The Road to Ruin.

Posted By: AZ Moderate
Posted on: Jan. 25, 2008 at 2:30 PM

15 Comments

5.0 / 5

Based on 1 ratings.

Email Friend

Add to Favorites Add to del.icio.us

del.icio.us

Digg It!

Slashdot It!

This Bushiite regime has almost a year to engineer the final coup de grâce to America. The plan is to make it a tin pot dictatorship like Argentina was under Juan Peron - and they are making unbelievable progress.

This injection of $800.00/$1600.00 ... No, $600.00/$1200.00 … No, $300.00/$600.00 … No, back to $600.00/$1200.00 per some individuals/some couples, with maybe $300.00 per child … except if you are retired, or … ARRRRRHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

This is such a @*&!! stupid ploy for political gain! It sure as Hell is a tear drop in the ocean of our economy. This expenditure would be so much more effective if it were to be spent on sorely needed infrastructure renovation. But NOOO. These @*&!! Dimocrats are slithering right under the Bush for political cover.

Pelosi, wake up!! The only possible way to avoid another seven years of terrible damage to our nation in Bush’s final year is to IMPEACH him and his. You are supposed to be the check to balance this self styled Holy Roman Emperor. That's what you exist for as a leader in Congress. What the @*&!! Hell is wrong with you!

I just received a second notice of membership renewal in the Dumocratic party. You will be receiving that shortly in the mail, sans any debased American currency at all. The ‘Other’ box will be checked, however, and the word ‘Notice’ entered to draw attention to a nice enclosed letter along the lines of this posting.

There is no way in that political Hell you inhabit within the Beltway that you will ever even know about that letter, let alone read it. But if enough of us that are absolutely fed up with you and Bush write a letter to your handlers, they may start tallying them. That might get your bright eyed attention.

Now that I have voted for John Edwards by mail in the Arizona Dimocratic primary, I am going to change my registration to Independent. Count on that too, you @*& stupid power grubbing traitor!!

But don’t get me started…

Tags: America bush democrat republican economy dictatorship party

Click here to view more articles by AZ Moderate

Rate This Article | Create Account

Anonymous commenting has been disabled, you must login to comment on articles.

Signup for an account

Comments:

1 2 Next »

Phaedrus

Jan. 25, 2008 at 04:09:21 PM

View Profile

I was going to work on an article on stimulus that will actually goose the economy and move the American family income and wealth back up, after 7 years of Conservative Republican Supply Side Reagonomics that has pushed the middle class to the brink. Isn't it odd that median family income is below where it was in 2000! As if a $1200 check in 5 months is going to change that at all. We need to publicly acknowledge that supply side theory works in exactly the way it is meant to; it provides incentives and stimulus to the wealthy and corporations to create supply, which then sits on shelves until a clearance sale.

Report Abuse

know it All

Jan. 25, 2008 at 05:10:20 PM

View Profile

What do we do with this windfall?

Some might try and pay off their gas card. If only they didn’t push those SUVs on us, and raise gas prices to over $3.00 a gallon. We could spend that refund on food instead of interest.

Some might try and catch up on their electric bill.

Hell some might even be able to pay the over draft charges or late payment fees.

It won’t stimulate the economy, but it might stop some of the costipation.

Report Abuse

prometheus

Jan. 25, 2008 at 06:24:55 PM

View Profile

I am not even going to buy a plasma T.V. I am just going to mail it right back to China without making a purchase! That will teach them

Report Abuse

adam

Jan. 25, 2008 at 07:40:04 PM

View Profile

I am going to pay my taxes with it....

Report Abuse

adam

Jan. 25, 2008 at 11:18:40 PM

View Profile

All of the Iraq and Afghanistan war money -- about $11 billion a month -- is effectively being put on a government credit card at a time when U.S. government debt has skyrocketed to more than $9 trillion, up from around $5.6 trillion when Bush took office in January 2001.

...

Interest payments on the debt will total an estimated $2.7 trillion over the next decade, the CBO said.

The Road to Ruin is paved in monopoly money..

