Does this scare anyone else?

Jump to Last Post 1-23 of 23 discussions (121 posts)

60
speaseposted 14 years ago
Barney Frank Said "We Are Trying On Every Front To Increase The Role Of Government"
reply report
1. 71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where is the rest of what he said and the context he was speaking in?
  reply report
2. 78
  jiberishposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Did he say this with, or without his teeth in?
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  62
  Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Either way, the fool has a gift for gumming up the works.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  *groan****
  reply report
75
Eaglekiwiposted 14 years ago
I only know Barney the purple dinosaur
reply report
0
Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago
I'm scared! I've never been more scared for this country, of the future! We are definitely headed for darker times!
reply report
87
livelongerposted 14 years ago
Context is everything. The discussion was solely confined to regulation of the financial services industry.
reply report
1. 66
  Flightkeeperposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  For now.
  reply report
  67
  Blogging Erikaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So you're agreeing that the government should increase its role with regards to the regulation of the financial services industry?
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes.
  reply report
  66
  Flightkeeperposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No. livelonger said that Barney's desire for regulation was restricted to the financial services industry. I said for now, meaning that the financial services industry was the starting point for now but could be expanded later which is what government tends to do if it is allowed.
  reply report
  61
  Friendlywordposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "I said for now, meaning that the financial services industry was the starting point for now but could be expanded later which is what government tends to do if it is allowed"
  If it is Allowed? Our Government is ELECTED by the people of this country to act on our behalf. Barney Frank is not a part of Her Majesties Government. He is our elected Congressmen doing his job for us. One of his responsibilities is to protect us from Busineses like Enron, illegal bank practices, and corporate crooks that want to rape and rob this Country. Some people running a few businesses in the Country think that people are as stupid as the companies are greedy? So they try us. That's why we have Barney Frank and others like him in OUR Government to protect us.
  reply report
  68
  ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh yeah, our representatives act on our behalf and not on the behalf of the people who gave them money to run their campaign.
  reply report
2. 0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Right he wants the power to dissolve the evil financial companies!
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And eat babies, too. Don't forget that. An important sign of the upcoming apocalypse.
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That's a common tactic of the left, change the subject! Those were his words to dissolve companies that don't follow his new rules! He'd have some credibility if it wasn't he that was responsible for the regulations that CAUSED this last crisis!
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  *Regulations* caused the recent financial crisis? That's really how you read what happened?
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  not me....greed caused the problem in the financial markets.
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Absolutely! The mortgage came first when the government pushed Fannie and Freddie to back paper and encourage home ownership and the giving of loans through the community reinvestment act
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Pushed through by the Clintons
  reply report
3. 60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  He has no intention of stopping there. That is obvious from what he says every time he speaks.
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where else do you expect Barney to overregulate?
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Here is another quote he made. "Increasing inequality in income distribution in this country has broader policy implications, and there is also the growing problem of perverse incentives that result from executives receiving grossly disproportionate compensation based on decisions they themselves take." That sounds like he wants to control income.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If you wish to take that tact then the minimum wage should be repealed.
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  the government "minimum wage" program only applies to state and federal jobs.
  
  It doesn't apply to the overall job market. If a state wants to increase their own minimum wage then they will....otherwise it is not uniform for normal jobs.
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I agree, the minimum wage is a bad thing.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So allow greed to take charge and let the chips fall where they may?
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What is the advantage of the minimum wage. Who can live on $7.00 an hour?
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If greed can take advantage of the regulations we have in place such as minimum wage which has eroded the middle class anyway, letting the minimum wage disapear is no big deal when the result would be even lower wages?
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The market place will take care of wages on it's own. It would also allow small business to hire kids for $5 or $6 an hour and expand their business.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, excellent point. Imagine, hiring our own kids instead of illegal aliens.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  When would the glorious moving out day of your kids take place when they saved up enough money to move out on $5 or $6 an hour?
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  By definition, high school kids live at home. Didn't you ever have a job in high school?
  report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Your example is not typical of the minimum wage earners who have jobs at Kmart and other stores that prey upon this condition. How about the big box stores that provide no health care along with the minimum wages. You are paying for that as well. There are far too many examples of this situation to cite but without any regulations we will be held powerless to corporate greed.
  report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If you're talking about the executive pay & bonuses for companies that, through their own incompetence, needed a government bailout, that's already happened. No ominous horror-flick background music necessary.
  reply report
  62
  prettydarkhorseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Economists generally agree that certain amounts of inequality are necessary and desirable but that excessive inequality leads to efficiency problems and social injustice, but he cant do that because this is free economy and shoud have little regualtions,,,,he is a little bit dictating eh??
  reply report
4. 80
  LiamBeanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Funny how those little missing details make such a huge difference eh?
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But it sounds so much more provocative the other way doesn't it?
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "It must be destroyed!"
  Is that scary or hopeful?
  reply report
66
Flightkeeperposted 14 years ago
Sorry blog erika, I thought that post was directed at me. My bad.
reply report
70
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
unregulated products and bring about trouble for the financial industry, just like the sub-prime mortgages did.

