a new party

[Daryl Hunt]

As long as insurance companies exist there will never be government healthcare, unless you guarantee insurance companies a cut of the pie. Insurance companies will always be as long as they pay politicians.

You do know you just gave another good reason to have universal health care, don't you?

 

[progressive hunter]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

its getting that way with the more control dems and some repubes have,,,

I AM ANTIFA!!!

You're going to hate the future then.

its common that people hate facsist times,,,

Maybe learn to spell it first, you've spelled it wrong 3 ******* times now.

OMG!! did I,,

do you feel insulted that I misspelled what you are???

 

[SC Patriot]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc
Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

 

[Papageorgio]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

 

[Papageorgio]

As long as insurance companies exist there will never be government healthcare, unless you guarantee insurance companies a cut of the pie. Insurance companies will always be as long as they pay politicians.

You do know you just gave another good reason to have universal health care, don't you?

And you have a point or you just like stating the obvious? Democrats want this money as bad as Republicans, so supporting the corrupt Democrats (all in Congress) gets you no closer to the goal.

 

[MaryAnne11]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

You are right the market can do many things but there is still a need for Government.

At least you are one of the few who understand Trump is far from Conservative. He is simply a fraud and con man. This is why so many turned to Biden. They know he is a Democrat but they also understand he is well known for working across the aisle. This will give real Conservatives time to put their party back together. I see that as good news.

Of course there will always be the nay sayers, those mired in anger but they will become the minority..

When has he worked across party lines?

It's kind of his schtick. Maybe get out of your bubble and breathe it in.

Biden and Sanders — Comparing their Bipartisan Index Scores

www.thelugarcenter.org

Joe Biden ranked in the top 20 percent of the lifetime Senate rankings (47th out of 250). Biden registered only one Congress with a score below 0.00. That was the 105th Congress, when he ranked 57th out of 98 Senators. In the Bipartisan Index, 0.00 represents the average score of a Senator during the twenty-year baseline period (1993 through 2012). Biden scored above the baseline average for Senators in each of his other seven Congresses. Of the seven, his highest ranking was fourth in the 107th Congress. His ranking in the other six Congresses ranged from 16th to 42nd.

...

In the narrowest term, what our rankings show is that, at bill introduction, Senator Biden was frequently seeking out Republican partners, while Senator Sanders was rarely doing so. Biden’s score was significantly above average, while Sanders’ score was lower than any Democrat who has served more than one Congress and lower than any Senator of either party who had served more than four Congresses.

And that is why I chose Biden. My way or the highway is not effective in life or politics.

 

[HappyJoy]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc

How is the market controlling polluting? It isn't. Most people don't care. You're concerned about offshoring jobs, right? But I bet you shop at WalMart, a company that facilitates moving manufacturing to China. What is your dumb fat ass doing about it? But I bet you want government to force companies to make shit here, right?

The Wal-Mart effect: Its Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the U.S. trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total U.S. trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this...

www.epi.org

Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

Where was your smart phone made and what are the alternatives if you know..you cared about it?

 

[progressive hunter]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

You are right the market can do many things but there is still a need for Government.

At least you are one of the few who understand Trump is far from Conservative. He is simply a fraud and con man. This is why so many turned to Biden. They know he is a Democrat but they also understand he is well known for working across the aisle. This will give real Conservatives time to put their party back together. I see that as good news.

Of course there will always be the nay sayers, those mired in anger but they will become the minority..

When has he worked across party lines?

It's kind of his schtick. Maybe get out of your bubble and breathe it in.

Biden and Sanders — Comparing their Bipartisan Index Scores

www.thelugarcenter.org

Joe Biden ranked in the top 20 percent of the lifetime Senate rankings (47th out of 250). Biden registered only one Congress with a score below 0.00. That was the 105th Congress, when he ranked 57th out of 98 Senators. In the Bipartisan Index, 0.00 represents the average score of a Senator during the twenty-year baseline period (1993 through 2012). Biden scored above the baseline average for Senators in each of his other seven Congresses. Of the seven, his highest ranking was fourth in the 107th Congress. His ranking in the other six Congresses ranged from 16th to 42nd.

...

In the narrowest term, what our rankings show is that, at bill introduction, Senator Biden was frequently seeking out Republican partners, while Senator Sanders was rarely doing so. Biden’s score was significantly above average, while Sanders’ score was lower than any Democrat who has served more than one Congress and lower than any Senator of either party who had served more than four Congresses.

And that is why I chose Biden. My way or the highway is not effective in life or politics.

thats been your attitude during this whole thread,, you refused to talk to anyone that disagrees with you,,,

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

 

[progressive hunter]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

the first thing to do is get the feds out of it and let the states do what is their legal authority to do,,

its easy to trace the increase in medical care to when the feds started to get involved,,

 

[SC Patriot]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc

How is the market controlling polluting? It isn't. Most people don't care. You're concerned about offshoring jobs, right? But I bet you shop at WalMart, a company that facilitates moving manufacturing to China. What is your dumb fat ass doing about it? But I bet you want government to force companies to make shit here, right?

The Wal-Mart effect: Its Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the U.S. trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total U.S. trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this...

www.epi.org

Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

Where was your smart phone made and what are the alternatives if you know..you cared about it?

The media keeps us well informed.
Seems most who are for "environmental protection" opt to use electricity (oil based technology), cell phone batteries (charged by electricity, an oil based technology) and drive cars with either electricity (an oil based technology) or combustible engine ( gasoline is a by product of oil refinery).

I love the vegans who wear leather jackets.

And the animal rights people that wear leather boots.

If Americans truly cared about what they claim to, they would stop buying products that are not supporting their "cause".

But they dont. Why? It is inconvenient.

 

[HappyJoy]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

the first thing to do is get the feds out of it and let the states do what is their legal authority to do,,

its easy to trace the increase in medical care to when the feds started to get involved,,

Then what? Your non-answer isn't cutting it.

 

[progressive hunter]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

the first thing to do is get the feds out of it and let the states do what is their legal authority to do,,

its easy to trace the increase in medical care to when the feds started to get involved,,

Then what? Your non-answer isn't cutting it.

then I would lower both corp tax and personal tax and bring jobs back so more people can work and pay their own ways in life,,

 

[HappyJoy]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc

How is the market controlling polluting? It isn't. Most people don't care. You're concerned about offshoring jobs, right? But I bet you shop at WalMart, a company that facilitates moving manufacturing to China. What is your dumb fat ass doing about it? But I bet you want government to force companies to make shit here, right?

The Wal-Mart effect: Its Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the U.S. trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total U.S. trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this...

www.epi.org

Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

Where was your smart phone made and what are the alternatives if you know..you cared about it?

The media keeps us well informed.
Seems most who are for "environmental protection" opt to use electricity (oil based technology), cell phone batteries (charged by electricity, an oil based technology) and drive cars with either electricity (an oil based technology) or combustible engine ( gasoline is a by product of oil refinery).

Electricity comes from multiple sources now. I have solar on my roof however a lot of people don't have the option to choose their energy source. Just like they don't have a choice in batteries for their smart phone either. Just like you don't have much of a choice but to buy many products from China, but you still do it.

I love the vegans who wear leather jackets.

I'm sure some do, some don't. Some people are vegans because they don't want to kill animals to eat some do it because they think it's healthier. Could even be some vegans buy leather goods second hand. I don't think you put a lot of thought into this.

And the animal rights people that wear leather boots.

I don't. Could it be some animal rights people just want livestock treated somewhat humanely? Rather than stuck in small cages or left to freeze to death being hauled across the country? Again, zero thought on your part.

If Americans truly cared about what they claim to, they would stop buying products that are not supporting their "cause".

But they dont. Why? It is inconvenient.

Just like you.

Anyway, this is where government comes in. Good policy isn't determined at the cashier. You want a cleaner planet then larger changes need to be made. You want products made in the USA? You're not going to solve the problem at your local WalMart.

 

[HappyJoy]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc

How is the market controlling polluting? It isn't. Most people don't care. You're concerned about offshoring jobs, right? But I bet you shop at WalMart, a company that facilitates moving manufacturing to China. What is your dumb fat ass doing about it? But I bet you want government to force companies to make shit here, right?

The Wal-Mart effect: Its Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the U.S. trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total U.S. trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this...

www.epi.org

Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

Where was your smart phone made and what are the alternatives if you know..you cared about it?

I refuse to shop at Walmart and shop local. I look for products that are American made, and if I can’t find the item, I ask a manager if they could find American made products, most are happy to do so.

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

You stop the silly lawsuits, that is driving liability insurance costs through the roof, limiting good doctors from treating people. We are seeing more and more doctors in big clinics because they could no longer afford the liability insurance. States could allow insurance companies to cross state lines and make them more competitive. States could then offer subsidized insurance and if they want to make it income based, then do it. States then need to limit lobbying in their states. Encourage more independent doctors by offering incentives for them to leave big medicine. The states could demand insurance companies to standardize their coding for easier and quicker processes.

It’s really a state issue and the best solutions are found at state levels where better fits for the people can happen.

Sure you don't shop at WalMart or Target

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

the first thing to do is get the feds out of it and let the states do what is their legal authority to do,,

its easy to trace the increase in medical care to when the feds started to get involved,,

Then what? Your non-answer isn't cutting it.

then I would lower both corp tax and personal tax and bring jobs back so more people can work and pay their own ways in life,,

So, both have already been lowered what has that done for healthcare so far? Not a thing.

 

[progressive hunter]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc

How is the market controlling polluting? It isn't. Most people don't care. You're concerned about offshoring jobs, right? But I bet you shop at WalMart, a company that facilitates moving manufacturing to China. What is your dumb fat ass doing about it? But I bet you want government to force companies to make shit here, right?

The Wal-Mart effect: Its Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the U.S. trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total U.S. trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this...

www.epi.org

Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

Where was your smart phone made and what are the alternatives if you know..you cared about it?

I refuse to shop at Walmart and shop local. I look for products that are American made, and if I can’t find the item, I ask a manager if they could find American made products, most are happy to do so.

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

You stop the silly lawsuits, that is driving liability insurance costs through the roof, limiting good doctors from treating people. We are seeing more and more doctors in big clinics because they could no longer afford the liability insurance. States could allow insurance companies to cross state lines and make them more competitive. States could then offer subsidized insurance and if they want to make it income based, then do it. States then need to limit lobbying in their states. Encourage more independent doctors by offering incentives for them to leave big medicine. The states could demand insurance companies to standardize their coding for easier and quicker processes.

It’s really a state issue and the best solutions are found at state levels where better fits for the people can happen.

Sure you don't shop at WalMart or Target

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.

Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.

Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.

For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.

do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???

Die young.

or are all you solutions fascist in nature??

Weird.

I said thats not fascist in nature,,

Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.

the very nature of forcing me into a system I dont want is facsist,, and also forcing me to pay more so other people pay less is also facsist,,

You're already paying into at least one government healthcare plan not to mention social security. So, give it a rest.

that is forced on me against my will,, in other words its facsist,,

Then according to you we're living in a fascist country.

This thread is mainly about moderates and where they may find the most room in a political party for their beliefs. Republican, Democrat or a moderate party. You're making it really easy to scratch off the first option.

And you have scratched off the second option.

I'm pretty confident most moderates don't feel Social Security and Medicare is fascism. Just a hunch.

First off your reading comprehension sucks, because I never said Social Security and Medicare is fascism, maybe you should try to understand what you read instead of mindless knee jerk responses.

Many do feel that taking away employer healthcare is fascism.
There is a place in America for both employer insurance and getting your own. Just because one has employer paid health insurance and likes it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think about his own demographic, it means he sees a bigger picture that doesn’t rely on the government to fix every problem but sees multiple solutions.

A one solution fix is fascism and you still ruled out your second option.

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

the first thing to do is get the feds out of it and let the states do what is their legal authority to do,,

its easy to trace the increase in medical care to when the feds started to get involved,,

Then what? Your non-answer isn't cutting it.

then I would lower both corp tax and personal tax and bring jobs back so more people can work and pay their own ways in life,,

So, both have already been lowered what has that done for healthcare so far? Not a thing.

not near enough and it wasnt permanent and biden plans on raising them,,

theres a big lack of confidence and that makes business's pause before making major changes,,,
and also the more government gets involved the worse things get,, thats a proven fact

 

[Papageorgio]

So give us an idea how to fix health care . What do you suggest?

In another post I explained how Insurance companies saying they had adjusted to the ACA and were able to provide more benefits each year.

Stop frivolous lawsuits or cap them, that will help bring malpractice down and allow good doctors to continue on being good doctors. This will also stop big medical from taking over. Very few independant doctors today because of the cost to stay in business, mainly by high malpractice rates. More doctors, more options, less cost.

States need to allow insurance companies to cross state lines and give better more competitive rates. States can create their own insurance pools and if the states want to subsidize them, so be it. States then can encourage employers to offer health choices for their employees, by tax breaks/and or subsidies. States are in a much better position to work for their own citizens and needs as opposed to a one size fits all approach the federal government would come up with.

 

[Papageorgio]

I don’t go to big corporate stores, I do admit finding local mom and pops is getting tougher to find. I look for US products as much as possible and always ask stores if they have a product made in the USA. I’m not a China fan, they have lied to us many times over, lead in toys, drywall that was moldy, lying about the coronavirus. They don’t care about Americans, and will kill for the almighty dollar as they keep proving.

 

[SC Patriot]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know **** it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird ******* world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

Gee, liberals like conservatives tend to have a core value of beliefs. For example liberals believe in a strong social safety net and conservatives apparently don't believe in science and the will of the people. Trump isn't an ideology, he is a fraud.

Saying Conservatives don't believe in science is a fallacy.
Conservatives want the market to deal with issues and the market has done a marvelous job of phasing out mechanical processes in favor of electronic processes in gathering materials , processing materials and cleaning up.
It is a wonderful coincidence that the work that goes into building a civilization such as ours is less expensive with the less ecologically intrusive processes than the more ecologically intrusive processes.

How does the market handle polluting? They've been forced to clean it up. Anyway, believe COVID isn't serious, don't believe in wearing masks and climate change isn't happening regardless of what science says. Give it a rest, you're trying way too hard to be obnoxious.

How does the market control polluting? If the public is against a company who pollutes, they will refrain from purchasing their products. That is how the market controls everything....from polluting, to child labor, to poor quality of product, to overpriced product, etc

How is the market controlling polluting? It isn't. Most people don't care. You're concerned about offshoring jobs, right? But I bet you shop at WalMart, a company that facilitates moving manufacturing to China. What is your dumb fat ass doing about it? But I bet you want government to force companies to make shit here, right?

The Wal-Mart effect: Its Chinese imports have displaced nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) was supposed to improve the U.S. trade deficit with China and create good jobs in the United States. But those promises have gone unfulfilled: the total U.S. trade deficit with China reached $235 billion in 2006. Between 2001 and 2006, this...

www.epi.org

Now...if the public buys a product from a polluter, than they are more interested in their own wants than they are in the environment. If they buy a prodcut from a user of child labor? They care about their own wants than the safety of children.
That is how the free market works.

Where was your smart phone made and what are the alternatives if you know..you cared about it?

The media keeps us well informed.
Seems most who are for "environmental protection" opt to use electricity (oil based technology), cell phone batteries (charged by electricity, an oil based technology) and drive cars with either electricity (an oil based technology) or combustible engine ( gasoline is a by product of oil refinery).

Electricity comes from multiple sources now. I have solar on my roof however a lot of people don't have the option to choose their energy source. Just like they don't have a choice in batteries for their smart phone either. Just like you don't have much of a choice but to buy many products from China, but you still do it.

I love the vegans who wear leather jackets.

I'm sure some do, some don't. Some people are vegans because they don't want to kill animals to eat some do it because they think it's healthier. Could even be some vegans buy leather goods second hand. I don't think you put a lot of thought into this.

And the animal rights people that wear leather boots.

I don't. Could it be some animal rights people just want livestock treated somewhat humanely? Rather than stuck in small cages or left to freeze to death being hauled across the country? Again, zero thought on your part.

If Americans truly cared about what they claim to, they would stop buying products that are not supporting their "cause".

But they dont. Why? It is inconvenient.

Just like you.

Anyway, this is where government comes in. Good policy isn't determined at the cashier. You want a cleaner planet then larger changes need to be made. You want products made in the USA? You're not going to solve the problem at your local WalMart.

You either chose to ignore the point or you just dont get the point.
If they truly believed oil based technology is bad for the environment, then why do they use it?
No one NEEDS a smart phone. They want one.

You see...you want the government to establish policy that forces us to do things. I get it.

Me? I prefer the free market decide what works and doesnt.

If the majority of the people refused to buy smart phones due to the effect on the environment, smart phone manufacturers will find another way...such as a solar powered recharger.

But they dont have to. Because the occupy people,, the tree huggers, the bible thumpers, the gun owners, the vegans...heck, the Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warrens...and the AOC's.....all prefer the convenience of smart phones that are destroying the environment and using child labor.

 

[MaryAnne11]

As long as insurance companies exist there will never be government healthcare, unless you guarantee insurance companies a cut of the pie. Insurance companies will always be as long as they pay politicians.

I think I have discussed that in a couple of posts.