My point is that the elderly already have several government programs geared directly for them. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicade. I was saying there is no need for a socialized medicine program in the US.

Casey, you really need to do a little research before you comment. First of all, the people who are uninsured are working people who are not provided health insurance by their businesses because their businesses can not afford to provide health care. The overwhelming majority of insured Americans receive their health insurance through business sponsored plans. There are 45 million uninsured Americans. They are not poor people. Poor people receive Medicaid, not elderly people. Poor people are not uninsured. The government already provides their insurance -- Medicaid. The elderly are insured through Medicare.

You will not be paying a higher tax rate under Obama unless you are in the highest percentage of income earners in this country. What Obama would do is eliminate tax breaks provided upper income earners by Bush. Now if you argument is that everyone should pay their fair share, then why is that wrong? He would give tax breaks to "middle class" Americans. Most families making less than $250,000 a year would pay lower taxes as a result of Obama's plan.

As far as health care plans, yes McCain does have one. He would make employer-provided health insurance taxable. In other words, you would pay taxes on the value of the health insurance provided by your company. At the same time, he proposes that every family get a $5,000 tax break and they use it to buy insurance. His goal is to get away from employed sponsored health care and move to privately owned health care. He has not discussed what to do if insurance companies refuse to provide coverage to pre-existing conditions. Also, health insurance, for a family of four averages about $13,000 year. At the same time, companies generally do not provide coverage for members of the family other than the worker. The employee can buy insurance for his or her family through the company plan.

Obama is not proposing a government run health plan. He does not require individuals to have coverage. He would createa new plan for those who lack access to other coverage and create a National Health Insurance pool that would allow small business and individuals to pool purchasing power. He also would provide subsidies and tax credits to make coverage more affordable. He would mandate coverage for children and create a federally sponsored health insurance plan, similar to Medicare that would allow people to purchase affordable insurance.

I still do not understand your argument about redistribution. Redistribution is a literal term.

[

Some people cannot afford to save for themselves. Quite a few Americans pay is not that well. Casey sounds like your rich yourself. May cannot live on what little they might get in 401K. Since the stockmarket has gone down, thanks to high oil/gas prices (thanks to W, Dick and big oil), quite a few Americans are losing money.

Noone said it is a bad thing to become rich. But everyone should pay their fair share. W and his cronies (and sounds like you do yourself) think that tax breaks for the rich and big oil and other big corporations are fine and dandy. Most people (not even many) do not try or work hard just because the government is "there to bail them out". That's elitist conservation Republican pure and unadulterated crap imho.

The current tax cuts have helped big corporations and the rich more than anything. The econony is horrible, some of the worst economic indicators since George Bush Sr. administration and some even the Depression. This country's deficit is at a record high (breaking George Bush Sr.'s) thanks to W's tax refund checks and tax cuts

What most people dont realize is that the big corporations are the ones that are employing the majority of Americans. Whats good for them is whats good for the employee. Oil is at a high because of increased demand from billions Chinese and Indians becoming more industrialized. I dont think Dick Cheney has the authority over the price of oil. This is what is hurting the economy along with the Democratic agenda pressuring mortgage companies to allow too many people housing that cannot afford it.

We have different definitions of what successful is since I don't see it as anything material, although I know many people do. But if I equate success with being rich then I'm not begrudging anyone the right to be rich. I think the rich should pay their fair share of taxes and not hide their money with the specific purpose of avoiding paying their fair share or using loopholes to avoid the same. I don't think anyone earns the privilege to not pay their fair share of taxes. By saying they've earned the right by making more money, you;re seemingly saying that people who are poor should be penalized for being poor.

I'm against people manipulating the system whether they are well off or not. Unfortunately society is set up so that some people who would otherwise take care of themselves are at a disadvantage and unable to do so.

There are people that are motivated and work hard and don't make much money. Everyone can't pursue high paying jobs or even get them. Teachers, for instance, are vital but don't generally make a whole lot of money. Not everyone making a whole lot of money is motivated or hard working. The point is there are probably people that are as motivated as you are if not more and who work as hard if not harder, and still are not as successful as you consider yourself. They probably have their own set of concerns about taxes and the fact that they can't hide their money any where.

Basically if someone makes $20,000 a year then giving up their 20 percent for taxes makes more of an impression than someone making ten times that, even though that person would clearly lose a bigger chunk of their money. If you're living on the edge of poverty then paying your fair share makes it even worse for you so I can't buy into the privilege of loopholes for the wealthy.

