Re-elect President Obama

296 replies [Last post]
lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005

President Obama's re-election seems more certain than ever.

The latest CNN poll gives him a 7 point lead over Romney and much larger leads over the other GOP possibles.

This is not surprising given President Obama's accomplishments:

Declining unemployment rates.
Declining first time applications for unemployment benefits.
Stable and rising stock market.
Saving of American auto industry.
Killing of Bin Laden and other leading terrorists
Health care reform providing coverage for many more Americans, including 2.5 million young people.
Tax cuts for millions of working Americans.

I could go on and on but you must get the point.

And you might check out the video on ABC News of President Obama shopping today at a Best Buy for gifts for his daughters. Very cool. Clearly the coolest President we have ever had.

In the meantime, the GOP tries to decide which of its wackiest candidates deserves the support of the Republican voters.

It is a great time to be a liberal Democrat.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lion

The silence here is deafening!! LOL

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Don't let facts color your vision

Declining unemployment rates: Yes, because they skyrocketed under Obama and are still far higher than when he took office. So...they have slightly declined from his peak despite his BS that all the stimulus and "shovel-ready jobs" would drive unemployment under 8%. Right.

Declining first time unemployment applications: Yes, see above again. Only libs see a decline from what they brought on in the first place as a "positive." Don't leave out extending benefits a record amount of length over and over and making a mockery of CLinton's workfare/welfare reform.

Saving of American auto industry: by what criteria? The US taxpayer is still on the hook for about 10billion in losses from GM's stock being pitiful. Bailing out failing business is wrong if it's AIG but right when it's GM and loser Chrysler? The trampling of creditor's rights,bankruptcy laws and taxpayer money be damned....got to make my union bosses happy!

Totally lied over and over about the Patriot Act and the National Defense Re-Authorization Act because fellow libs don't mind fascist laws and stomping on the Constitution if expanded upon or implemented by a lib. If a Repub does that, it's terrible. If Obama does it, great!

Solyndra? A terrible Attorney General and Justice Dept, even when the bar was set very low by predecessors almost as incompetent and hyper-partisan as Eric Holder? Claiming Repubs were holding the US hostage by not voting to increase the debt ceiling when he himself as Senator was totally opposed to raising the debt ceiling and bloviated on and on about how stupid that was? How about Cluless Leader ranting about how stupid it was to raise taxes in a recession and then wanting to in fact do just that?

Don't forget the highest deficit spending and record expansion of debt in history. Anyone can trim taxes down when they are spending the future generation's money as fast as they can print it...Bush, Congress and Obama all 100% agree and support this concept of totally screwing over people in the future in order to try and curry favor now for a few votes.

Done absolutely nothing whatsoever to try and shore up Medicare or Social Security that are on the road to making the US insolvent.

Why has Obama been upside-down on job approval for quite a while with all of these "accomplishments?" As far as being ahead of Romney or any Repub, how were the polls at this time in 2007 looking for Obama vs. Hilary Clinton? The election isn't being held tomorrow. There is plenty of time left for Obama to try and raise a billion dollars in hopes of holding off weak opposition but it may not be enough anyway because that's how bad of a job he's doing.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Nuk_

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. How can a Republican president get us out of this mess? How has the T-Party strategy in Congress helped us - middle class Americans? The strategy of 'saying it over and over again makes it true' - doesn't seem to be working. But as I said in 2008, we'll see.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
DM: A Repub President won't

It would be more of the same though under a different "party." It just means that some of the winners and losers change places for a while and some other moron from Goldman Sachs gets a different job.

I will give the TP credit for finally putting the focus on uncontrolled spending and humongous deficits, as well as putting principle before politics on issues like the National Defense Re-Authorization Act as well as forcing other Congress-types to have to justify what they want to burden everyone else with in terms of debt. For that, I say good job. Still not embracing the whole TP movement but they have their moments.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Nuk

Actually Nuk as I read other blogs, I think most Americans agree with your train of thought. It's too bad that 'politics as usual' got in the way of Americans working together to change some of the debilitating aspects of our government. We will go 'down' if we continue on the same non-cooperative road - and an insane desire NOT TO CHANGE under this President. I feel that if these guys and gals don't get together after their vacation and work out the one-year plan that they all 'want' - they deserve to go home to their families permanently .

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM & "debilitating aspects of our govt"

Would you pls list some of those for us? Thanks.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
AGH

Most of the contributors here have already done so. Pleasant reading!

