A Democracy too far?

[hodad]

re Labor history:  My point is that these things which you have such issues with (labor unions, big govt.) exist for a reason.  People struggled, suffered, and sometimes died while fighting for living wages, safe working conditions, safe food, a weekend, etc.  Things like the FDA, OSHA, MSHA, etc. serve a vital purpose, and if they disappeared because of the "small govt." people, all the problems they were created to remedy will come back with a vengeance.  I think the Glass-Steagall repeal and the weakening of antitrust laws (things that you and I agree on) are excellent examples of this. 
Much of "big" govt. is there for a very good reason.  Yes, there is bloat, and it should be dealt with as much as possible.  But getting rid of huge sectors of the govt. simply because it's too "big" would be folly. 

Speaking of folly, that's a kind term for Libertarianism.  Libertarianism is little more than a misguided pining for the sort of govt. we had in the days that brought us big govt. and labor unions--when robber barons ran roughshod over the American people, and things in general kind of stunk for the working class.  It's pie-in-the-sky idealism of the worst kind.  And most of the tea party is funded by billionaires who'd be happy to run roughshod over the little people--and they're thrilled that they've found so many little people to help them do it.  (Nonetheless, there are times when the individuals of the movement transcend its astroturf origins.)

I honestly think both sides are being played--we focus far too much on our differences than on the things we have in common--and the folks with the big money like it that way.  If rank and file Dems and Repubs (and Libs too) ever united on the things we agree on, power brokers on both sides would be quaking in their boots. 

 

[sodderboy]

I don't want to disappear them but there is so much mid level rot that has to be removed. Like why, under the ADA did every firehouse have to get an elevator?!?  That is the kind of covert lunacy that happens with a guv gone wild. They don't have to equip the trucks with ramps yet but wait a few years as they are already dumbing- down written and physical test requirements.

You are grasping at the same old rotten ends as so many of my friends. The unions backed the administration with PPACA and got stiffed on a lifetime cadallac exemption. They amass like a bunch of brownshirts at a tea party rally only the shirts are orange or purple. They sit sipping coffee beside an inflatable rat because work is tough for everyone.

My neighbor is a Teamster shop foreman delivering the NYT.  They are already swinging a shell game of multiple drivers per route and he still believes that they will need new drivers into the 20's. The whole structure is in denial. The leaders should be training guys to deliver booze and iPads from Amazon, but they all think that the NYT exists to keep them fantasy employed. I empathize because the studio tech biz went through the same consolidation the past two decades. No rats and coffee for us.

So you love unions and labor stuff. Do you really have faith in much of the rest?  Trace the increase in government waste to the formation of CBO and GAO. Do you think that the $300 toilet seat is a thing of the past?  Trace the decline of US education to the formation of the NEA. Do you know how dysfunctional US children and adults are compared to citizens of other countries?

I know what happened 100 years ago but those memes are quite sepia-toned to be polite. What are they doing for you today but help cling to the past?  Where is today's meme?  Show me the light!

Mike

 

[JohnRoberts]

It seems like we are arguing in terms of absolutes. I don't say get rid of all unions, but let them succeed or fail on the value they add to their participation. Collective bargaining was probably a good thing here for some workers in some industries 100 years ago... And a good thing in Bangladesh right now apparently. But guess what... if unions in Bangladesh tried to enforce California's new minimum wage of $10/hr there would be no more factories in Bangladesh. 

But when out of sync with a modern world collective bargaining does such a good job for it's members that it puts them out of work by making their work effort unprofitable. If you are losing money you can't make it up on volume. The recent Twinkie debacle (dissolution and brand sale to a different company) was because labor rules literally made it unprofitable for the original company who created the Twinkie to continue making and selling them. IIRC there were multiple unions involved and it was the delivery/truck drivers that padded that part of the Twinkie food chain ultimately costing the baking union members jobs. The Twinkie brand was sold to a different company who could use a more efficient shared distribution channel and will be profitable again.

Frankly I could live without twinkies so don't consider this a great victory for capitalism, it is the writing on the wall for union members, who may get helped out of a job by their unions.  Right now I am watching a dispute between UPS and teamsters. UPS has been unionized forever but they have always won productivity concessions coincident with each new labor contract so they managed to get value for the high pay the UPS workers get. This is the way it is supposed to work... I have watched this for decades as an example of a union that manages to not kill the golden goose. But now there are problems as UPS wants to shift a number of drivers over to the Teamsters healthcare plan, and they don't want to.  This will be interesting to watch since the UPS and Teamsters were the poster boy for unions behaving nicely.