I very much agree that everyone should pay their fair share. Why should any one group of people pay a higher percentage than the other? How is that fair?

What most people dont realize is that the big corporations are the ones that are employing the majority of Americans. Whats good for them is whats good for the employee. Oil is at a high because of increased demand from billions Chinese and Indians becoming more industrialized. I dont think Dick Cheney has the authority over the price of oil. This is what is hurting the economy along with the Democratic agenda pressuring mortgage companies to allow too many people housing that cannot afford it.

I have a hard time, for whatever reason, feeling sorry for an Oil company (Exxon/Mobil) who made 11 billion dollars in the last quarter alone.

I also don't have anything kind to say about a Vice President who had one meeting with energy people, one meeting with health care officials and over 40 meetings with oil company executives.

The ENTIRE system is broken.......Republican AND Democratic. I have more blame for a Republican-led Congress that pushed through every single pork project and big spending bill for 6 years, and a Republican president who didn't veto one bill for the same 6 years....and didn't start doing that until the Democrats took over.

The biggest reason I have lost some faith in the Dems is because they haven't dropped the hammer on the current administration.....and it doesn't seem like they will, either.

Casey, you really need to do a little research before you comment. First of all, the people who are uninsured are working people who are not provided health insurance by their businesses because their businesses can not afford to provide health care. The overwhelming majority of insured Americans receive their health insurance through business sponsored plans. There are 45 million uninsured Americans. They are not poor people. Poor people receive Medicaid, not elderly people. Poor people are not uninsured. The government already provides their insurance -- Medicaid. The elderly are insured through Medicare.

You will not be paying a higher tax rate under Obama unless you are in the highest percentage of income earners in this country. What Obama would do is eliminate tax breaks provided upper income earners by Bush. Now if you argument is that everyone should pay their fair share, then why is that wrong? He would give tax breaks to "middle class" Americans. Most families making less than $250,000 a year would pay lower taxes as a result of Obama's plan.

As far as health care plans, yes McCain does have one. He would make employer-provided health insurance taxable. In other words, you would pay taxes on the value of the health insurance provided by your company. At the same time, he proposes that every family get a $5,000 tax break and they use it to buy insurance. His goal is to get away from employed sponsored health care and move to privately owned health care. He has not discussed what to do if insurance companies refuse to provide coverage to pre-existing conditions. Also, health insurance, for a family of four averages about $13,000 year. At the same time, companies generally do not provide coverage for members of the family other than the worker. The employee can buy insurance for his or her family through the company plan.

Obama is not proposing a government run health plan. He does not require individuals to have coverage. He would createa new plan for those who lack access to other coverage and create a National Health Insurance pool that would allow small business and individuals to pool purchasing power. He also would provide subsidies and tax credits to make coverage more affordable. He would mandate coverage for children and create a federally sponsored health insurance plan, similar to Medicare that would allow people to purchase affordable insurance.

I still do not understand your argument about redistribution. Redistribution is a literal term.

I did not begin the discussion relating Obama's healthcare plan with supporting the elderly. I just responded to that comment from other posters by stating that they already have programs set up for them. With "elderly" being a very general term, they could possibly have access to all of the above government programs that I mentioned. They are usually grouped together because of their increased need for prescriptions and healthcare. However the term does not refer to an actual age. Lower income "older" Americans would have access to Medicade. Americans over 65 would have access to SS and Medicare.

You can sugar coat it all you want, Obama's plan is socialized medicine. If he is not proposing a government run plan, who is running it? Where is this "pool" going to come from? Is Obama pulling money out of thin air? I have done the research and I know what socialized medicine will do to this country and what it will do to the employers (or as you call them the tax payers making more than $250,000).

The National Coalition on Health Care estimated the health insurance premium for a family of four, in 2007, at $12,100. This was up 6.1% from the year before, and is likely up again, but we’ll stick with that number for now.

The minimum wage has gone up to a whopping $6.55 per hour. Earn that for 40 hours every week, 50 weeks a year, and your total pay is $13,100.