greedy people will find ways to get away with whatever they can, when no one is looking. Even at the expense of those who don't know any better.
reply report
0
Madame Xposted 14 years ago
Our government has been slowly expanding itself for decades - this isn't exactly a surprise
reply report
1. 80
  LiamBeanposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Under every administration too.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Of course - the dems just want to move faster
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  That's why Dems tend to get voted in. Your beef should be with Repubs who claim to want to pare back the size of the state but usually expand it. The Dems are just doing what their electorate asked them to do.
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh I definitely have a beef with the republicans as well! But the democrats are socialist! They want to make everyone equal everyone the same except the political elite, the unions and thsoe that give them money!
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The two parties are indistinguishable when it comes to your definition. Both parties want to share non of the wealth with the lower class and are destroying the middle class in the process.
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It's not about sharing the wealth! It's about freedom! Freedom to make choices and to deal with the choices you make and accept responsibility for them! The government should have NO ROLE in the free markets! It's when they get involved that they create opportunities for others to game the system!
  The government's only role in society is to promote prosperity. It's up to individuals to achieve economic success, not for the government to give it to them!
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Your altruistic approach is based on some type of all good things will come to pass with out any intervention. This has been proven wrong with the recent collapse of the economy and the people hurt by no fault of their own.
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The collapse of the economy was caused by the very thing we are talking about. Over regulation by the government.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Really, how does that relate to the sub prime debacle and the collapse of tariff trade with China and the Wall Street bail out of the very rich?
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Fannie May and Freddie Mac were set up by the government to give loans to people that could not afford them. There were warnings about the eminent collapse 7 or 8 years ago. The Dems in congress said that there was no problem. Franklin Raines was said to be an asset to the operation. He personally made over 90 million in 6 years running the loan programs, that were in trouble back then. That is what started the collapse.
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  over regulation? not....greed caused it.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  His approach is exactly the opposite of altruistic. Our system of government was set up as a tri-partate system where one branch of government would be held in check by the other two. It specifically takes into account and acknowledges the darker side of human nature. The place we are in right now is because the people have rested on what was supposedly guaranteed to them by those that came before.
  
  As the saying goes - "freedon isn't free" - we have to work at it.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Nobody is saying that we don't have to work at it but when an advantage is gained through illegal or immoral methods there has to be a check mark put in place to not allow it to happen again.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah - except they now own all the judges too. There was a time when judges had to pay no income tax because then (the theory goes) they could not be coerced by government corruption. Well they did away with that. So to whom do we turn at this point? I'm not saying I have the answer, but I definitely know that giving government more control is not it.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But in a marketplace devoid of regulation there would be all sorts of skullduggery. It is similar to having no patenting system where everyone could exploit every new idea that comes along without any repercussions. In reality it would stymy any new industry and or enterprise. The most powerful would dominate because of their resources and influence. Any idea they come up with is in effect the "right" idea.
  It can't work and is not working for that matter.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not saying it's an either/or proposition. What you have just described is what we have right now WITH regulation. I have heard countless stories of Microsoft stealing this or that invention and then being made to pay 100's of millions in court. What I haven't heard about is how many times they've actually gotten away with it.
  
