No offense, but the way you wrote that leads me to believe you wanted to "research" them (aka find a label) more than actually understand what their actual political ideals were.Macbeth wrote:
Well every single one I've met...every single one...everyone...
I've tried multiple times too.
Your last paragraph is where your politicians fail, they are bickering about their own "political babies" only ... the tea party think they can legislate a balanced budget without coming up with a good solution as to how, the republicans think they can balance the budget without increasing tax and the democrats think they can without decreasing government spending ...Jay wrote:
I did, it's bollocks. The Tea Party are the only ones pushing for fiscal sanity. Who else demands cuts in spending? Not the Democrats, their solution is always tax increases followed by more spending. It's not your typical Republicans, they spend their time denying global warming and trying to ban gay marriage. The Tea Party made economics a burning issue the other two would rather ignore.Varegg wrote:
Read the post again ... nothing like that is implied in my post ...Jay wrote:
So you think there wouldn't have been a downgrade if the Republixans had just fallen in line behind Obama and approved the debt ceiling increase without making it an issue?
Do I agree completely with them? Hardly. I feel spending should go down AND taxes raised in order to balance the budget. There is nothing super right wing about people advocating a balanced spending approach. The media should be behind them instead of trying to marginalize them at every opportunity.
And then there is the only solution like you said it: Cut spending, raise the tax a little bit and balance the budget with bipartisan talks ... time for the politicians to work for the people for a change ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Then you're doing it wrongFEOS wrote:
Fun fact: the US's socialized medicine is one of the primary contributors to the debt that drove the downgrade.Uzique wrote:
Fun Fact: All AAA rating countries now have socialized medicine (now that US is not AAA).
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
We have had socialized medicine for some time. .. just not a single plan that attempts to cover 300+ million people.Varegg wrote:
Then you're doing it wrongFEOS wrote:
Fun fact: the US's socialized medicine is one of the primary contributors to the debt that drove the downgrade.Uzique wrote:
Fun Fact: All AAA rating countries now have socialized medicine (now that US is not AAA).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
You guys should have joined in at the late 40's or early 50's like the rest of us and it would have been perfected by now ... we did it then dispite the cost of rebuilding Europe at the same time with borrowed money from the US ...Kmar wrote:
We have had socialized medicine for some time. .. just not a single plan that attempts to cover 300+ million people.Varegg wrote:
Then you're doing it wrongFEOS wrote:
Fun fact: the US's socialized medicine is one of the primary contributors to the debt that drove the downgrade.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
There is nothing in Europe that compares in the complexity and scale of a plan that is needed to insure an entire nation like the US. We already spend more per citizen on healthcare. That doesn't even include what the states provide... and our individual states have all kinds of healthcare plans. They have for a long time. There is no question that we need reform. However, reform should work on improving what the states can provide. Not handing over more money to Washington.Varegg wrote:
You guys should have joined in at the late 40's or early 50's like the rest of us and it would have been perfected by now ... we did it then dispite the cost of rebuilding Europe at the same time with borrowed money from the US ...Kmar wrote:
We have had socialized medicine for some time. .. just not a single plan that attempts to cover 300+ million people.Varegg wrote:
Then you're doing it wrong
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
You're essentially agreeing with Kmar's point.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
It's much simpler and more cost-effective to deal with the health-care issue (and other social issues) at the state level--as intended by the Framers--than to attempt to deal with it at the Federal level. Local administrators understand the needs of locals better and can implement plans that work locally (ie, more efficiently) than administrators can at the Federal level, who try to apply the "peanut butter method" across the entire nation of 300+ million, non-homogenous population.
You'll hear the term "block grants" quite a bit more in the coming months regarding health care reform. That is the method by which this would be accomplished. Giving each state a block of federal funds to spend as they see fit on health care, vice being told how it must be done by an out of touch federal government.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
EU doesn't provide health care for all of Europe, the individual member states do. That's why the US is the United States of America, each state is effectively its own country with different laws on certain issues.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
I believe we agree on most issues concerning thisKmar wrote:
There is nothing in Europe that compares in the complexity and scale of a plan that is needed to insure an entire nation like the US. We already spend more per citizen on healthcare. That doesn't even include what the states provide... and our individual states have all kinds of healthcare plans. They have for a long time. There is no question that we need reform. However, reform should work on improving what the states can provide. Not handing over more money to Washington.Varegg wrote:
You guys should have joined in at the late 40's or early 50's like the rest of us and it would have been perfected by now ... we did it then dispite the cost of rebuilding Europe at the same time with borrowed money from the US ...Kmar wrote:
We have had socialized medicine for some time. .. just not a single plan that attempts to cover 300+ million people.
Cutting out the middleman (aka insurence) will give you more health pr citizen, might be a good reform to cut spending in social services without the service being downgraded ... and yes I'm making such a claim without having the numbers, that should be grinded down by a comitee of some sort ... your spending should be looked at more closely and analysed tbh.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
That's kinda the same isn't it?Cybargs wrote:
EU doesn't provide health care for all of Europe, the individual member states do. That's why the US is the United States of America, each state is effectively its own country with different laws on certain issues.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
If it works in Europe country by country, why would it not work in the US ... state by state?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Taxation issues and people would more likely to leave the state (Mass. for one).Varegg wrote:
That's kinda the same isn't it?Cybargs wrote:
EU doesn't provide health care for all of Europe, the individual member states do. That's why the US is the United States of America, each state is effectively its own country with different laws on certain issues.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
If it works in Europe country by country, why would it not work in the US ... state by state?