Obama wants to boost uninsured Americans with 50% more "EMPLOYEE" sponsored healthcare. Obama would give the employer 50% tax credits in order to support the 50% boost. If you give a minimum wage worker health insurance, that $6.55/hour would immediately become $13/hour. There’s your problem. For lower wage workers health insurance DOUBLES costs. The "pool" that you speak of will come from business owners (remember those people that have an income of over $250,000). THEY will be funding the "pool" AND the 50% increase of employee health coverage. Thats 100% coverage from the business owner with 50% tax break. What does that leave? 50% increased taxes on the employer. THAT's what most businesses can’t afford. Oh and by the way, an income of $250,000 is your tax bracket no matter what you have to turn around and spend for business expenses, payroll, etc.. More people fall into the "over $250,000 crowd" than most people realize, including myself and a large portion of my family. Making $250,000 and being a business owner does not necessarily mean that you will take home that full amount. Small business will NOT be able to survive under this plan. Obama's tax and healthcare plans are more closely related than I think his supporters realize. They are not two seperate plans. Each one has an impact on the other. The only way that Obama's plan would work would be to set up inexpensive government run HMO's because the numbers for "employee sponsored" plan WILL NOT work. Government run medical facilities would be the only way businesses could afford to pay for this. I for one do not want to end up seeing a doctor that is employed by the federal government.

Thats the problem with being anti-corporation/business. The dumb masses like to look to the "rich" "greedy" assholes for all of their needs. Employment, healthcare, pay all the taxes....so on and so on...where does it end? Why bite the hand that feeds you. It's not a good idea to try to bring down the taxpayers that support you. Where will we get the money for healthcare once many many companies are forced out of business by Obamas demands?

Democrats know that the best and most efficient way to deliver health care services to the most people in this country is through the private sector. There has been no economic mechanism in the history of mankind that does a better job of delivering essential services and products to people quicker and more efficiently than capitalism and the free market. Democrats know this. You know this. What this is about more than anything is POWER. Democrats know that once they control people's healthcare, they control the people. Votes for life!

I whole heartedly support privatized healthcare. Let's let the individual be responsible for purchasing their own coverage. With more Americans purchasing their own insurance with the free market and competition the prices will only go down.

Yes redistribution IS a literal term, but what I was saying is that "wealth" is not literal in the phrase "redistribution of wealth". I said this because another poster thought I meant the poor would become wealthy. This is not what I meant.

Edited August 12, 200817 yr by Casey008

You can sugar coat it all you want. I have done the research and I know what socialized medicine will do to this country and what it will do to the employers (or as you call them the tax payers making more than $250,000).

The National Coalition on Health Care estimated the health insurance premium for a family of four, in 2007, at $12,100. This was up 6.1% from the year before, and is likely up again, but we’ll stick with that number for now.

The minimum wage has gone up to a whopping $6.55 per hour. Earn that for 40 hours every week, 50 weeks a year, and your total pay is $13,100.

There’s your problem. For lower wage workers health insurance doubles costs. Obama wants to boost uninsured Americans with 50% more "EMPLOYEE" sponcered healthcare. Were you to give a minimum wage worker health insurance, that $6.55/hour would immediately become $13/hour. And that’s something most businesses can’t afford.

Thats the problem with being anti-corporation/business. The dumb masses like to look to the "rich" "greedy" assholes for all of their needs. Employment, healthcare, pay all the taxes....so on and so on...where does it end? Why bite the hand that feeds you. It's not a good idea to try to bring down the taxpayers that support you. Where will we get the money for healthcare once many many companies are forced out of business by Obamas demands?

Democrats know that the best and most efficient way to deliver health care services to the most people in this country is through the private sector. There has been no economic mechanism in the history of mankind that does a better job of delivering essential services and products to people quicker and more efficiently than capitalism and the free market. Democrats know this. You know this. What this is about more than anything is POWER. Democrats know that once they control people's healthcare, they control the people. Votes for life!

Yes redistribution IS a literal term, but what I was saying is that "wealth" is not literal in the phrase "redistribution of wealth". I said this because another poster thought I meant the poor would become wealthy. This is not what I meant.

So this went from a conversation about the differences to now being labled "anti-coporation/business" and referring to people as "the dumb masses" just because they disagree with you?

Wow.

I have a hard time, for whatever reason, feeling sorry for an Oil company (Exxon/Mobil) who made 11 billion dollars in the last quarter alone.

I also don't have anything kind to say about a Vice President who had one meeting with energy people, one meeting with health care officials and over 40 meetings with oil company executives.

The ENTIRE system is broken.......Republican AND Democratic. I have more blame for a Republican-led Congress that pushed through every single pork project and big spending bill for 6 years, and a Republican president who didn't veto one bill for the same 6 years....and didn't start doing that until the Democrats took over.