Unionized government workers are insidious because government is not expected to operate profitably, so it doesn't disappoint But there is a less than arms length relationship when collective bargaining with elected leaders.

===

There are too many hyperbolic rants about libertarianism to respond thoughtfully. I am critical of them myself for being a little too idealistic, but they are not used to being taken seriously so speak in hyperbole. Just like Obama disappointed all his Nobel peace prize supporters when he had to sit in the big chair and deal with the real world problems, I suspect a libertarian leader would bend under the strain of real world considerations. Rom Paul was always like the court jester entertaining but not to be taken very seriously. His son OTOH has made it to the senate and is often a lonely voice of reason, while he shares some of the family tendency toward hyperbole.  Libertarianism is not folly, it is just to used to having to exaggerate to be listened to.

=====
Neither major partisan philosophy is perfect and the devil is in the details. Just because some government is good does not mean that more is better.

My philosophy to reduce the size of government is to make it less profitable for business to be so up in it.

=====

OK I mentioned this once before but since we still have high unemployment now years later I'll repeat it. Lets hire unemployed workers and task them with reducing waste and fraud in government spending. We can pay them minimum wage + a fraction of the money they save. This would be a win for them and us.

This would run it's course after several years, but by then the private economy would be so strong from reduced government spending and taxes that they could easily quit and get real jobs.

or not  8)

JR

 

[DaveP]

I have learnt more about America, Americans, American Politics and Constitution from these columns than any of the news media.  I had no idea there were so many checks and balances in your system compared to other systems around the world.

I hope I can see both sides of the argument, on the Democrat side they are upset that a law has been passed and an election won yet the funding is being held-up.  On the Republican side they are worried that hard working people will be subsidising the feckless.

It is also obvious to me that previous US governments (as have most western governments) have tried to spend their way out of problems and now the debts are becoming unmanageable.  I guess the Tea party are trying to draw a line in the sand over this principle.  Whether the "Wacko Caucus" deserves this amount of power and whether it will damage the Republican Party remains to be seen.

Ever since John Maynard Keynes laid down the principles of economics and the need for central government to initiate infrastructure projects (to counter the race to the bottom), succesive governments worldwide have continued overspending (even when it was not necessary) for popularity and advantage at elections, this is the root cause of our present problems.  How it ever became acceptable to make our children and grandchildren pay for our lifestyle today is an open question and one that is brought into sharp relief by the climate change debate.

In the past, America was viewed as the land of opportunity, but now it is viewed more as the land of extremes.  You have the super rich, a large middle class and the dirt poor in trailer parks, it does not look that attractive a system from this side of the pond.  What remains attractive is the entrepreneurial spirit which encourages creative ideas and risktaking.  This spirit is not in the DNA of far eastern cultures and may yet be your salvation.  What is worrying is that western standards of literacy and numeracy are so low compared to the rest of the world UK 21st USA 24th and bottom!

I personally don't think the printing of money matters too much as the US Dollar is a world currency nowadays and market forces will determine its value.  The enormous losses in the housing market and casino banking were all just paper losses in any case, its not like all the houses and dollars physically went up in flames.

I do realise that people have passionately held beliefs and principles and that these threads could be incendiary, we all need to respect each others beliefs because we don't know the road they have travelled; that this debate has been conducted in a civil way is a credit to all the contributors and our moderator JR.  I hope our common love of electronics and music will always be strong enough to hold us all together no matter what is said.

best
DaveP

 

[mulletchuck]

Most of the people who are posting are retired or aren't musicians and make a lot more money than a full-time musician.    Speaking from a musician's point of view, I would like to be able to not go into bankruptcy when it's time to pay back medical bills, say for something like having a kid.    in 2005, i went to the ER and took a ride in an ambulance.  I was still in school and on the school's insurance.  However, the school's insurance didn't cover ambulance rides, so i got stuck with the bill.  $400+tax.    That's probably not a lot of money to you folks, but to someone who at the time wasn't even making 1K/month, that's a LOT of money.   

