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.

Casey, the answer to your question is in the word "pool." If small businesses form a pool to purchase health insurance, then they have the same purchasing power as a large corporation. That enables them to purchase insurance at a lower rate. A pool is when a group of individuals or small business band together to form a group. It has nothing to do with federal money. It is small business pooling their purchasing power.

No, I do not disagree that Obama will increase taxes on incomes over $250,000. He will do that by eliminating tax breaks provided by Bush. He is proposing to do away with the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts were implemented under the theory that if you put more money in the hands of the wealthy, they will invest that money in the economy and that the results will be a net gain because the economic investment will generate more tax revenue and create jobs. It is supply-side economics, which also was promoted by Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately the results have not been what Reagan or Bush expected. It did not increase budget revenue, it decreased revenue. The tax cuts reduced revenue at a time that the government was spending more money on the war effort. As a result, the deficits grew. Deficits have a destabilizing effect on the economy. They do that because it takes money out of the economy and because the government must pay interest on its loans. Right now, the federal government's interest on the federal debt is 14 percent of the annual budget. That is very large. If the market is going to work, Bush/McCain and others would be well-served to step aside and allow monetary and not fiscal policies to address economic issues.

Many market conservatives are unhappy with the Bush/McCain approach because of its effect on the national debt.

Obama is proposing that the Bush tax cuts not be extended. He also is proposing tax cuts for those who earn under $250,000. I disagree with his tax cuts for the same reason I disagree with the Bush/McCain tax cuts. They are political solutions to a policy problem. Far better that there be no tax cuts, that the federal government balance its budget and that any surplus be used to pay down the debt.

As far as health insurance, having 45 million uninsured Americans is not good, and there is not a market solution under our current system. Had the United States NEVER gotten into health insurance, then yes there would be a market solution because there would be fair competition. There is not fair competition when some people have access to health insurance and others do not and when access is based on wealth and not demand. The only way the market system can control prices is when there is fair competition. Right now the market system can not control health care costs because insurance companies have control of the pricing mechanism.

Edited August 12, 200817 yr by Jess

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.

You are starting to scare me, with your positive spin on communism ("good of the community"). I think you guys are even further left than I realized.

Casey, the answer to your question is in the word "pool." If small businesses form a pool to purchase health insurance, then they have the same purchasing power as a large corporation. That enables them to purchase insurance at a lower rate. A pool is when a group of individuals or small business band together to form a group. It has nothing to do with federal money. It is small business pooling their purchasing power.

No, I do not disagree that Obama will increase taxes on incomes over $250,000. He will do that by eliminating tax breaks provided by Bush. He is proposing to do away with the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts were implemented under the theory that if you put more money in the hands of the wealthy, they will invest that money in the economy and that the results will be a net gain because the economic investment will generate more tax revenue and create jobs. It is supply-side economics, which also was promoted by Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately the results have not been what Reagan or Bush expected. It did not increase budget revenue, it decreased revenue. The tax cuts reduced revenue at a time that the government was spending more money on the war effort. As a result, the deficits grew. Deficits have a destabilizing effect on the economy. They do that because it takes money out of the economy and because the government must pay interest on its loans. Right now, the federal government's interest on the federal debt is 14 percent of the annual budget. That is very large. If the market is going to work, Bush/McCain and others would be well-served to step aside and allow monetary and not fiscal policies to address economic issues.

Many market conservatives are unhappy with the Bush/McCain approach because of its effect on the national debt.

Obama is proposing that the Bush tax cuts not be extended. He also is proposing tax cuts for those who earn under $250,000. I disagree with his tax cuts for the same reason I disagree with the Bush/McCain tax cuts. They are political solutions to a policy problem. Far better that there be no tax cuts, that the federal government balance its budget and that any surplus be used to pay down the debt.