The biggest reason I have lost some faith in the Dems is because they haven't dropped the hammer on the current administration.....and it doesn't seem like they will, either.

The oil companies NEED those profits to survive the constant bombardment of regulations/taxation from the government during the Clinton era. They have the pressure of creating cleaner (thanks environmentalists) grades and keeping up with demand all at the same time. Oh but its all Dick Cheney's fault, I forgot. And The federal government gets 30% more money from the sale of a gallon of gasoline than the oil companies! Just imagine the income the government has received last quarter. Who do you think is out there finding, drilling, employing, cleaning, developing, refining, and shipping all of the oil? Its the oil companies.

So this went from a conversation about the differences to now being labled "anti-coporation/business" and referring to people as "the dumb masses" just because they disagree with you?

Wow.

Well what would you call taxing corporations to death and looking to them to fund a socialized healthcare plan? I wouldn't call it pro-corporation.

I apologize if you think I was talking about you or anyone else from this thread. I was just talking about the public in general.

The oil companies NEED those profits to survive the constant bombardment of regulations/taxation from the government during the Clinton era. They have the pressure of creating cleaner (thanks environmentalists) grades and keeping up with demand all at the same time. Oh but its all Dick Cheney's fault, I forgot. And The federal government gets 30% more money from the sale of a gallon of gasoline than the oil companies! Just imagine the income the government has received last quarter. Who do you think is out there finding, drilling, employing, cleaning, developing, refining, and shipping all of the oil? Its the oil companies.

This post is the very reason why a Republican will never get my vote.....

Because this is exactly how they think.

Oil companies need record profits.....to not drill with oil leases they have had for years, and then bitch because the federal goverment and environmentalists (thanks! ) have stopped them from destroying our wildlife?

Well what would you call taxing corporations to death and looking to them to fund a socialized healthcare plan? I wouldn't call it pro-corporation.

I apologize if you think I was talking about you or anyone else from this thread. I was just talking about the public in general.

I am not anti-corporation......I am pro-worker. Period.

And with as many coporations that have fired people after they have shipped jobs out of the country, have jacked up health care cost for their employees while enjoying record profits, while making substandard materials and overpricing them while CEOs retire with multi-millions in their pockets....

You bet your ass I can't stand corporations.

This post is the very reason why a Republican will never get my vote.....

Because this is exactly how they think.

Oil companies need record profits.....to not drill with oil leases they have had for years, and then bitch because the federal goverment and environmentalists (thanks! ) have stopped them from destroying our wildlife?

The leased land that the oil companies were allowed was scowered for oil, but none was ever found.

Logically? Yes, this is how Republicans think. When you have RECORD demand, you will in turn need RECORD profit to support and sustain the very costly production operation.

I am not anti-corporation......I am pro-worker. Period.

And with as many coporations that have fired people after they have shipped jobs out of the country, have jacked up health care cost for their employees while enjoying record profits, while making substandard materials and overpricing them while CEOs retire with multi-millions in their pockets....

You bet your ass I can't stand corporations.

They were forced to move over seas because they are taxed to death here! And Obama supporters want to TAX THEM MORE! Yeah thats a good plan! What are we going to do when there are none left?

I did not begin the discussion relating Obama's healthcare plan with supporting the elderly. I just responded to that comment from other posters by stating that they already have programs set up for them. With "elderly" being a very general term, they could possibly have access to all of the above government programs that I mentioned. They are usually grouped together because of their increased need for prescriptions and healthcare. However the term does not refer to an actual age. Lower income "older" Americans would have access to Medicade. Americans over 65 would have access to SS and Medicare.

You can sugar coat it all you want, Obama's plan is socialized medicine. If he is not proposing a government run plan, who is running it? Where is this "pool" going to come from? Is Obama pulling money out of thin air? I have done the research and I know what socialized medicine will do to this country and what it will do to the employers (or as you call them the tax payers making more than $250,000).

The National Coalition on Health Care estimated the health insurance premium for a family of four, in 2007, at $12,100. This was up 6.1% from the year before, and is likely up again, but we’ll stick with that number for now.

The minimum wage has gone up to a whopping $6.55 per hour. Earn that for 40 hours every week, 50 weeks a year, and your total pay is $13,100.