It'll never happen, but it would be amazing if medical expenses were scaled based on your Tax Return.  Like, imagine if you had to file your taxes each year, and you receive a card which shows a number that defines what sort of rate you'll get for medical care.  So, people who make 100K/year get charged more than people who make 10K/year.  Doctors could charge whatever they wanted, but they would have to apply your rate to their decided price.  So, if a general checkup was $500, the 100K/year person might pay 80% of $500, but the 10K/year person might only pay 15% of $500.  that kinda system will never happen tho. 

 

[hodad]

Dave, you're just scratching the surface.  We have a shrinking middle class, by the way, as more of the money goes upward, and wages for the bottom two thirds stagnate and personal wealth (for the hoi polloi)  still has not recovered from the last bubble.

On the ACA front, one thing you've missed is all the conservative leaners who have a hissy whenever someone on their propaganda channels cries "SOCIALISM!"  And even John R seems to think single payer doesn't work, even though it works in countries all over the world.  Even the UK's truly socialized medicine is better on the whole (not just for the chosen few) than the US's twisted system. 

And don't forget that the Wacko movement is largely paid for by a couple of billionaires with a strong political agenda of their own.  And they're happy to use the disgruntled few to attack unions and generally make things better for the wealthiest few in this nation.  Tea Partiers are mostly fairly decent folks who are being used.  They've been subjected to 20 years of unending right wing propaganda masquerading as the "truth," and they start frothing at the mouth whenever the Pavlovian buzzwords are uttered in their propaganda that passes for news.  It doesn't matter how many times something is disproven, there they are, still believing the lies they've been taught to believe for the last 2 decades. 

I don't have issues with the movement's members so much, but they've been used, badly used--and abused, honestly.  These people will fight against their own interests because that's what they've been trained to do--to stand up for the "right" of the wealthiest to exploit them. 

This obviously is not all conservatives, and there are different degrees of obeisance, but it's very real--it can be pretty sad watching an old friend utter some of the most insane (and often demonstrably false) things because that's what he's been trained to do.  Eventually, if you have any grasp of reality whatsoever, you just quit talking to these folks, because there's simply no point.  No amount of empirical evidence will sway them.  It's actually kind of sad. 

 

[JohnRoberts]

Most of the people who are posting are retired or aren't musicians and make a lot more money than a full-time musician.    Speaking from a musician's point of view, I would like to be able to not go into bankruptcy when it's time to pay back medical bills, say for something like having a kid.    in 2005, i went to the ER and took a ride in an ambulance.  I was still in school and on the school's insurance.  However, the school's insurance didn't cover ambulance rides, so i got stuck with the bill.  $400+tax.    That's probably not a lot of money to you folks, but to someone who at the time wasn't even making 1K/month, that's a LOT of money.   

It'll never happen, but it would be amazing if medical expenses were scaled based on your Tax Return.  Like, imagine if you had to file your taxes each year, and you receive a card which shows a number that defines what sort of rate you'll get for medical care.  So, people who make 100K/year get charged more than people who make 10K/year.  Doctors could charge whatever they wanted, but they would have to apply your rate to their decided price.  So, if a general checkup was $500, the 100K/year person might pay 80% of $500, but the 10K/year person might only pay 15% of $500.  that kinda system will never happen tho.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (Karl Marx).

No it's been tried.

The trick to transferring wealth from the productive sector to the non-priductive sector is not discouraging the wealth creators from creating more wealth.  When tax rates get too high they stop working hard because it doesn't seem worth it any more. The trick is to bleed the host without causing too much notice.

JR

 

[bruno2000]

Most of the people who are posting are retired or aren't musicians and make a lot more money than a full-time musician.    Speaking from a musician's point of view, I would like to be able to not go into bankruptcy when it's time to pay back medical bills, say for something like having a kid.    in 2005, i went to the ER and took a ride in an ambulance.  I was still in school and on the school's insurance.  However, the school's insurance didn't cover ambulance rides, so i got stuck with the bill.  $400+tax.    That's probably not a lot of money to you folks, but to someone who at the time wasn't even making 1K/month, that's a LOT of money.   

It'll never happen, but it would be amazing if medical expenses were scaled based on your Tax Return.  Like, imagine if you had to file your taxes each year, and you receive a card which shows a number that defines what sort of rate you'll get for medical care.  So, people who make 100K/year get charged more than people who make 10K/year.  Doctors could charge whatever they wanted, but they would have to apply your rate to their decided price.  So, if a general checkup was $500, the 100K/year person might pay 80% of $500, but the 10K/year person might only pay 15% of $500.  that kinda system will never happen tho.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (Karl Marx).

