I Have A Question For Republicans

[P@triot]

What is the one branch of medicine where improvements are being made and costs are going down? Laser eye surgery. Since laser surgery is generally not covered by insurance, competition drives prices down while improving the product. Mark

Bingo! Because government subsidization causes prices to skyrocket. A simple, indisputable reality...

Its not only government. If you get into a fender bender and take your car to a body shop, before they give you a quote they ask you whether you have insurance or not. You see, they charge insurance companies more, although they would never admit it.

Mark

Well that's not entirely true. Some of that has to do with the business agreements that the repair shops and the insurance companies have entered into. The repair shops get consistent business and in return, the insurance companies get reduced costs. It just like health insurance and hospitals.

 

[P@triot]

Let me ask you what is the alternative? Do we allow ourselves to become so callous we just let old and young sick people die?

Juan de Fuca - it's imperative that you read this slowly and understand it thoroughly...

"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all." -Frédéric Bastiat

Andrew Wilkow has his own version of this - (and I'm paraphrasing a bit here): "with liberals, the choice is either centralized planning or nihilism". In other words, liberals believe if the federal government doesn't control everything, we couldn't possibly survive. The fact that you just said "what is the alternative?" is astounding. The alternatives are endless. None better than taking the passion that liberals have around socialism and funneling them into foundations in the free market to address these socials needs. Those nerds are met, we maintain a Constitutional government, and both conservatives and liberals are genuinely happy.

 

[Markle]

Hey, Poodle, that is even more moronic than usual (and that's quite a feat).......Reagan economic era in the 1980s IS NOT anything like the economic era of the new millenia. When Reagan was president, we had the beginning of the dot.com boon...while with Obama we had the beginning of a world-wide recession. While Reagan was president, we had an invasion of Granada and Panama....with Obama he inherited two major and costly wars.....and inherited $4plus TRILLION war costs that were never "on-the-books."

I could go on, but I think you're probably too hate filled to understand....So, stay as bitterand bile-filled as you are now.....in the long run I don't give a crap.

Running a few fries short of a happy meal aren't you?

Did you REALLY post that the DOT.COM BOOM started during the Reagan administration? Really, who can make these things up?

Microsoft didn't even sell their initial offering until 1986 which was the beginning of President Reagan's second term.

Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama did NOT inherit two major wars. There was peace and a democracy in Iraq. President Obama, ignored the advice of his advisors and pulled everyone out of Iraq before he knew what he was doing. Not that the has yet.

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."

- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010 [/b][/i]

How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going? How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President? Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities. Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.



And now the Obama administration TAKES CREDIT for the Iraq war…whew….

As for the cost of the War on Terror, it has been less than half your posted figure since it began in 2003. Still a lot of money but not what you stated.

As for being off the books, it was not in the budget, but, as you well know, of course, it was included in the debt.

FEB 3, 2015 @ 08:18 AM
The War On Terror Has Cost Taxpayers $1.7 Trillion
Niall McCarthy

According to data compiled by the Mercatus Center citing the Congressional Research Service, the cost of global “War on Terror” operations (including both Afghanistan and Iraq) since 2001 had reached about $1.6 trillion by FY2014. When war funding approved by Congress for FY2015 is taken into account, the total reaches $1.7 trillion.

[..]

Read more at: The War On Terror Has Cost Taxpayers $1.7 Trillion [Infographic]

 

[P@triot]

Honestly I don't know a single liberal who holds Ronald Reagan in any esteem... I think he was born in the wrong time, he would make a good Democrat today.

Vintage....absolutely vintage.....liberal response. The irony is so thick, one could cut it with a knife.

He starts by saying he's never heard of a liberal that holds Reagan in high esteem. He proceeds to list what he believes are policies by Reagan that were liberal, and finishes by saying Reagan was essentially a Democrat.

Then....uh....why wouldnt he be beloved by liberals?!?

Simple, because when he was president he was the antipathy of liberal, he was widely hated and his presidency is a good example of just how far right the Republican Party has traveled since then.

So then he never subscribed to all of the liberal policies as you claimed (if he was "the antipathy of liberal"). And if he wasn't the "antipathy" of a liberal, then you have just proven how radicalized the left has become and not the right.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

Let me ask you what is the alternative? Do we allow ourselves to become so callous we just let old and young sick people die?

Juan de Fuca - it's imperative that you read this slowly and understand it thoroughly...

"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all." -Frédéric Bastiat

Andrew Wilkow has his own version of this - (and I'm paraphrasing a bit here): "with liberals, the choice is either centralized planning or nihilism". In other words, liberals believe if the federal government doesn't control everything, we couldn't possibly survive. The fact that you just said "what is the alternative?" is astounding. The alternatives are endless. None better than taking the passion that liberals have around socialism and funneling them into foundations in the free market to address these socials needs. Those nerds are met, we maintain a Constitutional government, and both conservatives and liberals are genuinely happy.