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM Response

And that's what it is--just a response--not an answer! You made a statement and I simply asked for details--you obviously don't have any. And a Happy New Yr to you and an updated ID Card too--think the GA Natl Guard HQ folks can help with that!

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM Response

And that's what it is--just a response--not an answer! You made a statement and I simply asked for details--you obviously don't have any. And a Happy New Yr to you and an updated ID Card too--think the GA Natl Guard HQ folks can help with that!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
AGH
Quote:

And that's what it is--just a response--not an answer! You made a statement and I simply asked for details--you obviously don't have any. And a Happy New Yr to you and an updated ID Card too--think the GA Natl Guard HQ folks can help with that!

Your response is not at all argumentative. NOT! Others have been quite clear on the issues they feel are causing the government to be completely ineffective. The polls have made it clear on how the American people feel about our legislators in Congress. If you don't have some clue to the answer to your question - I, and no one else can help you. Gee AGH, don't let your insecurities get the best of you. I, and many others in Fayette County are fortunate to have the required photo ID. I won't need the services of the Georgia National Guard - can't imagine why you think that I do. NOT!

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM & another response

First, I don't know who "AGH" is but perhaps it is just reflective of those ineffective govt issues that are hanging around just because we refuse to accept Obamanitis as a cure for all that ails!!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
At home gym

Work out a little more - it will stimulate your brain cells. Your answers would be entertaining - if not so pathetically defensive. Nothing you say at this point in my life can diminish my self-esteem. I learn so much from so many contributors here - and I learn from you also. Thanks.

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Nuk. Good thing he's not running against the almighty.

He's running against the alternative. He's running against Mitt Romney ; the both for and against everything guy; the romney-care guy (so sorry for u Robert morgan); the guy
who wishes we were still in Iraq. No need to hold my nose when I vote Obama.

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
let's not forget these things as well

A couple more things which were recently brought to my attention which many Americans can thank Obama for:

No Social Security cost of living increase for 2010 and 2011. That only affected some 60 million Americans who collect Social Security or disability. Yes, they are getting a 3.6% in 2012 and that is a fair increase but does it make up for 2 years without an increase? Medicare premiums will increase by a couple of bucks this year as well. The 3.6% increase will generously cover it but after 2 years without a raise, even the smallest of increase in expenditures is a good solid kick in the groin.
No civilian federal employee (3 million people) cost of living increase for 2011 and 2012. You know these folks, these are the millions of middle-class Americans (family, friends, neighbors, etc) who happen to work for Uncle Sam (I wonder if Uncle Sam employs anyone who lives in Peachtree City or Fayetteville or Newnan?) These poor fools have also seen their expenditures increase every year but will be taking the same pay as they did in 2010.
While the Payroll tax cut has put more money in workers pockets, it did not help small business owners who were and are still required to pay in their full 6.2% contribution. Thanks to the Democrats, this payroll tax credit has been so generously extended through February 29th.
The Maximum wage base for Social Security will also increase by $14000 in 2012 to $119000. What does this number mean to you? It means you have to pay into social security until you have earned more than $119000. While this may not effect someone like Lindsey Lohan, it will affect quite a few middle class Americans, may not be you or I but since President Obama has thrown around the $250,000 number as being the rich, I have to assume he considers those making $119000 to be middle class. In the end, many middle-class americans will see their take home pay reduced.

Way to go Mr. Obama, you are doing one hell of a job for the middle class and seniors!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
bigfoot, here's one more thingy.....

not to forget. Starting Jan 1, 2012 - tomorrow - employers must disclose the value of the benefits they provided beginning in 2012 for each employee's health insurance coverage on the employees' annual Form W-2's. (Google) Now this new reporting requirement does not mean that we'll be taxed for these benefits. The administration supposedly just wants everyone to be aware of the cost of these benefits. Now if the "Guv" thinks we'll believe that then they must think that we all bought into that pure bovine manure of hope and change. Taxing those benefits is just around the corner.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Of course it's about taxing us to death

the only reason this provision is required is to not inform you and I but to provide the means and database for which these "benefits" can be taxed.

After all the Government needs to spend money they have to get more from somewhere. They can't just keep printing it can they?