No it's been tried.

The trick to transferring wealth from the productive sector to the non-priductive sector is not discouraging the wealth creators from creating more wealth.  When tax rates get too high they stop working hard because it doesn't seem worth it any more. The trick is to bleed the host without causing too much notice.

JR

And folks seem to notice a gun held to their head...............
Best,
Bruno2000

 

[JohnRoberts]

Dave, you're just scratching the surface.  We have a shrinking middle class, by the way, as more of the money goes upward, and wages for the bottom two thirds stagnate and personal wealth (for the hoi polloi)  still has not recovered from the last bubble.

The solution for this if there is any solution is better education and more training. Raising the minimum wage and collectively winning more pay for low value labor is not a sustainable solution. Educate people to be worth more.

On the ACA front, one thing you've missed is all the conservative leaners who have a hissy whenever someone on their propaganda channels cries "SOCIALISM!"  And even John R seems to think single payer doesn't work, even though it works in countries all over the world.  Even the UK's truly socialized medicine is better on the whole (not just for the chosen few) than the US's twisted system. 

I have written at length about what I believe so it should be clear by now. Without free market forces our health care costs will rise even higher and innovation will decline. I saw in the news that one drug company was laying off 20% of their R&D workers. Not the right direction for a better future.

And don't forget that the Wacko movement is largely paid for by a couple of billionaires with a strong political agenda of their own. 

You keep saying this... and Gorge Soros supports the wacko progressives.  There are real people embracing the different themes. Stop the name calling and trying to tarnish the entire group by association... This is pretty common political strategy to avoid the real issues.

And they're happy to use the disgruntled few to attack unions and generally make things better for the wealthiest few in this nation.

I support unions for the Bangladesh garment workers, but Twinkie delivery truck drivers not so much. Government office workers even less. Who do the government workers need protection from? Us, Me... perhaps.  8)

[edit- another 10 Bangladesh factory workers killed in a fire on tuesday  /edit]

Tea Partiers are mostly fairly decent folks who are being used.  They've been subjected to 20 years of unending right wing propaganda masquerading as the "truth," and they start frothing at the mouth whenever the Pavlovian buzzwords are uttered in their propaganda that passes for news.  It doesn't matter how many times something is disproven, there they are, still believing the lies they've been taught to believe for the last 2 decades. 

blather... lots of important sounding words saying nothing.

I don't have issues with the movement's members so much, but they've been used, badly used--and abused, honestly.  These people will fight against their own interests because that's what they've been trained to do--to stand up for the "right" of the wealthiest to exploit them. 

Talk about working against their own interest, I'd like to ask those cheering kids from the college rallies how they feel a few years from now as they sit with huge college debt and lousy job prospects, not to mention an increasing federal debt. Who do you think will pay for that, and deal with the austerity when the sovereign debt market dries up? Hopefully we will stop the spending increases before this happens, we are blessed with good credit but could screw that up.

This obviously is not all conservatives, and there are different degrees of obeisance, but it's very real--it can be pretty sad watching an old friend utter some of the most insane (and often demonstrably false) things because that's what he's been trained to do. 

If you have a friend who is doing that try talking to him. Maybe he won't agree with your opinion of him. That could be awkward.

Eventually, if you have any grasp of reality whatsoever, you just quit talking to these folks, because there's simply no point.  No amount of empirical evidence will sway them.  It's actually kind of sad.

There are true believers and lots of group think on both sides. I suspect we may be able to sustain a more reasonable discourse here because of our work with electronics teaches us to be objective and fact based. 

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

Most of the people who are posting are retired or aren't musicians and make a lot more money than a full-time musician.    Speaking from a musician's point of view, I would like to be able to not go into bankruptcy when it's time to pay back medical bills, say for something like having a kid.    in 2005, i went to the ER and took a ride in an ambulance.  I was still in school and on the school's insurance.  However, the school's insurance didn't cover ambulance rides, so i got stuck with the bill.  $400+tax.    That's probably not a lot of money to you folks, but to someone who at the time wasn't even making 1K/month, that's a LOT of money.   

It'll never happen, but it would be amazing if medical expenses were scaled based on your Tax Return.  Like, imagine if you had to file your taxes each year, and you receive a card which shows a number that defines what sort of rate you'll get for medical care.  So, people who make 100K/year get charged more than people who make 10K/year.  Doctors could charge whatever they wanted, but they would have to apply your rate to their decided price.  So, if a general checkup was $500, the 100K/year person might pay 80% of $500, but the 10K/year person might only pay 15% of $500.  that kinda system will never happen tho.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (Karl Marx).

No it's been tried.

The trick to transferring wealth from the productive sector to the non-priductive sector is not discouraging the wealth creators from creating more wealth.  When tax rates get too high they stop working hard because it doesn't seem worth it any more. The trick is to bleed the host without causing too much notice.

JR

And folks seem to notice a gun held to their head...............
Best,
Bruno2000

Yup, I object to my government, the IRS forcing me to buy health insurance or pay a fine..  Good news it's only around $100 the first year. But it will get higher.

JR

 

[DaveP]

Hodad,

Yup, I am certainly only scratching the surface, there are way too many details and acronyms in this thread for me to keep up.

We have seen some of these propaganda videos over in the UK and they strike us as truly bizarre.  We also understand that many Americans think Socialism is just another way of saying Communism and that it brings out the paranioa in them.  All that conspiracy hokum about Obama's birth certificate being a prime example.  For some reason we don't get those videos in the UK, we only have party political broadcasts in the few weeks before an election, its probably because our political parties have much smaller budgets and the electorate is much more cynical, they would never have any impact and the media would tear them to pieces.  We only have to hear that kind of deep voiced American guy they use to narrate film trailers and we switch off cos we know its bogus, especially if it has stirring patriotic music behind it.

Our taxes are deducted at source by our employers under a system called PAYE (pay as you earn).  You are only exempt from this system if you are self employed, then you have to enter your own returns.  No-one pays tax if they earn less than $15,000/year.

Our National Health Service is paid for by National Insurance contributions which our employers also collect directly from our salaries (they also contribute). In this case the threshold is $9000/year and after that it is 9% of earnings up to some higher threshold.  I don't know how this equates with your health insurance premiums?

best
DaveP

 

[hodad]

JR, to you who are so untainted by propaganda (at least in his own mind), I say this:  I've listened to a great deal of right wing talk radio over the years, and my brother worked for a popular syndicated host for many years.  I think I have more firsthand knowledge of what's going on there than you do.  I also undoubtedly spend more time on left wing blogs than you do.  And I have to say, the right wing propaganda machine is far more powerful and advanced than the left wing one.  And the lunacy that is propagated on the fringe right is far more widespread than the lunacy of the far left.  If you bothered to subject yourself to a month of Fox News and Right wing talk radio, you'd probably switch parties. 

re Mulletchuck's comment:  roughly 2/3 of US personal bakruptcies are related to medical expenses.  Even if you have decent insurance, you can still end up in the poorhouse.  (I'm not that young, by the way, but I'm not retirement age yet!)

Oh, and re the friend--people try talking to him.  It's impossible.  He spouts the Kenyan Muslim crap which is just ludicrous.  How do you reason with that sort of deep, unquestioning faith?  I like him, but I've given up--at some point it's just not worth it.

 

[JohnRoberts]

JR, to you who are so untainted by propaganda (at least in his own mind), I say this:  I've listened to a great deal of right wing talk radio over the years, and my brother worked for a popular syndicated host for many years.  I think I have more firsthand knowledge of what's going on there than you do.  I also undoubtedly spend more time on left wing blogs than you do.  And I have to say, the right wing propaganda machine is far more powerful and advanced than the left wing one.  And the lunacy that is propagated on the fringe right is far more widespread than the lunacy of the far left.  If you bothered to subject yourself to a month of Fox News and Right wing talk radio, you'd probably switch parties. 

I sample left and right leaning cable programs just to hear the spin du jour. The last few days I have changed the channel away from the business news I usually monitor in the background because the too frequent partisan rants from our political leaders cause me to yell back at my TV set. i don't need that extra blood pressure or stress reaction from getting angry for no good reason.

I had a prolonged exchange with an intelligent friend who respects my opinion about other things like electronics, but drinks the kool-aid from left leaning talking heads as the whole truth. Eventually he ran out of energy to pursue our personal debate. Which is OK with me, I don't expect everybody or even many people to think exactly like I do, they have different world experiences.

re Mulletchuck's comment:  roughly 2/3 of US personal bakruptcies are related to medical expenses.  Even if you have decent insurance, you can still end up in the poorhouse.  (I'm not that young, by the way, but I'm not retirement age yet!)