The death of fellow citizens to me isn't an option and if Conservatives truly felt that way what are we doing arguing over abortion? I've heard the various arguments over churches and charity stepping up to the bat but all examinations of those experiments show failure, what then? I have yet to see your idea put to work, what have conservatives been doing for the last five years? Please point me to examples of those experiments to prove they are worthy of replacing government health, where are they?

 

[Juan de Fuca]

Honestly I don't know a single liberal who holds Ronald Reagan in any esteem... I think he was born in the wrong time, he would make a good Democrat today.

Vintage....absolutely vintage.....liberal response. The irony is so thick, one could cut it with a knife.

He starts by saying he's never heard of a liberal that holds Reagan in high esteem. He proceeds to list what he believes are policies by Reagan that were liberal, and finishes by saying Reagan was essentially a Democrat.

Then....uh....why wouldnt he be beloved by liberals?!?

Simple, because when he was president he was the antipathy of liberal, he was widely hated and his presidency is a good example of just how far right the Republican Party has traveled since then.

So then he never subscribed to all of the liberal policies as you claimed (if he was "the antipathy of liberal"). And if he wasn't the "antipathy" of a liberal, then you have just proven how radicalized the left has become and not the right.

What a non-serious position to take. If you no longer prescribe to the "Great One" and his manner of governance you are the one who drifted. The Democratic party in 1980 was still flirting with FDR and unions and the plight of children in Appalachia, energy, jobs, etc Republicans fretted about inflation, the Soviet Union, energy, improvements in health care, education, opportunities for youth, housing, etc it is you who went to the far right corner and I'm surprised you don't see it.

 

[Markle]

You didn't source your claim so I have no way to know what date that was published. That said, California is back on an economic roll, higher taxes, higher wages, and a fully integrated system of business regulation have allowed California to remain the sixth most dynamic business engine in the world. The debt is being retired and unemployment has hit a new low. Life is good in the Golden state.

If life is so good in the "Golden State", why are people and corporations leaving?

 

[Markle]

Yeah we should have let the free market take over so there would be no US automakers left. Too bad thats how it goes.

You don't know much about bankruptcy do you?

With Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama's interference we are down to the BIG TWO in American Automakers. GM and Ford.

 

[P@triot]

Please point me to examples of those experiments to prove they are worthy of replacing government health, where are they?

We're not. But according to you liberals - your hearts bleed around the clock for those so less fortunate. If that's the case, you liberals are worthy. Something tells me many of you are paralyzed with fear that this would prove you're not as worthy and you don't care as much as you'd like people to believe.

 

[Juan de Fuca]

You didn't source your claim so I have no way to know what date that was published. That said, California is back on an economic roll, higher taxes, higher wages, and a fully integrated system of business regulation have allowed California to remain the sixth most dynamic business engine in the world. The debt is being retired and unemployment has hit a new low. Life is good in the Golden state.

If life is so good in the "Golden State", why are people and corporations leaving?

High taxes, high wages and regulation. It hasn't affected the economy that much, although income growth has slowed a bit for the next year, the jobless rate is at 5%, we are the sixth most powerful economy in the world passing Brazil last year. Those companies leaving hopefully will do well elsewhere, it is their decision to move and I can understand why. California doesn't work for everyone, nor should it. I've made a lot of money in California real estate, you either believe you can make it here or you don't.

 

[P@triot]

The death of fellow citizens to me isn't an option

The violation of the U.S. Constitution isn't an option to me. And only one of us is being a hypocrite here. You haven't shed too many tears for the millions of "fellow citizens" who have died to give you freedom and the U.S. Constitution. I honor their sacrifice by vehemently defending and upholding what they gave their life for. You want to render their death senseless and make their efforts in vain by surrendering what it is they died for just so you can supposedly save someone else who didn't even make that same sacrifice.

 

[P@triot]

I've heard the various arguments over churches and charity stepping up to the bat but all examinations of those experiments show failure, what then?

Over 100 years of liberalism has given us federal government failure. What now? We're a mind-numbing $19 trillion in debt. What now? We've broken the law to achieve this level of failure. What now?

 

[Juan de Fuca]

Please point me to examples of those experiments to prove they are worthy of replacing government health, where are they?

We're not. But according to you liberals - your hearts bleed around the clock for those so less fortunate. If that's the case, you liberals are worthy. Something tells me many of you are paralyzed with fear that this would prove you're not as worthy and you don't care as much as you'd like people to believe.

I will not paint all Democrats the same, just as I would not paint all Republicans with the same brush. It is the true believer that slows progress and keeps the parties from negotiating like they once did. America is great because our ancestors weren't afraid to talk and negotiate, and hammer out compromises. These days it is something that will get you removed from the building, and labeled a traitor. It isn't the Democrats afraid to come to the table and frankly that is something you're going to have to come to terms with.

