Stimulus bill is a Trojan Horse

[Truthmatters]

I heard they must be shaped in the form of Sara Palins hair. They also have to hold hands in the urinals.

 

[Ravi]

I heard they must be shaped in the form of Sara Palins hair. They also have to hold hands in the urinals.

And tap their feet to announce their presence.

 

[Truthmatters]

Especially if they have a wide stance.

 

[Diuretic]

Link requesters - fair go, this is Frazz's own work. I can tell

 

[Truthmatters]

No under his rules he has to document what we say.

 

[del]

it would require that healthcare be rationed for seniors. In other words -it would require that doctors base their decision to treat someone - on their age.

Link?

I think you are full of shit but here's your chance to prove otherwise.

here, knock yourself out. the pertinent info is contained between roughly PP440 and 540.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1eh.txt.pdf

 

[Ravi]

it would require that healthcare be rationed for seniors. In other words -it would require that doctors base their decision to treat someone - on their age.

Link?

I think you are full of shit but here's your chance to prove otherwise.

here, knock yourself out. the pertinent info is contained between roughly PP440 and 540.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1eh.txt.pdf

Um, thanks? That portion was about Information Technology. Could you give me a phrase to search for?

 

[del]

Link?

I think you are full of shit but here's your chance to prove otherwise.

here, knock yourself out. the pertinent info is contained between roughly PP440 and 540.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1eh.txt.pdf

Um, thanks? That portion was about Information Technology. Could you give me a phrase to search for?

no, read it or not. it's your choice, and it was primarily about health care and IT.

 

[Ravi]

here, knock yourself out. the pertinent info is contained between roughly PP440 and 540.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1eh.txt.pdf

Um, thanks? That portion was about Information Technology. Could you give me a phrase to search for?

no, read it or not. it's your choice, and it was primarily about health care and IT.

I did read it.

 

[del]

Um, thanks? That portion was about Information Technology. Could you give me a phrase to search for?

no, read it or not. it's your choice, and it was primarily about health care and IT.

I did read it.

you're a fast reader, maybe go back and look at it again- it's 100 pages of govspeak, after all.

 

[Truthmatters]

They would lose their jobs if this was how they performed in the market.


Do your own damn research

 

[del]

They would lose their jobs if this was how they performed in the market.


Do your own damn research

medication time

 

[rayboyusmc]

Scores of economists have said it will work.

Let's just stick with the good old tax cuts.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It has worked in the past and will work this time if its NOT watered down too much.

Dont you people ever read history?

Please clarify: is it the Stimulus Bill you are referring to in "It has worked in the past"?

 

[frazzledgear]

Frazz, it's froth. Where are your points?

The start is simple revisionism, the sort of anti-Keynesian revisionism that started with Friedman and the Chicag School and which was adopted as orthodoxy in the 1970s and strengthened. The revisionism has got to the point now where some people are arguing that it was WWII not Keynesianism that saved capitalism. The paucity of that ideology can be seen if you look beyond the US, beyond the New Deal, to look at the policies of other countries that followed Keynes ideas and saved their economies.

Your views on health care are a simple re-hash of tired old arguments. I'll re-state my own views if we're re-hashing. Health care should not be run by private corporations on the basis of profit, health care should be at least single-payer funded and provided as a right to citizens and not a luxury.

Your assertion that "liberalism" (whatever that is) is a mental illness is just a studied insult and needs to be seen as such.

And your post is a simple collection of prejudices glued together and slapped into the forum in your usual wordy style where much is written but no real solid points are made.

Nice try ducking out on the fact that Americans actually have a REAL right to hear an open, public debate in Congress about ANY potential bill that would represent a major overhaul of our healthcare system. But there is NO SUCH THING as a "right" to healthcare. Your rights ONLY involve specific acts YOU may CHOOSE to engage in where government is forbidden from having you arrested if you choose to exercise them. Stuff like free speech, right of assembly, right to exercise your religious beliefs. There is NO SUCH THING as a "right" to the services of another human being just because you value that service. YOU didn't bother to spend at least ten years beyond college gaining the education and expertise to provide that service -but you think those that did somehow lost THEIR right to expect fair compensation for their service? But that discussion is besides the point anyway.

Apparently you missed the real point of my first post. Legislation that would cause a MAJOR upheaval in our healthcare system was sneaked into and buried deep within a STIMULUS bill - and intentionally done in order to PREVENT Americans from being able to participate in the process and have their voices heard on this issue.

Last time I checked this was still a democratic republic -which means the PEOPLE get to decide what laws they will be governed by. While people like you, Daschle and Obama apparently believe that government should just ram down the throats of Americans the laws and rules THEY want imposed. Such people believe that government is actually the master of the people -and not their servant. The exact opposite of what our founders believed. I guess you also believe that the real job of our elected officials is NOT to carry out the will of the people as charged in the Constitution - but to impose THEIR will on us all instead. Even if it means duping Americans by sneaking major changes into an unrelated bill in order to avoid allowing Americans to have their voices heard on this issue.

You might want to read an American history book about what happened the last time Americans got unhappy about their government ramming stuff down their throats without allowing for their input and consent. This is NOT how to properly go about making any changes in the healthcare system -whether you are in favor of universal healthcare or not. It should be a stand alone bill that is openly and publicly debated in Congress and allowing the time necessary for Americans to have their voices heard through their elected representatives. Which IS their real job -not being deceptive, sneaky bastards like they were here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It has worked in the past and will work this time if its NOT watered down too much.

Dont you people ever read history?

No, it has not worked.
1) FDR New Deal stimulus? This is by FDR's Sec'y of the Treasusry:
To begin with, those Americans who are insured--which, of course, includes the vast majority of voters--are very happy with their coverage and care. Almost 90 percent of them rated their coverage good or excellent in last year's Kaiser Foundation poll on health care, the highest rating in the two decades Kaiser has been polling. In the same poll, 93 percent were happy with their quality of care, 86 percent with their ability to get a doctor's appointment when they want to, and 77 percent with their ability to get non-emergency care without having to wait. A surprisingly high 64 percent even said they were satisfied with their health care costs. These are not voters clamoring for radical change in their health care.

2) See front page of NYTimes, 2/5/09 for lead story about Japan's ten-year stimulus, and what a bust it was.

3) The Congressional Budget Office actually says that no bill would be better:
Washington Times - CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul

And this is with reference to a stimulus bill, not including all of the democrat crap in this one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Scores of economists have said it will work.

Let's just stick with the good old tax cuts.

“There’s basically no historical evidence since World War II that stimulus bills help,” said William Niskanen, chairman of the free-market Cato Institution in Washington. His organization ran an advertisement in national newspapers today, signed by 243 academic economists, registering their dissent. "
Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

 

[Red Dawn]

If passed as is in both houses of Congress, the Senate "stimulus bill" will affect every single person in the country because of the hidden provisions buried deep in the bill. This bill really isn't about stimulating the economy because scores of economists have repeatedly said this bill will not do that because government cannot spend the country out of a recession. Never has, never will. It was about something else all along. I'm sure Obama was hoping to get it passed before anyone read that far into the bill -and see it imposed on all Americans without their approval or even their knowledge. Until too late.


Remember the founders were the same people who thought the fact England was imposing taxes on Americans without their input and consent -was worth violent revolution.

I don't know if you're one of those belatedly and recently minted "I never supported Bush" republicans, but if you voted for him twice in presidential election, if you stood by in silence as the GOP nominated him twice in republican primaries, if you defended his tax cuts for the rich scheme, his iraq war, and his hands-off approach to regulating banks and wall street, then your predictions and opinions aren't worth a warm bucket of piss.

 

[frazzledgear]

Scores of economists have said it will work.

Let's just stick with the good old tax cuts.

The problem is -there are plenty of examples of governments trying to spend out of recession. But not a single example where it worked. NOT ONE. I've got a slew of examples where targeted tax cuts did though.

So sure -it could only make sense to a liberal to pretend what has never once worked EVER surely will now. LOL

And yet one more liberal missed the real point of the original post -which wasn't whether or not the stimulus bill would work or not. I'm of the opinion it won't and can cite historical evidence that it has never worked to back that up. You think it will but cannot cite a single time it ever worked. But at this point, these are just our opinions and only time will tell about who is correct or not.

I'm FAR more concerned about the stunt being pulled here by Democrats of trying to impose universal healthcare and rationed healthcare on the entire nation -while trying to avoid allowing for the open and public debate and the RIGHT of Americans to participate in the process and have their voices heard on this issue. (That I also happen to oppose universal healthcare due to the historical proof it ALWAYS ends up providing people with INFERIOR healthcare than they had before, ALWAYS costs them far more than before and that it is a fact they will forfeit their health and even life expectancy -is another issue entirely. But even on that issue, you have no historical evidence to support the claim of supporters that people will have BETTER healthcare services if government takes it over. Except I don't want to "wait and see" who is right on that one by adopting it and seeing what happens. I already know who is right. Bringing everyone down to the lowest common denominator is only an "improvement" to a liberal.)

I think it is very telling about what liberals REALLY value when they show they have NO problem with how Democrats tried to sneak this past Americans while denying them an opportunity to have their voices heard -and have no problem with it ONLY because they happen to like universal healthcare. So it doesn't bother liberals at all it meant denying Americans their right to have their voices heard. But how about when Congress tries to sneak past some other major legislation in the same way -and its one you don't like and want YOUR voice heard? How something of such major importance is being handled by Congress should disturb you far more than whether you support the issue or not. But it doesn't. Liberals never mind having THEIR agenda rammed down everyone else's throat even when it means preventing Americans from even knowing about it until too late -and only squeal when its their ox being gored.

Its one of the things I really despise about liberals frankly. If you refuse to defend the integrity of the democratic process and right of Americans to hear an open, public debate and the right to have their voices heard on an issue just because it is an issue you happen to support -then what makes you think that process will exist when it is an issue you oppose and want YOUR voice heard?

 

[American Horse]

I see you don't know either.

If you come up with an original thought , opinion or observation there probably won't be anything on the net to link it to.

No way! You mean people can say any crazy shit they want and expect us to believe it?

There are provisions in the stimulus bill to create an agency to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the application of medical procedures. (busy work)

(and more busy work) The president also has often stated and did so again today in Florida, that it is obsolete, and inconvenient, to have to go into a doctor's office and fill out a form or forms to provide your medical history. It would create new jobs to have technicians recording that information into electronic files so that that information would be instantly available. I'm not so sure any of would want that. How long before our genetic information becomes a part of that and is used in those coming soon "cost effectiveness evaluations"?

Here is an article that was in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, 9 February, that deals specifically with the issue of health care rationing:

Nadeem Esmail Says Nationalized Health Care Will Cost Us Pain and Suffering - WSJ.com