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Cy & W2 Info

I'm betting there are more surprises buried in that monster 3,000 page AHCA that few, if any, have read completely--or understood, if in fact, read.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GOP - hope/change

I think the American people are rightly looking at 'what is' and 'what will be'. We're slowly coming out of this mess, and I'm in the midst of reading the Republican Health Plan. (What is so different that reasonable leaders cannot compromise to benefit the American people?) No one is against better coverage for the American people. (Another discussion) The WH needs to know the value of the benefits in case these nuts in Congress don't extend the payroll tax. Our hope is that this Congress will 'change' and work for the American people instead of 'party'. The mud slinging in the preparation for the 'primaries' IMO has been destructive to the GOP. . ..and a distraction to substantive discussion of the issues. Oh well.

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Cyclist. I wanted us to CHANGE course and leave Iraq. We did. I

HOPED Bin Laden would die for the pain he caused our nation. He did. If you smell bovine manure, you may be very close to the political source.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Kevin & Iraq

Kevin, are you not aware that the Dec 31 2011 withdrawal date (Article 24) was established in 2008 when the Status of Forces Agreement was signed? Of course you won't see that too often either in today's press or in arguments of those who bang the drum for the current administration. It's kinda like that issue has a "No Step" plastered all over it! When do you do the 13 hr reverse drive?

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Athomegym. Im confused again. Why were all of the GOP

Candidates criticizing Obama for our premature withdrawal from Iraq? Someone really needs to straighten this out. Cars in both spots so wont need a road trip just yet. Name the time and place tomorrow evening or Monday before 3pm and I'm all in like it was my last night in Vegas!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
New disclosure

We have been getting something like this every April. My last one is still back at my residence in LA so I don't have it front of me but this pamphlet was detailed and included everything including the cost of of space in which my desk occupied to my uniform allowance to the cost for the number of bullets I was issued during the year. I wouldn't have been surprised if they had figured out how much toilet paper I used and the cost for that as well. In the end, I think the city of LA had figured it cost them something like $40,000 additional each year to keep me working..

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
New disclosure

Sounds like a jobs program. I wonder if Mayor Villaraigosa knows about this. (Chuckle)

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Figboot Shows His Stripes!

Figboot, you have shown your stripes as a big-government socialist! You want everyone taxed to high heaven to pay for your SS and cushy government retirement! I'm tired of you welfare kings sitting around crying and blogging while the rest of us job creators have to go and slave everyday to put money in your pocket. Time to pull your own weight and get a job--broken foot or not!

Also, Roosevelt was only dead about 30 days before the Germans surrendered, so Roosevelt gets the credit for whupping the Nazis, while Truman gets it for whupping the Japanese, as he ordered the bombs dropped!

BTW, how you think the Jackets will do against Utah in the Sun Bowl? I say Jackets by 7+.

Happy New Year!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
You reading the same thread?

Or is it that you have a hard time dealing with facts? My post pointed out that Obama has managed to screw over some 60+ million Americans. It did not advocate taxing anyone but rather how the Middle Class are getting screwed by this President. I'm sorry if you could not understand that, I actually thought I had dumbed it down enough but guess I was wrong. As a a supposed job creator, you should be pissed that Obama did not give you a break on your portion of Social Security contributions. I see that 2% as a tax on you, the small business owner.
For the record, I am not collecting Social Security nor will I be collecting it for a couple more years but you damn well better believe that I will be looking for check every month once I finally do qualify. I will also add that you have one hell a lot of nerve belittling me and telling me to get a job. I have worked 40 plus years and have paid into Social Security and my retirement and have earned every right to collect from them.

Since you want to give Roosevelt credit for stopping the Nazi's, let's give G.W. Bush credit for taking out OBL as he was in office longer. I guess I really should not be complaining as so far it's the only good thing to come out of his presidency.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Bigfoot!
Quote:

Since you want to give Roosevelt credit for stopping the Nazi's, let's give G.W. Bush credit for taking out OBL

What?????

The interesting thing about this blog is that so many see the same facts through their own perspective - and come to totally different conclusions. I see you're younger than I am - and that begins to help me understand some of your comments. Also - very few law-enforcement officers are 'liberal'. However, as I read most contributors, whether we want to admit it or not - there are areas of agreement. As a middle class contributor - I felt 'screwed over' long before Obama came into office!

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Figboot Demands We Support Him!

That is the problem with welfare; big-government socialists like Figboot feel entitled to sit back while us job creators support him and other non-workers for the REST OF THEIR LIVES! How do you figure working for 40 years entitles you to some of my money for the REST OF YOUR LIFE?! You should have followed the conservative model and saved, saved, saved enough to sustain you in your old age! Keep your hands out of the pockets of job creators!

BTW, do you think Matt Ryan has reached elite quarterback status? I don't think so, but maybe next year or the next. He could be the next Peyton Manning!