  It's how those regs are applied and by whom.
  report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Your suposition of how many times Microsoft has gotten away with doesn't negate the fact that everyone involved in the process has respect for the patent system and the little guy has access to the bigger picture because of it.
  
  Look I am not in favor of Big Brother tactics by the government but I am not in favor of the power and influence big business enjoys because of a lack of regulation. I deal with this everyday and find that the small business people are very sensitive to this problem and do want some sort of control in place.
  report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  My point is precisely that the little guy is getting screwed, access or not to the PTO, by the likes of Microsoft and other behemoths, with plenty of regs already in place. It's not about regs per se but how they're applied and by whom. These huge entities buy most of the regs that are in place only to suit themselves.
  report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  This is absolutely how government works! Government doesn't write the laws, lobbyists do! And Congress doesn't even read them! Votes are purchased through the exchange of earmarks! All of this is done to maintain the power of the incumbents and to enrich the contributors! Health care like anything else is about power, manipulation and control at the expense of the taxpayer and freedom!
  report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The vigilance that the goverment employs is not the issue but the legal right to proceed is. Sure government is big and it is sloppy and we (taxpayer) are left to clean it up. But your "Wild West" approach to abandoning regulation in favor of the "Outlaws" rising to the top is so counter to any sane thinking. With the NAFTA and other trade agreements that have put in effect a wide open trade policy has desimated the manufacturing sector of our economy. Sure it was politicians that were paid by lobbyists but the effect is that big business without regulations in place have robbed us of our jobs and enslaved another people to sell us product we can't afford because we have lost our jobs. Big Business and the marketplace took total advantage of this situation. In 1963 we produced 95% of all domestic clothing. In 2009 we now produce 5% of all domestic clothing. The jobs are gone and will not return.
  report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It's not altruistic at all! It's common sense! If there was no money and no government there would still be a free market, a buyer and a seller which would come to a meeting of the minds, an agreement to exchange goods and or services and both would be happy.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But what if you are in collusion to eliminate the competition? Is it okay because you have the power to do so?
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But isn't that what the government is doing? Eliminating competition? The government has no profit margin so it can sell services at cost or even below cost until all others are out of business. Government will be the sole provider, the sole payer of health care and government makes the rules and enforces the rules, just like the income tax system! This bill is about power!!! Taking it away from you and me and taking control over our lives!
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  that sounds like paranoia
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I agree that does take it to an extreme. The thing is that we are now here because of what we have not done to stop it. The only thing I hear from the naysayers is to do nothing to change it.
  
  Sounds a little insane.
  report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Remember, it's not paranoia if they're really out to get you
  report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOL Just in case huh?
  report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You must be talking about the White House trying to eliminate Fox News from the competition.
  reply report
  52
  remikiss1posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  0
  sneakorocksolidposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What is this crap?
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You hit the nail on the head
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sounds lovely in theory, and sounds like Columbia in practice.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly - which is to force in a communist police state and get rid of personal sovereignty
  reply report
70
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
what else is new with politicians......first they want in and once in more power is wanted.....regardless of how they get it.
reply report
0
Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago
Rahm Emanuel has said, "never let a good crisis go to waste" The democrats see their time is now, to seize this opportunity to push their agenda, to fundamentally transform America into a socialist state!
reply report
1. 70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  communism, socialism, democracy, and every other form of government is always about control.
  reply report
70
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
the next thing you know.....government will try to strip the entire constitution....
reply report
1. 0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Ahem . . . try?
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Massachusetts is already stripping the right of choice.
  reply report
70
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
on top of really poor assumption that the real-estate property would never go down. Which was really stupid.

bankers, traders and others...expected the real-estate market to never pull back. That was really dumb.
reply report
62
prettydarkhorseposted 14 years ago
i just so thought in a free market economy, the governments only role is to see to it that there is no fraud committed and that the main decisions are in the hands or the interactions between buyers and sellers, which is deemed not in opposite directions!
reply report
1. 0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, unless one side decides to buy a politician and tilt the scales in his favor
  reply report
  62
  prettydarkhorseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  yes thats it, I still think that there is more advantages if we just let the actors play (buyers and sellers)and not intevene. we should take lesson from the case of soem european countries which have more of a welfare kind of economy...their health care systems is at flawed and more people are disillusioned.
  reply report
61
mikelongposted 14 years ago
Government having no role in enterprise is ludicrous and unfounded, in my opinion.