Obama wants to boost uninsured Americans with 50% more "EMPLOYEE" sponsored healthcare. Obama would give the employer 50% tax credits in order to support the 50% boost. If you give a minimum wage worker health insurance, that $6.55/hour would immediately become $13/hour. There’s your problem. For lower wage workers health insurance DOUBLES costs. The "pool" that you speak of will come from business owners (remember those people that have an income of over $250,000). THEY will be funding the "pool" AND the 50% increase of employee health coverage. Thats 100% coverage from the business owner with 50% tax break. What does that leave? 50% increased taxes on the employer. THAT's what most businesses can’t afford. Oh and by the way, an income of $250,000 is your tax bracket no matter what you have to turn around and spend for business expenses, payroll, etc.. More people fall into the "over $250,000 crowd" than most people realize, including myself and a large portion of my family. Making $250,000 and being a business owner does not necessarily mean that you will take home that full amount. Small business will NOT be able to survive under this plan. Obama's tax and healthcare plans are more closely related than I think his supporters realize. They are not two seperate plans. Each one has an impact on the other. The only way that Obama's plan would work would be to set up inexpensive government run HMO's because the numbers for "employee sponsored" plan WILL NOT work. Government run medical facilities would be the only way businesses could afford to pay for this. I for one do not want to end up seeing a doctor that is employed by the federal government.

Thats the problem with being anti-corporation/business. The dumb masses like to look to the "rich" "greedy" assholes for all of their needs. Employment, healthcare, pay all the taxes....so on and so on...where does it end? Why bite the hand that feeds you. It's not a good idea to try to bring down the taxpayers that support you. Where will we get the money for healthcare once many many companies are forced out of business by Obamas demands?

Democrats know that the best and most efficient way to deliver health care services to the most people in this country is through the private sector. There has been no economic mechanism in the history of mankind that does a better job of delivering essential services and products to people quicker and more efficiently than capitalism and the free market. Democrats know this. You know this. What this is about more than anything is POWER. Democrats know that once they control people's healthcare, they control the people. Votes for life!

I whole heartedly support privatized healthcare. Let's let the individual be responsible for purchasing their own coverage. With more Americans purchasing their own insurance with the free market and competition the prices will only go down.

Yes redistribution IS a literal term, but what I was saying is that "wealth" is not literal in the phrase "redistribution of wealth". I said this because another poster thought I meant the poor would become wealthy. This is not what I meant.

Where are you getting this [!@#$%^&*]?

They were forced to move over seas because they are taxed to death here! And Obama supporters want to TAX THEM MORE! Yeah thats a good plan! What are we going to do when there are none left?

That is such bull. None of it is true.

Where are you getting this [!@#$%^&*]?

That is such bull. None of it is true.

So then please explain to me where the money for the "pool" is going to come from. I know you guys think Obama is a rockstar, but that doesn't make him a magician. He cant make money magically appear.

Do you disagree that Obama will increase taxes on incomes over $250,000? Would that not include self-employed small business owners, corporations....etc...?

**Where are you getting this [!@#$%^&*]? **

Thats a good response.

I got it from your man's website. Read it? Click on issues...then...healthcare. Look under small business.

I very much agree that everyone should pay their fair share. Why should any one group of people pay a higher percentage than the other? How is that fair?

I find this slightly contradictory since you seem to have said that the rich were privileged to take advantage of loopholes and hide money overseas to avoid paying their fair share.

Since there is a vast difference between what I see as ideal and what the reality is then I'm not overly concerned with what is fair though I do take note of it. I don't care if people who make large amounts of money have to pay a higher percentage of it in taxes. If I were in that income bracket, I would gladly pay it since I'd have plenty to spare. Just like other people, I've had to pay a price for having money in the bank which was taxed when I earned it and taxed every year for saving it and I was never rolling in dough so I don't see why someone who is should receive special treatment.

In a true communist society everyone would be working for the good of the community and on equal footing. I'm unlikely to see such a thing in my lifetime. And yes, it does seem unfair that some people work hard to support the slovenly but that happens every day at jobs where workers make their lazy know nothing supervisors and managers look good (and I'm not saying that management is all like that). And yes there are workers who are lazy and carried by their co-workers.

Society is full of inequities and that's a fact of life.

I don't favor one political party over the other because their both full of the good, the bad, and the worse. In this particular cycle, I'll take Obama over McCain because if I find Obama to be more progressive than McCain. Now that doesn't mean that I agree with all of what he says and maybe not even half because I disagree with him on some things and I may disagree on even more as more is revealed.

I'd rather face a tax increase than see this country go deeper into debt to China. I don't think this country should get to the point where the president cannot speak up because he doesn't want to make his lender mad.