Go Jackets!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
Cloudy vision

Did I say that I expect you to support me for the rest of my life? Nope
Did I say for a moment that I am living off the system? Nope
Did I ever say I did not have a retirement? Nope
Did I ever say you have no understanding of what I said? Yes
Did I ever say you are an Idiot? I am now

Take a few moments, Turn off the TV, & get yourself a dictionary out and then go read my post. You assumed I said things which I didn't and the things I have said, you have misunderstood them.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Figboot, I don't watch TV

except for football games. Everyone on the blogs knows that! You said you are entitled to SS! How long does it last-for the rest of your life! The last thing we need is another left-coast liberal here in our fine and pristine city spouting socialist dogma and trumpeting the virtues of the welfare state! We are conservatives down here--god, country, family! Moochers not wanted!

And, you haven't answered my question about Matt Ryan!

Baptism by fire ya'll! Welcome to the Citizen blog!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
Ninja, You don't read either!

At this point, conversing with you has hit a low. When someone starts to speak out their ass, it's time to end the conversation for good. You have no idea of what you saying. One moment I am too conservative and the next I am a liberal promoting a welfare state.
If you are a conservative, I'm Barrack Obama!

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Figboot, It's Not What You Say It's What

you have done and continue to do!
Fact: You were a government employee for 40 years--taxpayer funded salary.
Fact: You have retired, or will retire, with a government pension--taxpayer funded.
Fact: You have 'earned' your SS handouts to come in a few years--taxpayer funded.

So, you have your size 14s at the public trough for 40 years+ and are lining up to stay there until you die--at the expense of others!

All good and true conservatives know that government cannot create jobs. The public sector workfare system operates outside of the marketplace and is therefore subject to the same shortcomings of socialism, namely the absence of a true pricing mechanism by which to allocate resources! Von Mises and Hayek pointed this out long ago!

Again I say to you, stay out of the pockets of job creators! The day is coming when we will implement the John Gault plan, leaving on the moochers to only mooch from each other!

Good day sir! I have to do some work now, on Sunday AND New Years' day no less, to pay part of your pension!

BTW, who you liking in the Giants vs. Cowboys today? I would like to see a Falcons-Cowboys playoff game myself.

Jackets take a nosedive!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
Really

I guess someone needs to clean toilets.
Fact: You were a government employee for 40 years--taxpayer funded salary. - GUILTY & damn proud of it (might also add that since I was a resident of LA for 40+ years & still own property there, my taxes helped pay for my job)
Fact: You have retired, or will retire, with a government pension--taxpayer funded. - YES & NO, The city of Los Angeles requires employees to contribute to their pension plan which is then matched by the city. This is no different then if I had worked for IBM or Microsoft.
Fact: You have 'earned' your SS handouts to come in a few years--taxpayer funded. - NO and maybe yes? Did I not pay into Social Security for 40+ years? Yes Do I not continue to pay in every month when my pension check arrives? Yes. I'm pretty sure My employer(s) & I have paid in more then enough to cover that $1200 a month check at least for several years.
I'm so sorry that my benefits package upsets you but to be fair I could care less what you think. You have proven yourself to be a small individual who is in need of some serious help. You call yourself a conservative but we both know what you really are. My heart bleeds for you..

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Government Workers Do NOT Pay Taxes

Government workers do NOT pay taxes in a true sense! Only job creators do!
Step 1: The government confiscates money from job creators in the form of taxes.
Step 2: The government pays out workfare to various moochers.
Step 3: The moochers give some back.

Now, how is the giveback by the moochers a NET positive for overall tax collections?

The total amount collected after Step 3 will never exceed the original amount collected in Step 1 EVEN IF the moochers give back 100%!

Therefore, those on government workfare are NOT paying taxes!

Only good and true job creators pay taxes!

Case proved! Thank you Ludwig! Next!

Still haven't answered on the Giants-Cowboys game either!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
no plans to answer

on the Giants-Cowboy either as I'm taking part in my very own NFL lockout for this season. These greedy SOB's (owners & players) wanted to screw me over and threatened to disrupt my enjoyment this year. So in order not to disappoint either side, I am boycotting all things NFL this year. WATL's 36-3 is showing a 'Three Stooges' marathon today. BTW, which stooge are you?

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Figboot, I know that Reality is

a bitter pill to swallow sometimes, especially when you have to look in the mirror while taking it, but it goes down better with a little football! I don't think Jerry Jones and Arthur Blank will notice that you are not watching this year! You are only punishing yourself! Never was a fan of the Stooges--much preferred the Little Rascals!

