Will Ryan and the GOP win the "War on the Elderly"?

[Stephanie]

Boy oh boy, the FEARMONGERING from the Left is in high gear.

Of course even their MASTER, Obama is getting in on the act.

so you would EXPECT the sheep to follow

 

[editec]

The super-rich are too damned rich, simple as that.

Such imbalance between supply (the rich) and demand (the rest of us) causes the economy to fibrilate.

I really don't know why some of you have trouble understanding something so well understood by macro-economists.

Economies work when they're in balance econmically.

When too much of the money ends up in the hands of the investor class, and not enough in the consumer class, investments cannot make a high enough return on assets to justify the investments.

So the money doesn't circulate and the economy slows down, thus creating a vicious cycle of layoffs, personal bankruptsies and governments going insolvent as their tax revenues go down.

What we are seeing in this economy is the result of nearly 40 years of cutting taxes on superwealth, and free trading which sent uinvestment money OFF shore, and put domestic industries at a pricing disadvantage.

And given that BOTH PARTIES had a hand in those stupid anti-nationalistic policies, trying to pin this economy entirely on one party while absolving the other of any responsibility is sort of silly.

 

[rdean]

I heard the GOP wants to cut 500 Billion from Medicare! Can you believe that shit?

Oh wait. That's the Democrats.

link?

The DNC just isn't getting it's money's worth from you dean.

From the Wall Street Journal. July 2009:
GovernmentCare’s Assault on Seniors. - WSJ.com

2009? Years ago? How'd that work out?

 

[Mad Scientist]

link?

The DNC just isn't getting it's money's worth from you dean.

From the Wall Street Journal. July 2009:
GovernmentCare’s Assault on Seniors. - WSJ.com

2009? Years ago? How'd that work out?

It's in ObamaCare to cut 500 Billion. If you still don't understand that, print out that article and have someone read it to you aloud.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why are Liberals always such fucking pussies and refuse to run on a 90% Income tax platform?

 

[edthecynic]

The DNC just isn't getting it's money's worth from you dean.

From the Wall Street Journal. July 2009:
GovernmentCare’s Assault on Seniors. - WSJ.com

2009? Years ago? How'd that work out?

It's in ObamaCare to cut 500 Billion. If you still don't understand that, print out that article and have someone read it to you aloud.

That was an Op/Ed piece by Betsy McCaughey which has been completely discredited. She's the liar who started the "death panels" crap that Celebutard Palin pounced on.
Try again.

PolitiFact | McCaughey claims end-of-life counseling will be required for Medicare patients

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Originally Posted by Quantum Windbag
Tell me something.

Let us assume that we tax your rich at the rate of 100%, how much do you think that will decrease the deficit. give me some kind of number to work with so I will be able to make an informed decision about your ideas.

Discounting the fact that the top 20% means there are 80% below you, which puts you quite a bit away from the middle, let's consider the top 1%. I hope you are not going to pass off the top 1% as middle class.

The total wealth of all Americans in 2010 was $ 56.8 trillion and the top 1% hold 35.6% of it which equals over $20 trillion. Taxed at 100% as you suggest, that covers the entire national debt with $6 trillion left over for a rainy day.

I see your problem, you are equating earnings with wealth. I apologize for treating you like you know what you are talking about, I should have known better. The top 1% of wage earners pay about 38% of the taxes. that does not mean that they hold 38% of the liquid assets in the country. If we confiscated everything they own and sold it off we would only get a fraction of its real value, would incur extra expenses in doing so as they fought the seizures in court, eventually loose because the constitution actually forbids doing that, and end up with a bigger deficit.

You loose.

I see your problem, the argument didn't go the way your programmers on GOP hate radio led you to believe it would. You didn't specify "WAGE EARNERS" in your post, you specified "RICH." The truly rich do not work for common WAGES. They accumulate wealth in the form of capital assets. You, like the GOP with their Ryan Plan, believe that people who accumulate capital assets are too ELITE to pay any taxes. You believe taxes are only for the inferior WAGE EARNER'S to pay.

You were the one who suggested a 100% tax as a thought exercise to try to make a point that the "RICH" don't have enough to cover the debt even if you confiscated everything they have, and now you whine about the Constitution.
Sore looser.