While the United States expanded its business mind in the 19th and 20th century the government, in one way or another, has been greatly involved, either through the forwarding of cash, or through bills and laws that enabled large landowners to connect their tracts to major urban centers........

There is more to be said here.........but if one wants to think about fear, how about the Citigroup memos on plutonomy (both parts)....

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674229/Citig … Part-2...,

and then compounded with a memo last year regarding gold prices and the likelyhood that the world we know it will collapse...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comm … s.html....

"The bank said the damage caused by the financial excesses of the last quarter century was forcing the world's authorities to take steps that had never been tried before.

This gamble was likely to end in one of two extreme ways: with either a resurgence of inflation; or a downward spiral into depression, civil disorder, and possibly wars. Both outcomes will cause a rush for gold."

and.....

"We are already seeing countries on the periphery of Europe under severe stress. Some leaders are now at record levels of unpopularity. There is a risk of domestic unrest, starting with strikes because people are feeling disenfranchised."

....and they got bailout money.....planning for whose future?

It has been the government, not enterprise, that has opened doors for the diverse peoples of this nation, and it is government, for government is ourselves, to ensure companies like citigroup are controlled.....for they are simply profiteers......through whatever means necessary.

Who's ready for what's next?
reply report
1. 0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There is no place in the constitution that says the government should involve itself in the free trade of the people. It's only role is to ensure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Through forcibly taking "control" of more and more aspects of our lives we are now in the mess we're in right now.
  reply report
2. 0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Being greatly involved doesn't mean that prosperity couldn't have been achieved without government involvement! I could say greater prosperity would have been achieved if government wasn't involved, of course just like when Obama says the economy would be worse if the government didn't get involved, there would be no way to prove my claim!
  
  Corporations seek profit, that's what they do, people seek wealth to improve their station, that's what we do and government's role should be to see that we all succeed to our greatest ability while taking the minimum from us in taxes to do so and to be a responsible fiduciary of our money. Government has failed, and continues to push foolish policies which threaten to bankrupt our nation. We are being lead into anarchy down the path of socialism!
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Perfect answer.
  reply report
63
Mishaposted 14 years ago
Nah, I am not scared anymore. All my and family members' papers are in order, and we are ready to move out any moment, letting you guys experience the wonders of communism on your own. We had enough of those wonders before.
reply report
1. 60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where are you from?
  reply report
  63
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOL Originally from Russia
  reply report
  60
  speaseposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So you know first hand what an out of control government can do.
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  He puts his finger right on it every time
  reply report
  63
  Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh yeah, no question. I started having flashbacks right after 9/11, when they started the propaganda machine for Iraq war. Since then it is getting more and more recognizable every day.
  reply report
  87
  livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think "Where are you going?" might yield a more interesting answer.
  reply report
0
Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago
It's not paranoia! These guys aren't going to read this bill! Obama promised to put the debate on cspan, but instead it's taking place behind closed doors.

You have to understand the income tax is the way it is because a fair tax or a flat tax would eliminate the ability of Congress to revise the tax code to suit the needs of lobbyists. Who gets what deductions or relief is decided by congress. Now, those same kinds of decisions will be made over the health care industry and you and me will be in the middle, paying for it all!

It's not paranoia! Money IS power! Back in the old days when you had to pay your doctor, you negotiated with him cost and terms. We have now sacrificed that power and have given it to the insurance companies. What this bill will do is give that power to the government! And this is just the beginning!

Once the government is in charge, they will be forced to regulate your health! They will justify this because they claim they need to be responsible with taxpayers money.