As far as health insurance, having 45 million uninsured Americans is not good, and there is not a market solution under our current system. Had the United States NEVER gotten into health insurance, then yes there would be a market solution because there would be fair competition. There is not fair competition when some people have access to health insurance and others do not and when access is based on wealth and not demand. The only way the market system can control prices is when there is fair competition. Right now the market system can not control health care costs because insurance companies have control of the pricing mechanism.

With your definition of "pool", I do not see the need for the government to intervene. Businesses can do that now if they wanted. Sounds much more privatized than the understanding I had from Obama's plan. Would Obama select one insurance provider for the "pooled" businesses? It would seem to defeat the purpose by allowing several different providers to participate because the insurance provider would not benefit without a higher number of premiums being purchased. Obama's plan is much too centralized and would HAVE to be government sponsored and funded by tax payers.

With your definition of "pool", I do not see the need for the government to intervene. Businesses can do that now if they wanted. Sounds much more privatized than the understanding I had from Obama's plan. Would Obama select one insurance provider for the "pooled" businesses? It would seem to defeat the purpose by allowing several different providers to participate because the insurance provider would not benefit without a higher number of premiums being purchased. Obama's plan is much too centralized and would HAVE to be government sponsored and funded by tax payers.

Part of it would be funded by taxpayer dollars, but not the pool. The pool would work just as it does for private businesses. Small business would purchase insurance as a group. It might be organized at the state level. Private companies would bid on their business just as occurs now. In my opinion, it would be best to set up the pools at state levels. Some states have them now. There are parts of his plans that would require federal funding. For instance, all children would be required to be insured. This would probably require an expansion of Medicaid or the creation of a children's health care plan similar to Medicare. I suspect it would be indexed to income. I personally agree that all children should have health insurance. It is just good public policy. You could argue that you disagree, but I hardly think having a society that provides health care for children is equal to communism.

You are starting to scare me, with your positive spin on communism ("good of the community"). I think you guys are even further left than I realized.

And you call people communists because they refute lies that are being told and think that kind of talk doesn't make people look at you?

Once again.......wow.

Part of it would be funded by taxpayer dollars, but not the pool. The pool would work just as it does for private businesses. Small business would purchase insurance as a group. It might be organized at the state level. Private companies would bid on their business just as occurs now. In my opinion, it would be best to set up the pools at state levels. Some states have them now. There are parts of his plans that would require federal funding. For instance, all children would be required to be insured. This would probably require an expansion of Medicaid or the creation of a children's health care plan similar to Medicare. I suspect it would be indexed to income. I personally agree that all children should have health insurance. It is just good public policy. You could argue that you disagree, but I hardly think having a society that provides health care for children is equal to communism.

Hey guys I can see that you are all ganging up on the conservative here, but NEVER ONCE did I call anyone a communist nor did I bring up the word. Wales..started defining IHO what communism is....I just pointed out that it scares me for it to be even brought up. Much less to be looked on in a positive light. Maybe I interpreted it incorrectly.

And you call people communists because they refute lies that are being told and think that kind of talk doesn't make people look at you?

Once again.......wow.

Please tell me where in this thread I called anyone communist. If you look back I didn't bring up the ideology.

IA...Wow.

Edited August 12, 200817 yr by Casey008

You are starting to scare me, with your positive spin on communism ("good of the community"). I think you guys are even further left than I realized.

Yep.

You didn't mention communism once.

Sorry.

Yep.

You didn't mention communism once.

Sorry.

I did not say I didn't mention it. I said I did not CALL anyone a communist. And I said that I did not bring it up.

Are you reading the same thread as me?

And you call people communists because they refute lies that are being told and think that kind of talk doesn't make people look at you?

Once again.......wow.

I ask you nicely, please do not acuse me of doing something that I have not done. Also...what lies have I told?

I did not say I didn't mention it. I said I did not CALL anyone a communist. And I said that I did not bring it up.

Are you reading the same thread as me?

Um, Casey.....

The first person to use that word in this thread was you.