Almost done with my work for today, so your government moochfare is safe for another day!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
Thank You!

Much appreciated! Would it be easier for you if I just give you my address and you can coem over daily and drop off what you owe me?

Guess we can call it a matter of principle. I use to hold season tickets to the Raiders but after 1987, I decided sell my tickets and boycott the sport for the year anytime these greedy SOBs try to penalize the fans. I'm just keeping to my word! As for penalizing myself, it all depends on how you look at it. Missing the NFL season has given me the chance to explore this city, meet some of my neighbors, and do this God awful thing called, reading a book. You might want to try it sometime.
I'm not a Stooges fan either but it's either that or an all day marathon of That Girl or Fat Albert & the Cosby kids.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Ninja & "Govt Workers Do Not Pay Taxes"

Damn! Wish you had told me that before so I could charge someone for extortion! As I look at my shiny, new "NOTICE OF ANNUITY ADJUSTMENT", I see where they will withold $1,195.30 monthly for "Federal Income Tax"---if what you say is true, that just ain't right and I deserve some adjustment!

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
AHG: When A Tax Is NOT A Tax

What you give back to the treasury is not a tax in the true sense of the word. Your retirement check for past workfare services comes out of taxes levied on job creators! The government would do better by reducing the amount of your dole by the amount you give back, therefore eliminating unnecessary paperwork and related administrative costs.

The amount you give back under the improperly titled heading of 'Federal Income Tax' does not nor can ever add to the amount originally collected from job creators!

Again,

Step. 1: The government takes money from the private sector (job creators)
Step. 2: The government doles some out to those on government workfare
Step. 3: Those on government workfare give some back to the government

Even if those on government workfare give back 100% of their workfare payments, the most the government will have is the amount originally collected from the private sector, or job creators!

The result is the same as for welfare recipients. Would you say that they pay taxes if they had to give some back each month? No, you would say that their handout has been reduced by a certain amount.

Look at it this way. If ALL workers were government workers, where would the money to pay them come from? The answer--nowhere! Because there would be no source of money, or taxes, to dole out to them in the first place!

Taxes come strictly from job creators in the public sector! Case proved!

Government workers DO NOT pay taxes!

Looks like the Falcons will take the No. 5 seed! Packers beat the Lions and ATL whupping up on the Bucs in the 1st quarter!

Bring on the Cowboys!

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Ninja & Taxes

Sorry, you haven't proven anything to me. You seem to be the only source for your hypothesis. BTW,you call General Electric a "job creator"? Also, I contributed 12% of my salary for years into a retirement fund--and my employing agency also contributed a percentage. Seems to me you don't know squat about Govt annuities and their origin.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Gov Workers and Taxes

When and if certain candidates get their way - and lay off all of these government workers - the taxes they don't pay into the IRS might be missed! I think a tax consultant would advise one to pay their 'taxes' even though they are government workers. LOL

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Ninja - We agree

Government workers DO NOT pay taxes!

Just like corporations do not pay taxes, the consumers of their products or services pays the tax. Corporations simply adjust their income stream after tax to achieve an appropriate ROI based on the risk of the investment.

So, who pays for government?

Everyone that doesn't work for the government that purchases products in the marketplace. This assumes of course that government workers are not using investment income to purchase products and only has income from their government jobs.

So, Ninja what's the logical conclusion? Who should have a voice in how much they are taxed? Government workers? Those that are "job creators"? Shouldn't we simply limit the franchise?

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
PTCO Fails Econ 101 Again!

PTCO, I thought an Austrian School argument might awaken you from your zombie state!

However, you erroneously assume that corporations can hike prices to the exact same extent of any tax increase. Prices are determined by the supply-demand curve, not tax rates! Corporations can only hike prices to cover any tax increase to the extent that consumers are willing to pay higher prices! So, while it is correct to say that corporations themselves, as artificial persons, do not pay taxes, it is INCORRECT to say that shareholders do not. Back to Clayton State for another round of Econ 101 for you my friend. Happy 2012!

Take a 20% increase in the corporate tax rate for example. If consumers are willing to pay a price that covers only 10 basis points of the 20% tax hike, the corporation (ie, shareholders) must bear the brunt of the remainder in the form of lower retained earnings (and dividends).

No, I do not favor limiting voting only to those that pay taxes. The Republic has been undone and never to be assembled again. Stop looking 200 years into the past and start looking 200 years into the future! You should watch Star Trek!