Report Abuse

www.MoronInCharge.com

Jan. 26, 2008 at 12:48:56 PM

View Profile

It has become high comedy that every Republic vying for the office of POTUS pledges to cut your taxes. Basically their entire stump speech has become, "Vote for me and I'll write you a check . . . oh, and 9-11: we're all gonna die!!!"

Now an economic stimulus package to increase spending when everybody is in fear of doing do will have a momentary positive effect on the economy, as measured by short-term economic indicators. Of course, such a stimulus, like caffeine, cannot be applied continuously because the overall health of the economic body will suffer greatly. At best, a good stimulus package is a morning coffee pick me up. It might smooth out the trough, but the economy is still tired and needs to drastically reform its sleep schedule if it wants to avoid collapsing from exhaustion.

The stimulus package proposed by the President and rubber stamped by the Congress is a bad cup of Joe. This coffee has been spiked by arsenic. I might be wrong, but I am not sure how corporate tax breaks -- something that has not been in short demand in the seven years preceding this meltdown -- will help to increase spending now.

An interesting point was made in an AZ Republic op-ed piece the other day:

Jump-start economy: Give health care to all

Jan 23, 2008

Let the president and the Congress uses the $150 billion to expand Medicare and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and segue into a universal health-care system.

If health contingencies would be covered, I'd be delighted to go out and replace my seven-year-old laptop and eight-year-old car.

- Andrea Gasten, Scottsdale

That is brilliant. If you want an economic stimulus package that will work for everybody, and fix more than just an economic slump, fix health care once and for all. That will be a lot better than another puny check in the mail.

Report Abuse

adam

Jan. 26, 2008 at 01:18:10 PM

View Profile

MiC,

Is is possible to "fix" healthcare without rescinding the special legislation and powers given to the pharmaceutical and insurance industries?

It has been some time since I was directly involved, but I do remember the power of the pharmiceutical companies and how it impacted the choice of treatment (drugs).

A bit off topic.

Should pharamceutical companies advertise for products that you cannot buy without governmental permission (OTC)?

Report Abuse

www.MoronInCharge.com

Jan. 26, 2008 at 02:28:27 PM

View Profile

[This is a reply to comment by adam on Jan. 26, 2008 at 01:18:10 PM]

adam
Jan. 26, 2008 at 01:18:10 PM

MiC,
Is is possible to "fix" healthcare without rescinding the special legislation and powers given to the pharmaceutical and insurance industries?
It has been some time since I was directly involved, but I do remember the power of...

View this Comment

The answer is no. The health care industry will never be "fixed" if the pharmaceutical industry is not sufficiently regulated and the medical insurance industry is not radically reformed. We might arrive at the former (reigning in Big Pharma) incrementally, but for now the primary crisis to address to making medical care available to everyone regardless of ability to pay, and the only way that is possible without forever escalating costs is publicly funded single payer universal health care.

Should the pharmaceutical industry be allowed to publicly pitch Rx meds? From the point of view of the doctor, it makes our job a royal headache. To offer an analogy, it is like people who don't know science, lecturing to me the "science" talking points they heard about 9-11. But be that as it may, to force the pharm industry to not advertise gets into huge issues of free speech. It's a thorny issue, to be sure.

Report Abuse

AZ Moderate

Jan. 27, 2008 at 12:39:42 AM

View Profile

" ...forever escalating costs is publicly funded single payer universal health care. '

I am surprised at your stance in this MoronInCharge. Should I be? How popular is that stance in the medical profession?

Care to elaborate on that issue a little?

Report Abuse

www.MoronInCharge.com

Jan. 27, 2008 at 02:16:07 AM

View Profile

The way you chopped the quote makes my statement kind of confusing, so to restate:

We will never reign in accelerating health care spending, nor provide good quality health care (with an emphasis on prevention) for every American if the private insurers stay in the business of being the profit-driven middleman, planting themselves firmly in between doctor and patient like a border fence.

They are not in the business of facilitating medical care for the patient, or paying the doctor. They are in the business of denying both. The more they can deny authorization of a medical examination/procedure, or reject a claim for payment on the basis of an ad hoc technicality, the more profit they make. This profit really does gold-plate the bathroom fixtures inside the CEOs Lear Jet.

It should not be surprising at all to see doctors fed up with the necessity of hiring a team of billers to deal with a dozen different insurers capricious rules, navigate through reams of paper work and red tape, and jump through the hoops to get a payment. If we had a single payer, we can take that medical billing office personnel and actually use them to provide patient care - a commodity we have a shortage of. Doctors are also fed up with a non-medical puke on the other end of their phone, telling your schedulers that your patient is not authorized to get the test that all his or her doctors agreed was needed. We're funny about our autonomy, and believe that doctors should practice medicine, not insurance agents.

Now all three of the Democratic candidates for POTUS are pushing a very similar form of universal health care that requires everybody to purchase insurance, and will supplement those who cannot with our tax dollars. I do not have a problem with our tax dollars paying for universal health care -- we are all paying for it right now when someone without insurance goes to the ER. But I do have a problem with our tax dollars being used to bring the private insurers even more business and profits. They would not have any new motivation for cost containment or changing their "denial" ways under such a plan. And they would make a killing at government expense. That's something we can't afford in the long run. Still, as a incremental step in the right direct, it's better than the big fat zero the Republican candidates are offering.

Keep in mind that single payer universal health care does not "socialize" medicine. Physicians still practice medicine and the hospitals still operate exactly as they do now. It simply changes the way medical care is payed for. With single payer, every doctor is "in plan." With universal health care, no one who needs medical care goes without; or prolongs the seeking of treatment until the treatment has become much more expensive, or the disease incurable.

We are all going to get seriously sick or hurt one day, and we will need medical care (unless we die suddenly). Consequently, we all need medical insurance, because the consequences of being seriously ill or wounded would financially devastate almost all of us (it's currently the number one cause of all bankruptcies). But the premiums for private insurance are a joke. Sure, you may only have to pay only a couple hundred dollars a month when you are in your twenties, but if you plan on getting much older, be ready for your premiums to exponentially increase. Don't plan on getting diabetes; after that diagnosis you might find yourself suddenly unable to afford your instantly tripled $10K a month premium. Maybe you'll luck out and defy the odds, staying healthy until the age of 90, saving up all your money just in case, and then dying in your sleep. Just hope that you don't have a parent, sibling, or child that needs your help for their medical care.

So if most of us are going to have to pay through the nose at one point or another through our for-profit private payer system now in effect, wouldn't it be preferable to pay a small payroll tax all along, support a public insurance plan that operates at 3% overhead instead of the 30-40% overhead intrinsic to the private insurance industry, and never have to worry about a medical calamity again?

And talk about economic stimulus. As a consumer, you will be much more inclined to splurge with your money if you didn't live in constant fear of being one paycheck away from financial ruin should you get sick. You might also find it easier to pull out your wallet if you were suddenly relieved of the burden of paying astronomical medical insurance premiums. Perhaps you have insurance through your work already. That's great if you are employed and like your job, and the job is stable, and you can do it until retirement. But think of the millions of Americans locked into dead-end jobs because they can't afford to risk going without their work-sponsored insurance. Think of all the potential small business entrepreneurs that once made this country economically great, that will never pursue their dreams because their current brain-dead job covers the insurance bill that they cannot afford on their own. Think of all the people who received a diagnosis of some chronic illness or another while employed at one company, but who can't now take the better job at another company because they have a different insurance plan, and you now have an expensive pre-existing condition under the new plan. Think of all the businesses that would like to compete on a more level playing field with the foreign competition, but they can't, because they have to spend $3000 per employee for health insurance, and the foreign company's employees are covered under a universal health care plan.

I could go on about this for pages, and presently I am actively involved with a group intending to establish single payer universal health care in Arizona by either ballot initiative or legislation (more on that later). But for now, there may actually be hope that if a Democrat wins in 2008, you will see a much more enlightened single payer universal plan pushed through a Democratically controlled Congress than either candidate is talking about now. The political reality is that a general election might not be the best time to talk about revolutionary change (at least with these three). And they might be right, because the only guy that was talking about real single payer universal health care was Kucinich, and that didn't work out so well for him.

Report Abuse

1 2 Next »