 

[Markle]

Yes, Crusader Frank, Newt Gingrich should not be begrudged his place in history balancing the budget. But it wouldn't even exist if Clinton hadn't signed it.

Nor would the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 have existed without Newt Gingrich, the Republican Congress and President Clinton being forced to sign it after having vetoed it twice.

I'm sure you also know that Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama was able to destroy the entire, highly successful program.

 

[P@triot]

I have yet to see your idea put to work, what have conservatives been doing for the last five years?

Trying to restore Constitutional government by getting the federal government the hell out of healthcare where they don't belong. You would think obeying the law would be the one thing that the left would agree with us on but clearly not. Speaks volumes about how radicalized they've become. They subscribe to "the ends justifies the means".

 

[Juan de Fuca]

The death of fellow citizens to me isn't an option

The violation of the U.S. Constitution isn't an option to me. And only one of us is being a hypocrite here. You haven't shed too many tears for the millions of "fellow citizens" who have died to give you freedom and the U.S. Constitution. I honor their sacrifice by vehemently defending and upholding what they gave their life for. You want to render their death senseless and make their efforts in vain by surrendering what it is they died for just so you can supposedly save someone else who didn't even make that same sacrifice.

Well you probably need to go and find your own country, there are just too many people in this country that believe in "us" and not "me." Personally I'm gratified and encouraged that there are.

 

[Markle]

I hope we have learned something from 1929, 1987, 2002, 2008, it is those lessons we should take to heart. God isn't needed in our economic stability, it is god given common sense.

Why did you not include the Depression of 1921?

Are you saying that there have been only three recessions since 1929?

 

[Juan de Fuca]

I hope we have learned something from 1929, 1987, 2002, 2008, it is those lessons we should take to heart. God isn't needed in our economic stability, it is god given common sense.

Why did you not include the Depression of 1921?

Are you saying that there have been only three recessions since 1929?

Same reason I didn't include the recession of 1937, or the depression of 1921, they were over very quickly.

 

[Markle]

In which countries do liberal policies work? I would say that the majority of the countries on earth have went the way of "liberal policy". And every one is now suffering from debt. We have the PIIGS(Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) Japan(which is bankrupt yet nobody will "pull the plug') because of what it will do to the world economy, etc...

Mark

The single most dangerous conservative economic thought is that the market, no matter how diverse, threatened, or open to monopoly can correct itself. Without regulation markets become free for all brawls. Every single time producers will try to tie up their sector to manipulate it for their personal aggrandizement then exploit it like they did in 1929, 1987, and 2002. Donald Trump himself said he was drooling over the 2008 economic crisis looking at with a view to a kill not about the harm it was doing the nation.

I have a different theory. As government grows, it is imperative or business to infiltrate it to protect itself. Business wasn't to concerned with government until government became so large as to threaten business, then they became involved.

Now, business uses government to choose winners and losers, and protect themselves by writing laws to squash competition.

It is also my belief that economies suffer ups and downs on a regular basis, and that the downs are the mechanism that keeps economies from overheating.

One last thing. Just who is it that you know that is so brilliant that they should be the ones to regulate our economy? God already has a job.

Mark
Mark

I hope we have learned something from 1929, 1987, 2002, 2008, it is those lessons we should take to heart. God isn't needed in our economic stability, it is god given common sense.

The market is too complex for anyone to control. They are "throwing darts" which is as bad as the problems they try to solve.

Mark

Glass Steagal kept things running pretty smoothly for 70 years, I fail to see how it would be hard to reconstruct something similar.

It would be like pushing toothpaste back into a tube.

 

[P@triot]

it is you who went to the far right corner and I'm surprised you don't see it.

I love this desperate lie by the Democrats. True conservatives sit firmly planted the U.S. Constitution. Which is neither right nor left. It is ground zero - the legal structure of government implemented by our founders. Please tell me how we've moved "right" of that? I'd love to see a single example you could demonstrate. In fact - I'll make you this sincere promise right here and now. If you can give just a single real illustration of how true conservatives have "moved right" of the Constitution - I'll vote Democrat for the rest of my life. Examples of libertarian's, sovereign citizens, and anarchists don't count as they self-identify as not being conservatives but another group entirely.

Show me any true conservative that has suggested we violate the U.S. Constitution by stopping the federal government of one of their 18 emulated powers. I've never heard a conservative suggest that the states should run 50 individual patent offices (maybe a sovereign citizens has - but not a conservative). I've never heard a conservative suggest that the states should coin their own money. Please show me any conservative group (Tea Party, Constitution Party, etc.) that makes such an official (or even unofficial for that matter) part of their platform.