This bill, government health care is a trap, a deal with the devil and you will pay with your soul, secured with the chains of submission and servitude! Don't fall for it!
reply report
1. 71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What is the answer to your dilemma?
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If he had one he'd run for president! Then we could all vote for him - I would
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Vote for who? Answer to what? I think I missed something in the translation....
  reply report
  0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Poppa Blues. Rhamson was asking Poppa Blues "What is the answer to your dilemma?"
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  See, I told you I lost something in translation....
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What about us? Should we wait and look for the Golden Child to answer all of this? The politics of this country is dedicated to division. How can a devisive institution come up with a fair and conclusive answer. Just say no never worked and we need answers.
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  First of all people should pay the doctor directly for their health care. Insurance policies should be for catastrophic illness but policies should be available nationwide across state lines. The companies will come up with plans that serve the needs of what the market is asking for. Managed care is a failed experiment. People that can't afford care are treated now in emergency rooms at a cost of 116 billion dollars a year, so theoretically everyone already is covered. A basic plan can be provided that can be deducted from your income taxes or a tax credit can be issued if you meet a means test based on you income and dependent situation. This can all be done for very little money and very quickly!
  
  If there's waste in medicare lets find it and get rid of it! Why do we have to rebuild a whole new health care system from the ground up to do so? Medicare can combine with the VA to negotiate drug prices and pass those savings onto seniors. The VA already does a great job keeping the costs of medications down, combining with Medicare could give them added leverage.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The problem with paying the Doctor directly is that it is far too expensive for many people. That is why collectively the insurance companies and medicare can reduce this cost.
  
  Another tax and responsibility of business to pay for us is what is crippling business now.
  
  I can't imagine fighting an insurance company in California for benefits denied when I live in Maryland. The catastrophic factor scares me even more.
  
  The unfunded 116 billion dollars already covered by the deficit of insurance for everyone is not a fix. Another income tax or credit to pay for healthcare can only work on a large scale basis to be mostly paid by healthy people. The horrors associated with the VA Hospitals is not a model I would cite as a good alternative especially with recent news reports about its' quality of healthcare.
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Doctors charge up to 3 times maybe more of what they would charge if you were to pay them directly with cash! The point here is when you have managed care you go to the doctor for any little thing because the sense is it isn't coming out of your pocket. But the doctor has to have a staff that deals with the insurance company and denials and forms and tracking payments, it's a huge cost that does nothing for the patient! Without that the doctor can charge much less!
  
  If the goal is to insure everybody and the public is willing to accept that some people will die simply because they are poor, then you have to pay for that somehow. Doing through the tax code would be the easiest way without adding a whole new layer of government. Of course, ideally if I had my way, I'd eliminate the income tax all together and replace it with a national sales tax.
  
  Well I've used the VA so yes I agree the care is not the best. Indeed I almost lost my life because of their "care". That's one of the reasons I'm so opposed to government health care. I've seen it and it sucks! That said, they do a great job controlling the cost of medications.
  reply report
  70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The problem with the VA is that its the people or idiots running the program.
  
  The other problem that exists which no one is talking about is that many smaller ailments can be treated with herbal remedies, but the drug manufacturers are hiding that fact so they can keep their profit margins. How is this beneficial to society? Who is getting the best care? Too many drug products have more and more side-effects, which can cause so many other problems.
  
  Again, this is because- BUSINESS has a strangle-hold on Congress. The knowledge of other remedies for ailments is critical to society. The drugs offered, even tylenol, advil and any form of anti-biotics can damage your system, ruin certain organs in the body and even kill some people.
  
  BUSINESS has no regard for human life, because they are not worried about what's best for citizens.....They are only concerned about their bottomline.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Your taking the collective bargaining out of the equation will only hinder any efforts to reduce costs. Perhaps some tort reform could help but the current system relies on collective bargaining and that is what the medical business understands. Poor people and the uninsured make up a great deal of people who cannot get medical insurance. Some estimate up to 50 million. That is a large chunk to let fend for themselves let alone die.
  
  I am sorry for your run ins with the VA and I know it is because of neccesity that you deal with them but they are terrrificaly underfunded and are a bad example of good management.
  
  The problem is immense and if we leave it up to the individual to solve there is little power in the power of one to solve it.
  reply report
2. 70
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  They are already regulating your health. They put taxes on the things that are bad, so you'll stop spending on them and look for healthier ways to live?
  