^^ Strange wording tbh?
But why?
But why?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Wealthier citizens would be more likely to leave the state due to taxes as its disproportional for them to pay into insurance via taxes compared to buying individual insurance.Varegg wrote:
^^ Strange wording tbh?
But why?
That's the huge dilemma for the USA
Why?Cybargs wrote:
Wealthier citizens would be more likely to leave the state due to taxes as its disproportional for them to pay into insurance via taxes compared to buying individual insurance.Varegg wrote:
^^ Strange wording tbh?
But why?
That's the huge dilemma for the USA
That will eventually even out ... and why would they leave one state to go live in another that has the same system?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Different states have completely different taxes and systems, compare Texas and California for example. Rural states would usually get fucked due to distance issues.Varegg wrote:
Why?Cybargs wrote:
Wealthier citizens would be more likely to leave the state due to taxes as its disproportional for them to pay into insurance via taxes compared to buying individual insurance.Varegg wrote:
^^ Strange wording tbh?
But why?
That's the huge dilemma for the USA
That will eventually even out ... and why would they leave one state to go live in another that has the same system?
Because we don't believe in the government dictating compensation, which is what would happen if the government replaced insurance.Varegg wrote:
That's kinda the same isn't it?Cybargs wrote:
EU doesn't provide health care for all of Europe, the individual member states do. That's why the US is the United States of America, each state is effectively its own country with different laws on certain issues.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
If it works in Europe country by country, why would it not work in the US ... state by state?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
ObamAA+
I tell you what, scrap your program for an all encompassing EU program and then we'll talk. You are right, we spend more and get less. This is a symptom of larger governments. There is less oversight. Size does matter when considering the bureaucratic mess that comes with it. If you truly can't understand the difference in complexity then you know nothing of our state's rights. Each state has their own constitution as well. And I'd be more comfortable with each state administering their own health care plan.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
.. and Europeans love to bind together when the argument supports their world view. Sometimes it's applicable. Sometimes it's not.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The beauty of the Federalist system is that if you don't like the system implemented in one state, you're free to move to another. This is why I argue so vehemently against expanding the national government. I want choices, and competition for my tax dollars.Kmar wrote:
I tell you what, scrap your program for an all encompassing EU program and then we'll talk. You are right, we spend more and get less. This is a symptom of larger governments. There is less oversight. Size does matter when considering the bureaucratic mess that comes with it. If you truly can't understand the difference in complexity then you know nothing of our state's rights. Each state has their own constitution as well. And I'd be more comfortable with each state administering their own health care plan.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
.. and Europeans love to bind together when the argument supports their world view. Sometimes it's applicable. Sometimes it's not.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Yea, we're on the same page here. However, with healthcare there would need to be some sort of Mutual State Recognition.. and open up buying across state lines.Jay wrote:
The beauty of the Federalist system is that if you don't like the system implemented in one state, you're free to move to another. This is why I argue so vehemently against expanding the national government. I want choices, and competition for my tax dollars.Kmar wrote:
I tell you what, scrap your program for an all encompassing EU program and then we'll talk. You are right, we spend more and get less. This is a symptom of larger governments. There is less oversight. Size does matter when considering the bureaucratic mess that comes with it. If you truly can't understand the difference in complexity then you know nothing of our state's rights. Each state has their own constitution as well. And I'd be more comfortable with each state administering their own health care plan.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Sorry what?
Why is that whenever the US is criticised on this forum the opposing argument is "You cannot compare xyz with America because it is soo much bigger."
If size is the root cause of all of the USAs problems then maybe they should split up into smaller countries?
No I dont think that would solve anything because ultimately I dont buy the whole size argument. If the problem is that the directives are too centralised then give the states more power to be able to implement the changes / policies effectively on a more local level.
I cant see the system is that much more complex between the EU and USA.
Just because you spend the most per citizen does not mean anything. What are you getting for your money? Not a lot.
Throwing money at problems does not make them go away, I thought the US would have figured that out by now.
.. and Europeans love to bind together when the argument supports their world view. Sometimes it's applicable. Sometimes it's not.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The opening up across state lines is the key. There is an old law that is still on the books (name escapes me at the moment) that prevents it. It's the same law that requires different auto insurance policies in each state.Kmar wrote:
However, with healthcare there would need to be some sort of Mutual State Recognition.. and open up buying across state lines.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Short list of credit ratings by countries:
AAA Australia, Canada, UK, Finland, France, Germany, Singapore.
AA+ U.S., Belgium, N.Z.
AA Bermuda, Kuwait, Slovenia
AA- CHINA, JAPAN, SAUDI ARABIA.
A+ Italy
A Estonia, Israel
A- Botswana
BBB+ Brazil, Ireland
BBB Mexico, Russia
BBB- Portugal
BB+ Indonesia
BB Guatmala
BB- Egypt
B+ Albania
B Uganda
B- Pakistan
CC Greece
AAA Australia, Canada, UK, Finland, France, Germany, Singapore.
AA+ U.S., Belgium, N.Z.
AA Bermuda, Kuwait, Slovenia
AA- CHINA, JAPAN, SAUDI ARABIA.
A+ Italy
A Estonia, Israel
A- Botswana
BBB+ Brazil, Ireland
BBB Mexico, Russia
BBB- Portugal
BB+ Indonesia
BB Guatmala
BB- Egypt
B+ Albania
B Uganda
B- Pakistan
CC Greece
Last edited by Karbin (2011-08-16 19:03:42)