You are incredibly persistent in your stupidity, aren't you?

There is a difference between a tax on wages, which I proposed as a thought experiment, and your proposal of co opting wages and property. Do you understand that the Constitution specifically prohibits your idea when it talks about due process?

 

[Dot Com]

The Repubs made the wrong choice to put Wall St/insurance co's in front of seniors. If there's ONE THING seniors do, its vote

 

[RDD_1210]

The DNC just isn't getting it's money's worth from you dean.

From the Wall Street Journal. July 2009:
GovernmentCare’s Assault on Seniors. - WSJ.com

2009? Years ago? How'd that work out?

It's in ObamaCare to cut 500 Billion. If you still don't understand that, print out that article and have someone read it to you aloud.

Do you know the difference between Medicare and Medicare Advantage? If so, why did you fail to mention that the cuts were to Medicare Advantage and not Medicare itself. Tsk, Tsk.

Q+A: How does healthcare overhaul affect Medicare? | Reuters

 

[rdean]

Why are Liberals always such fucking pussies and refuse to run on a 90% Income tax platform?

You mean like the last Republican President to balance the budget? Dwight D. Eisenhower? Oops. He must have been a "socialist/Marxist".

 

[mudwhistle]

It's just a matter of time until middle American wakes up. Republicans should be concerned, because there is going to be a massive backlash against them and conservatism in general.

Horsehit.

Something has to be done. The Dems want to do nothing.

The debt needs to be paid down, not left to fester. The S&P fired a warning-shot and Obama played it down like it was meaningless. This is irresponsible at best. If interest rates start going up all hell is gonna break loose and Obama can't blame that on Bush.

 

[Wicked Jester]

It's just a matter of time until middle American wakes up. Republicans should be concerned, because there is going to be a massive backlash against them and conservatism in general.

Horsehit.

Something has to be done. The Dems want to do nothing.

The debt needs to be paid down, not left to fester. The S&P fired a warning-shot and Obama played it down like it was meaningless. This is irresponsible at best. If interest rates start going up all hell is gonna break loose and Obama can't blame that on Bush.

Absolute truth.....The S&P downgrade is the warning of seriously bad things to come....No lame flower filled, rainbow laden speeches from Obama's teleprompter is going to change that fact.

The liberal wing of the dem party, too include the teleprompter, now has no choice but to accept the fact that serious cuts must be done. Taxing the top 1% out their ass, while continuing to spend like drunken sailors on shore leave will not solve the problem.

 

[taichiliberal]

Reality check: medical expenses
Last month, my 74 year old mom (don't tell her I know her true age and told others....she'll kill me!) had a medical emergency where she had to be taken to the local hospital by ambulance. The cause was a flare up of a condition by which she's suffered before and is being treated.

Anyway, she spent a total of 1 week in the hospital.....from about 3 hours in the emergency room where she was tested, diagnosed, given a small blood transfusion (2 units), stablilized, being moved to a bed where she shared a room with another patient, various tests, vists/consultations/diagnosis/treatment by her doctors, nurses....fed 3 meals daily for 4 days...and then sent home with a clean bill. She's doing great, back to her normal routine.

The total cost from the hospital: $27,000.....NOT including the ambulance!

Fortunately, my Mom has a hospital insurance; she also shares my Dad's GHI and she has medicare and even with that she sometimes in the past had to shell out $1-200 bucks out of pocket. Now my parents (both retired) are on a fixed income, so her Soc. Sec. would be paired down $200 every time she's hospitalized (which, thank God, has been only 4 times in the last 13 years).

I can only imagine what her out of pocket expenses would be if Sen. Ryan has his way with her Soc Sec and Medicare! You've got to wonder what type of deal a private insurance company replacing medicare is going to give a 74 year old with a condition that may flare up....you've got to wonder what would have happened to her Soc Sec if it were privatized and gambled on Wall St. in the last 13 years!

 

[rightwinger]

Best of luck to your mom. We do have great medical care in this country, the problem is that you can no longer afford to pay out of pocket. If the GOP ever succeeds in killing Medicare, the elderly will quickly wipe out their life savings

 

[Jroc]

I heard the GOP wants to cut 500 Billion from Medicare! Can you believe that shit?