  And, your point?
  
  My point is that BUSINESS needs to let go of Congress.
  
  How ever, that isn't going to happen until the PEOPLE finally put an end by using their voting power they way it was designed to be used.
  reply report
  71
  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you!
  reply report
70
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
I guess the biggest and most scariest problem we(all) have is that business has a strangle-hold on Congress because of donations, contributions and lobbyists & special interests groups who like to ensure America is always divided.

Many different organizations are destroying this country, slowly but surely.
reply report
71
rhamsonposted 14 years ago
We are in trouble. Who is responding to who?
reply report
62
Daniel Carterposted 14 years ago
My observation is the more entitled we become, such as everyone is entitled to national healthcare, the more laws need to be enacted to make it "fair." But then it still isn't fair because people are not treated right, the fall through the cracks, etc. It's the same old story as before. The difference is that people die from not being able afford health care one way, and people die from too much red tape the other way.

And we all grow poorer, subsidizing it all to make it "fair."

There are no easy answers. As long as big business, the money industry, and insurance have their tentacles on the balls of congress, this problem will only worsen, I believe. They own this country and have threatened our government with crisis they created. It's a frightening time.

I believe it really is time for us to take some power back by choosing carefully who of these businesses we deal with--if at all--and keep our money closer to home circulating through smaller companies and people in which we can develop some kind of trust.

All that said, there no point in crying about the sky falling. It's been falling for a hell of a long time. We just get used to being hit with giant chunks of it, but suddenly the chunks could kill us.
reply report
0
Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago
You'll never insure everyone! Even this bill leaves 20 million without insurance! The worst part about this bill though is a mandate that FORCES you to buy insurance! That is just unacceptable!!

The best way to insure the most people is to make the country the most prosperous in the world! To make sure everyone has a job and can make a decent wage and can afford to buy insurance IF they want to!

The best way to do that is to cut taxes, especially corporate taxes to the bone and to pay for it, reduce the size of government! If you empower individuals, you incentivize them to reach for the stars of success! When people know that the harder they work the more they make and the more of that they keep the wealthier they become, they will work harder! If government gives us everything why should we work? If government takes 1/2 of what we earn where's the incentive?

Get off the backs of the people and get out of their wallets, their savings, their property and watch what we can do!!!
reply report
1. 0
  Madame Xposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It worked that way for a looong time. Why did anyone want to change it?
  reply report
  0
  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  No one wanted to change it. It happened when we weren't looking when we became too apathetic to care. Government is a serpent, a slithering snake that sneaks into the cracks and shadows of despair and tempts us with it's shiny apple of answers to all of our problems.... but it's a poison apple that enslave us and makes us beholden to them!
  reply report
66
Flightkeeperposted 14 years ago
Actually if you negotiate with the doctor directly instead of having to go through insurance, it's cheaper. No processing costs, no waiting time.
reply report
72
EYEAM4ANARCHYposted 14 years ago
I appreciate the honesty.
reply report
61
mikelongposted 14 years ago
As to the "perfect answer" listed earlier, it is only so if one ignores American history and development.

It was the government/business coalition promoting strictly controlled immigration in order, largely, to undermine an already established workforce, white, black, and hispanic, keeping labor weak and cheap.

Perhaps the "perfect answer" folks are those who aid in setting up such unnatural imbalances and profiteering from them, but that is not for me.

The problem with many people is that they have very little clue as to why the United States became so powerful in the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.

If it had not been for the government invading Mexico under false pretenses and enacting and enforcing the laws that permitted wealthy industrialists to acquire land and labor at cut rate deals there would be no success.

Like the Ottoman Empire, American strength lies in controlling trade routes, and through them, markets. The rail lines are all regulated by the federal government, and the land they ride on was subsidized by the American taxpayers, not business.

Government hands of business?

Let's see if you can answer this first.....

Why did Los Angeles become the city it is today?

There really is but one reason......
reply report
61
garynewposted 14 years ago
It would have been far scarier ANYONE other than BF--who may or may not currently HAVE a BF--said it.
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Does this scare anyone else?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Does this scare anyone else?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies