality is of the 10 that remain with a higher rating, we subsidize their defense spending. Without the US subsidizing what would otherwise create a greater cost their suicide plans would be netting the same result.

The reality is, even places with the tax scenario that would give Apple orgasm, this is still an economic suicide plan and many are failing even with the US subsidization of defense....

We can do better than that, and we should be ashamed that we didn't.
 
One thing that's clear is out of the 18 countries with a higher credit rating than the US 10 have government medical. Hmmm. I wonder if there's something there?

If we look at the countries that have a better credit rating than the US and check out their social policies.

Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Guernsey, Hong Kong, Isle of Man, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Swiss Confederation, United Kingdom.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...the-united-states/18-countries-credit-rating/

Countries with government medical.

Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom
http://www.gadling.com/2007/07/05/what-countries-have-universal-health-care/

And not a single mention of Canada.
 
Yea and hell while were at it, why don't we just get rid of government all together! Scratch a libertarian and you get an anarchist.

A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither

You sound like someone who can't be resoned with Mott.

If you were made to pay more than you could afford, I bet you might think differently.
 
No, it wouldn't "surely" do any such thing. Only if we maintain that cradle to grave care is somehow tenable in a government that has to live within its means would such be the case. This comes from the insistence that the only way to raise revenue is through higher tax rates, you shouldn't allow yourself to fall into that trap.

I must admit that you've really put me in my place on this one Damo.
 
It's sad you people on the right HAVE to create myths to find an excuse to punish people Damo. America doesn't have a 'cradle to grave' care system. Compared to other 1st world countries, our social safety net is minimal.

But the question is; are we a civilized society or is America a jungle? SHOULD we provide care for the most vulnerable in our society?

It's at the most vulnerables (old people in most cases) expense that your form of government feeds on.

Your form of government took their money and spent it, and now has to threaten them with default if they don't think like you do, and do as you and yours say they better do. (Or else.)

That's not what they bought into.
 
Last edited:
You have to be a "true believer"...

It rips 500 Billion from Medicare, it deliberately makes the penalties cheaper than the insurance for employers. It is absolutely designed to kill and cripple the system we'd need to get it done if we don't want to follow Europe into economic suicide and is designed as a "first step" towards that very unviable economic suicide pact.

We need the free market to solve the issue if we want to do something differently and aim for a different result. If the only plan is this one we will absolutely be forced into government care in the future and we already know the result of it, we are watching it play out currently in Greece and Italy.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/27/do-the-right-thing-repeal-presidents-ploy/

Damo, you have made a concerted effort to remain woefully ignorant. I read your fear-mongering hit piece, but you have always refused to read or listen to a guy that spent 20 years as an insurance executive. The 'true believer' is YOU Damo. You are being fed very well funded propaganda.

Wendell Potter
is former Vice President of corporate communications at CIGNA, one of the United States' largest health insurance companies. wiki

Wendell Potter: Rally Against Wall Street's Health Care Takeover

August 31, 2009

I would like to begin by apologizing to all of you for the role I played 15 years ago in cheating you out of a reformed health care system. Had it not been for greedy insurance companies and other special interests, and their army of lobbyists and spin-doctors like I used to be, we wouldn't be here today.

I'm ashamed that I let myself get caught up in deceitful and dishonest PR campaigns that worked so well, hundreds of thousands of our citizens have died, and millions of others have lost their homes and been forced into bankruptcy, so that a very few corporate executives and their Wall Street masters could become obscenely rich.

But it was only during the last few years of my career that I came to realize the full scope of the harm my colleagues and I had caused, and the lengths that insurance companies will go to increase their profits at the expense of working families.

As I told the Senate Commerce Committee two months ago, the higher up the corporate ladder I climbed, the more I could see how insurance companies confuse their customers and dump the sick – all so they can satisfy those Wall Street masters.

I described for the senators how insurers make promises they have no intention of keeping, how they flout regulations designed to protect consumers, and how they make it nearly impossible to understand -- or even to obtain -- information consumers need.

I also told the Committee how the industry has conducted duplicitous and well-financed PR and lobbying campaigns every time Congress has tried to reform our health care system -- and how its current behind-scenes-efforts may well shape reform in a way that benefits Wall Street far more than average Americans.

I noted that, just as the industry did 15 years ago when it led the effort to kill the Clinton reform plan, it is using shills and front groups to spread lies and disinformation to scare Americans away from the very reform that would benefit them most.

Make no mistake, the industry, despite its public assurances to be good-faith partners with the President and Congress, has been at work for years laying the groundwork for devious and often sinister campaigns to manipulate public opinion.

The industry goes to great lengths to keep its involvement in these campaigns hidden from public view. But I know from having served on many trade group committees that industry leaders are always full partners in developing strategies to derail any reform that might interfere with their ability to increase their companies' profits.

My involvement in those activities goes back to the early '90s when insurers joined with other special interests to finance the activities of an organization called the Healthcare Leadership Council, which led a coordinated effort to scare Americans and members of Congress away from the Clinton plan.

A few years after that victory, the insurers formed a front group called the Health Benefits Coalition to kill efforts to pass a Patients Bill of Rights. While it was touted as a broad-based business group, the Health Benefits Coalition in reality got the lion's share of its funding from Big Insurance.

Like most front groups, the Health Benefits Coalition was set up and run out of a big and well-connected PR firm. One of the key strategies developed by the PR firm as the coalition was gearing up for battle in late 1998 was to stir up support among conservative talk radio hosts and other media.

The PR firm formed alliances with groups like the Christian Coalition and the Family Research Council and persuaded them to send letters to Congress and to appear at press conferences. The firm also launched an advertising campaign in conservative media outlets. The message was that President Clinton owed a debt to the liberal base of the Democratic Party and would try to pay back that debt by advancing the type of big government agenda on health care that he failed to get in 1993. Those tactics worked. Industry allies in Congress made sure the Patients' Bill of Rights would not become law.

The insurance industry has funded several other front groups since then whenever the industry has been under attack. It formed the Coalition for Affordable Quality Healthcare to try to improve the image of managed care in response to a constant stream of negative stories that appeared in the media in the late '90s and the first years of this decade.

It funded another front group when lawyers began filing class action lawsuits on behalf of doctors and patients.

The PR firm the industry hired to create that front group, by the way, had planned and conducted a similar campaign for the tobacco industry a few years earlier.

The insurance industry hired that same PR firm again in 2007 to help blunt the impact of Michael Moore's movie, "Sicko." It created and staffed a front group called "Health Care America" specifically to discredit Moore and to demonize the health care systems featured in the movie.

Among the tactics the PR firm used once again was to enlist the support of conservative talk show hosts, writers and editorial page editors to warn against a "government-takeover" of the U.S. health care system. The term "government-takeover" is one the industry has used many times over the years to scare people away from reform.

Health Care America also placed ads in newspapers. One of those ads carried this message, "In America, you wait in line to see a movie. In government-run health care systems, you wait to see a doctor."

With this history, you can rest assured that the insurance industry is up to the same dirty tricks, using the same devious PR practices it has used for many years, to kill reform this year, or even better, to shape reform so that it benefits insurance companies and their Wall Street investors far more than average Americans.

Americans need to be alert to how the industry and its allies are working to influence their opinions and lawmakers' votes. I know from years as an industry PR executive how effective insurers have been in using scare tactics to turn public opinion against any reform efforts that would threaten their profitability.

I warned earlier this year that Americans and the media should pay close attention to the efforts insurers and their ideological buddies would undertake to demonize health care systems around the world that don't allow for-profit insurance companies to have the free reign they have here.

Americans must realize that the when they hear isolated stories of long waiting times to see doctors in Canada and allegations that care in other systems is rationed by government bureaucrats, the insurance industry has written the script.

And Americans must realize that every time they hear we will be heading down the "slippery slope toward socialism" if Congress creates a public insurance option to compete with private insurers, some insurance flack like I used to be wrote that, too.

Every time you hear about the shortcomings of what they call "government-run" health care, remember this: what we have now in this country, and what the insurers are determined to keep in place, is Wall Street-run health care.

And know that we already have one of the most insidious means of rationing care in the world -- not by people we can hold accountable on election day but by insurance company executives who answer only to a few wealthy investors and hedge fund managers who care far more about earnings per share than your health and well-being.

More at link
 
Exactly and drinking more tea aint gonna fix the problem. The time for brinksmanship is done. Now is the time to govern!
Big surprise here, Moot the lib-tard is blaming the TEA Party for the downgrade. Answer this question, if you dare: would the downgrade have occurred if the TEA Party goals had been enacted? :)
 
Back
Top