I already was extremely angry about the distorted pricing of healthcare due to whorehouse deals cut between big insurance companies and hospitals, but this will only get worse without free market tension between providers and consumers of healthcare. I estimate I paid 3-4x for a simple MRI scan because I was outside the "insurance" system. Somebody is getting fat from all this and they will only get fatter.  Our healthcare costs should be getting cheaper and cheaper like the free market driven Lasik eye surgery, not ramp upward toward the sky, from all this big insurance and big government help. 

Oh, and re the friend--people try talking to him.  It's impossible.  He spouts the Kenyan Muslim crap which is just ludicrous.  How do you reason with that sort of deep, unquestioning faith?  I like him, but I've given up--at some point it's just not worth it.

I had a friend sort of like that... after time it becomes like a high maintenance girlfriend who isn't putting out, just say good bye, or ratchet down the relationship to mere acquaintance. Life is too short to dilute your personal energy with a black hole. We can't save them all. 

JR

 

[sodderboy]

Sorry about your friend, but no one is talking that Kenya baloney here.  There is plenty of reality to deal with.

The expanding size of federal government is the problem not the solution.  They work for US, not the other way around.  It needs to be scaled back and returned to the locals.  Accountability needs to be enforced on all levels.

It's OK hodad you don't have to answer my questions, but have you think about why 7 of the richest 10 counties in the US surround DC.  It is an irrefutable fact- evidence of Big Corp and Big Gov dancing together.  Together.  You can embrace it as good if you wish; I do not.
Mike

 

[hodad]

You know, I'm not a fan of the ever-expanding military-industrial complex any more than you are (and possibly less), but that doesn't mean I think govt. is necessarily bad.  There's a lot of waste and bloat, there are plenty of aircraft and weapons made that the military doesn't even want, there's bloat in govt regulation, etc. etc.  I don't deny any of that, and I don't like it either.  But I have yet to hear anything from the right that isn't throwing out the baby with the bathwater.  If you have a problem with food stamps, try to fix it, not defund it.  Even though I'm not a huge fan of the military, I recognize a need there and have no interest in defunding it.  However, I have major issues with how the money is spent and how much of it is spent. 

There's a lot that we agree on (as I mentioned earlier, JR & I are in agreement on Glass-Steagall & TBTF stuff, as well as antitrust enforcement.)  And guess what?  Nothing's likely to change in those areas where we agree because the big money (which, in the final analysis, is largely apolitical and plays both sides to get what it wants) is against all of us.  And we're kept divided because there is no party that does not represent the monied interests, and they want us to bicker about our differences rather than unite around our commonalities. 

That's my take on it anyway. 

 

[MagnetoSound]

Nothing's likely to change in those areas where we agree because the big money (which, in the final analysis, is largely apolitical and plays both sides to get what it wants) is against all of us.  And we're kept divided because there is no party that does not represent the monied interests, and they want us to bicker about our differences rather than unite around our commonalities. 

That's my take on it anyway.

+1

 

[JohnRoberts]

Nothing's likely to change in those areas where we agree because the big money (which, in the final analysis, is largely apolitical and plays both sides to get what it wants) is against all of us.  And we're kept divided because there is no party that does not represent the monied interests, and they want us to bicker about our differences rather than unite around our commonalities. 

That's my take on it anyway.

+1

We get what we tolerate.

While I am not a tea party guy (I'm not a big follower), that really does appear to be a grass roots movement inspired by angry voters attempting to take back some influence over "our" government.

The tea party gets their share of criticism just like any fledgling political organization but the accusations that they are just an invention of the right and propped up by deep pockets seems more an effort to discredit them than realistic appraisal of the depth and reach (and stubbornness) of the movement.

It is the nature of incumbency in government offices, that those in power have a significant advantage, and every office does not get voted on every election cycle so a true movement to change the status quo of crony capitalism will take multiple election cycles. Decades not years.

The government has not changed enough to calm the sleeping giant (middle America) who has been woken up and is now angrily paying attention. I expect this trend of attacking out of control government over-reach to continue.

The only way we fail is if we believe we can not change things and do not try.

JR

PS: Did I ever mention that I am a flaming optimist.  8)

 

[hodad]

While I am not a tea party guy (I'm not a big follower), that really does appear to be a grass roots movement inspired by angry voters attempting to take back some influence over "our" government.