Oh wait. That's the Democrats.

link?

YouTube - Shimkus Questions Sebelius on Budget Gimmicks in the Health Care Law

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why are Liberals always such fucking pussies and refuse to run on a 90% Income tax platform?

You mean like the last Republican President to balance the budget? Dwight D. Eisenhower? Oops. He must have been a "socialist/Marxist".

Do you support a 90% tax rate or not?

 

[auditor0007]

Best of luck to your mom. We do have great medical care in this country, the problem is that you can no longer afford to pay out of pocket. If the GOP ever succeeds in killing Medicare, the elderly will quickly wipe out their life savings

And those who have no life savings will be sent home untreated. Either that, or the insurance companies will have to spread the cost to everyone a bit like they do now. You know, they treat the uninsured, and the insured pay the difference. But that would be better than letting the government pay those bills, because we all know the private insurance companies can do it much cheaper than the government.

 

[auditor0007]

It's just a matter of time until middle American wakes up. Republicans should be concerned, because there is going to be a massive backlash against them and conservatism in general.

Horsehit.

Something has to be done. The Dems want to do nothing.

The debt needs to be paid down, not left to fester. The S&P fired a warning-shot and Obama played it down like it was meaningless. This is irresponsible at best. If interest rates start going up all hell is gonna break loose and Obama can't blame that on Bush.

Absolute truth.....The S&P downgrade is the warning of seriously bad things to come....No lame flower filled, rainbow laden speeches from Obama's teleprompter is going to change that fact.

The liberal wing of the dem party, too include the teleprompter, now has no choice but to accept the fact that serious cuts must be done. Taxing the top 1% out their ass, while continuing to spend like drunken sailors on shore leave will not solve the problem.

The problem with all you suggest is that we cannot, and I repeat, cannot cut $1.6 trillion from the budget. Every time someone has a suggestion, your stupid response is we must cut spending because you can't tax the rich enough to pay off the debt. Well, just like we can't get enough to fix the problem just by taxing the rich, we also cannot make enough cuts to balance the budget.

And nobody is suggesting that we tax the rich that much anyway, but you don't want to tax anybody. And even though the rich are only paying about 17% in taxes, you still say it is too much. It's laughable. What I do support is ending the Bush tax cuts, across the board. Hell, the middle class would feel it more than the rich, at least based on how you told us the rich got the smallest benefit from the Bush tax cuts to begin with. Ending the Bush tax cuts would hurt, but it would raise revenue. Secondly, we most definitely need to cut defense spending. Next, we could cut 10% across the board from all non-entitlement spending. Last of all, we could raise the retirement age gradually, but not too gradually, to 70 years. That would save an awful lot, especially in Medicare, without reducing benefits once people become eligible.

But, go ahead, tell me how you would suggest cutting $1.6 trillion in spending. I really want to hear this, because most of you keep suggesting we can do it, but you never tell us how.

 

[Zona]

I heard the GOP wants to cut 500 Billion from Medicare! Can you believe that shit?

Oh wait. That's the Democrats.

The $500 billion in "cuts" is really the reduction in the future growth of Medicare over 10 years, and it's intended to make the program more efficient. The law also includes new benefits for Medicare that would improve quality.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politifact.com%2Ftruth-o-meter%2Farticle%2F2010%2Foct%2F11%2Frepublican-exaggerations-about-cutting-medicare%2F&ei=XrGvTfPnMJSltwe84fCkBQ&usg=AFQjCNFglisOTdqLcfaKo05gNSMAClCgRA&sig2=Km4eyPQ3zLocY4n0z_vTyw

Really dude. REally? You just throw nthat out and expect no one to call you out?

Even if what you said was true on a face value, the republicans want gut the entire program!

70% of THE TEA PARTY disagree's with that dumb ryan plan. There are a lot of seniors or soon to be seniors who are saying, leave medicare alone.

They are running from Ryan...and his dumb plan

 

[Zona]

I heard the GOP wants to cut 500 Billion from Medicare! Can you believe that shit?

Oh wait. That's the Democrats.

link?

YouTube - Shimkus Questions Sebelius on Budget Gimmicks in the Health Care Law

see above.