You know.....all anyone is doing is pointing out what they see as the lies that are being spread about his plan. You are the one who has decided that since some won't sit and take outright lies being told, they must be ganging up on you.

This liberal/conservative crap really is silly.

You sound like you were not going to vote for Obama inthe first place, so, let me ask you a question.........

What is McCain's plan to lower taxes for the working class and what is his health care plan?

Edited August 12, 200817 yr by Roman

I did not say I didn't mention it. I said I did not CALL anyone a communist. And I said that I did not bring it up.

Are you reading the same thread as me?

I ask you nicely, please do not acuse me of doing something that I have not done. Also...what lies have I told?

The same one I've been hearing since Obama got the nom....that he would raise taxes on the middle class, even though his planb would LOWER taxes from between $1,000-$5,000 for these very same people.

You have not said one word about where McCain stands.

Because even HE doesn't know where he stands..........I'm still laughing at his press secretary who said two weeks ago that John McCain does not speak forthe McCain Campaign.

Um, Casey.....

The first person to use that word in this thread was you.

You know.....all anyone is doing is pointing out what they see as the lies that are being spread about his plan. You are the one who has decided that since some won't sit and take outright lies being told, they must be ganging up on you.

This liberal/conservative crap really is silly.

You sound like you were not going to vote for Obama inthe first place, so, let me ask you a question.........

What is McCain's plan to lower taxes for the working class and what is his health care plan?

That is not true! I DID NOT use the word first. Wales2004 was the first to bring up Communism. Please show me where you think I was the first to use the word.

Which part of my critique of Obama's plan was a lie?

I'm not sure what your definition of "working class" is. If you mean the lower income earners, currently, they do not pay taxes in the long run. With refunds, exemptions and child tax credits any taxes paid through payroll are null. As far as I know, McCain will leave this as it is.

McCain wants to promote privatized healthcare coverage and leave the government out of the equation for the most part. He believes that competition and the free market will lower the prices of premiums and make them more readily available for the uninsured.

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.

Amazing how none was found even though none of the oil companies have started drilling at any of these locations yet.

Where is the proof that none was found?

And, if that is how Republicans think.......no wonder the deficit sits at its highest level in the nation's history.

The same one I've been hearing since Obama got the nom....that he would raise taxes on the middle class, even though his planb would LOWER taxes from between $1,000-$5,000 for these very same people.

You have not said one word about where McCain stands.

Because even HE doesn't know where he stands..........I'm still laughing at his press secretary who said two weeks ago that John McCain does not speak forthe McCain Campaign.

Again, please show me where at any time in this thread that I said he would raise taxes on the middle class? I never said that. I plainly said he would raise taxes. I did not specify any economic class. I thought it was common knowledge on which class that Obama's increases would effect. I will try to be more specific and exact in the future.

Amazing how none was found even though none of the oil companies have started drilling at any of these locations yet.

Where is the proof that none was found?

And, if that is how Republicans think.......no wonder the deficit sits at its highest level in the nation's history.

Blindly drilling, without searching is not cost effective for the oil companies. They have equipment, sonar and electromagnetics that search for oil before they ever have to drill. The searching equipment did not show any oil in the leased land.

Our GDP and tax income is also at the highest level in our nation's history. The deficit is just the "withdrawals" being made from the national treasury. The GDP and tax income are the equvalent of the country's "deposits". I love how the left uses the blanket term of deficit as if no income is coming into the treasury.

Edited August 12, 200817 yr by Casey008

Again, please show me where at any time in this thread that I said he would raise taxes on the middle class? I never said that. I plainly said he would raise taxes. I did not specify any economic class. I thought it was common knowledge on which class that Obama's increases would effect. I will try to be more specific and exact in the future.

And that is where we will always disagree.

You feel that americans making over a quarter of a million dollars a year should not have their taxes raised.

I think they should, and don't care that they have to pay out of pocket fortheir health care.

Like Jess and Wales said........the only decent thing to do is to truly help those who can't help themselves.

If you feel differently.......right on to ya.