I don't doubt the genuine feelings of the rank & file--I share many of their frustrations.  It's the folks steering from the top that make me queasy.  AFP is Koch-funded.  The current manufactured "crisis" was the brainchild of the Kochs, the Cato Institute, and some other well-heeled rightie groups.  I don't trust the motives of any of them, and the Tea Partiers are (IMO) just a tool for them to use to get what they want.  Here's a link to something I didn't know until just now: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/the-house-gop-s-little-rule-change-that-guaranteed-a-shutdown)

On the other hand, one thing I've gotten a kick out of here in Ga.  is the tea party and Common Cause allying to fight corruption in our intensely corrupt state govt.  They haven't made a ton of headway, but I love that they're working together. 

That is where we need to be heading.  The power of people is being diminished by the (seemingly) ever-increasing power of big financial firms and huge multinational corporations of every stripe.  No one likes govt. corruption, and if we were all united in fighting it--policing pols on both sides, regardless of whether they're "one of ours"--our nation as a whole would be much better off. 

 

[Phrazemaster]

PS: I don't mind paying the congress for their faint effort, but one of the recent proposals from the House that was summarily dismissed by the senate was forcing the legislature and their staff to all participate in Obamacare, just like they are forcing us to. I don't trust any cooks who don't eat their own cooking. 

I have to agree with you John. If there was one amendment to the Constitution that I believe would radically and positively affect this country, it would be that all laws apply equally and to the same degree to all congressmen.

Then find a way to eliminate lobbying, making it totally illegal.

While I'm at it, a new form of money that might forever simplify and transform our world. Instead of exchanging valuable metals or pieces of paper (or 1's & 0's in a computer that never existed  , how about using TIME as money instead?

Think about it. The very nature of time is that we all have a limited amount of it. It is therefore essentially equally valuable to everyone. Let's trade hours of our time instead of fiat flubbery.

And, let's not fool ourselves. Obama-(doesn't)-care will make this country an Obamination...it ain't gonna work. The current healthcare system is already reeling and straining under all the skyrocketing costs; how can adding millions more people to a system that is already teetering possibly going to be good for anyone?

Sure, there may not be any death panels written into O'care (then again has anyone read all of it?), but you watch. Already certain treatments and specialists are denied approval by insurance companies. This is going to be a blood bath.

Mike

 

[Phrazemaster]

Most of the people who are posting are retired or aren't musicians and make a lot more money than a full-time musician.    Speaking from a musician's point of view, I would like to be able to not go into bankruptcy when it's time to pay back medical bills, say for something like having a kid.    in 2005, i went to the ER and took a ride in an ambulance.  I was still in school and on the school's insurance.  However, the school's insurance didn't cover ambulance rides, so i got stuck with the bill.  $400+tax.    That's probably not a lot of money to you folks, but to someone who at the time wasn't even making 1K/month, that's a LOT of money.   

It'll never happen, but it would be amazing if medical expenses were scaled based on your Tax Return.  Like, imagine if you had to file your taxes each year, and you receive a card which shows a number that defines what sort of rate you'll get for medical care.  So, people who make 100K/year get charged more than people who make 10K/year.  Doctors could charge whatever they wanted, but they would have to apply your rate to their decided price.  So, if a general checkup was $500, the 100K/year person might pay 80% of $500, but the 10K/year person might only pay 15% of $500.  that kinda system will never happen tho.

Absolutely brilliant!

But what about something simpler? How about changing the concept that doctors and hospitals are gods and palaces, and simply admit that healthcare is a service we all need - just like we need our autos maintained and our PCB's stuffed (little DIY humor, heheh, er, get it?)...

At the end of the day, our children need teachers, our stores need clerks, and our streets need policepeople. And we need doctors. Healthcare should be looked at as a reasonable service, important of course, but similar to all other service we need (which don't charge up the ying yang!). Why in tarnation should an ambulance ride cost $400? This is a symptom of deep and rife corruption, and/or inefficiencies gone wild. Doctors/Hospitals/Big Pharma should not be making gazillions of dollars! A fair wage for a fair service. Use to be doctors did not make much money.

I read about a brothel in Nevada that ran into trouble with the feds for tax violations or something or other. Govt took it over. Within months the place went bankrupt. If the feds can't sell booze and women, how can they possibly be trusted with our healthcare?

</rant>