Falcons win, Lions lose. Giants or Cowboys here we come!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Ninja - Laughable

arguments made by an amateur economist. If all corporations are taxed the same without "loopholes" then they would all be on level economic ground. Naturally they all have other competitive advantages and must meet competitive market forces, but taxes applied equability means that consumers pay the tab.

Again, corporations pay a return on risk that is tax neutral.

Shareholders are voluntary holders of equity, they need not hold an equity that does not pay a fair return on investment. If corporations pass taxes to shareholders and pay shareholders less than they expect (either dividends or appreciation) they simply move their investment to an investment that will return what they want.

It is you that need to return to your social engineering class and get some useless myths that will support your illogical arguments.

However, you are correct that government employees pays no tax.

Looking at history can tell us where we have gone wrong, or do you deny our fiscal reality as well?

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
PTCO--Laughing Back At You

Your writing is so incoherent I can't figure out what you intend to say!

I guess you better sign up for English 101 while you are at it! Are you even a native speaker?

Let's make it simple for you. This is the colouring book version, but you still might have to take off your shoes to figure it out!

Take a three-party economy:
1. Corporation
2. Consumer
3. Government

Corporation sells 1 widget per year for $100. Costs are $50 per widget. Gross profit is therefore $50 per year. Corporate tax rate is 50%.

So, taxes paid to government is $25 ($50 x 50%). Profit after tax is $25. All profit after tax paid out as dividends to a single shareholder ($25).

Government raises tax rate to 75%. Corporation wants to maintain the same after-tax profit. To do so, the price of the widget would have to rise to $150 ($150 price - $50 costs = $100 gross profit, times 75% tax rate = tax of $75, leaving after-tax profit unchanged at $25).

However, Mr. Consumer rejects the $150 price and is only willing to pay $120 for the widget. $120 price - $50 costs = $70 gross profit, times 75% tax rate, equals tax of $52.50, leaving $17.50 in after-tax profit, versus $25 in profit before.

So, the consumer, by the magic of the supply-demand curve, has born only A PORTION of the tax increase, while the shareholder has also shouldered a portion.

In the end, the government gets $27.50 more in taxes ($52.50 new tax amount - $25 old tax amount), consumers pay $20 more for the widget ($120 new price - $100 old price, and shareholders lose $7.50 in dividends ($25 old dividend - $17.50 new dividend).

On second thought, perhaps you should sign up for pre-Econ 101!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Ninja - You

must be an accountant, you're certainly not an economist.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
PTCO, Not An Accountant but

WHATEVER I AM I am far more knowledgeable about accounting, finance, economics, and football than you are! You continually throw out half-baked ideas that don't make any sense whatsoever! It's evident that you are uneducated or ill-educated and don't really have a basic grasp of the topics you comment on!

Take for example,

'Corporations simply adjust their income stream after tax to achieve an appropriate ROI based on the risk of the investment.'

What in the world does this mean? I guess you mean that corporations try to raise prices to offset external disruptions to their profit streams, including increases in input costs and taxes, etc.

However, consumers, whether retail or wholesale, DO NOT have to accept higher prices. They can purchase substitute goods or foregone consumption of a particular good altogether!

I really think you would be better off watching football rather than embarrassing yourself on the blog!

Anyway, Happy 2012!

BTW, you think UGA can pull off a victor today? Kickoff in about 45 mins. UGA will be the tam with the big G on the side of their helmets!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Ninja - You're

an accountant for sure.

You are excellent at point out things with precision but are totally useless to the argument. You're also good at putting words in my mouth.

Of course consumers don't have to pay the increased prices if they choose not to, corporations can adjust their income streams by reducing costs, increasing prices, or both. This Ninja is what they do and that's why they move their jobs offshore. Either way they adjust and when they do they either maintain their ROI or improve it.

So, who pays for the tax? This is the question at hand, shareholders don't they adjust their risk assessment and move their investments to other corporations that give them a ROI based on this risk assessment. It is the consumer of the product or service that pays the tax. Corporations don't pay tax, they simply avoid costs and tax is among these costs.

Yes, you are correct, consumers can simply not purchase a product if prices are increased or they can buy substitutes. They do these things, but what of the corporations that must adjust through price increases? Well if they can't adjust their costs and consumers refuse to accept the price increase, then their margin (ROI) is reduced, ergo they lose investors, layoff workers because of reduced demand, shutdown factories to adjust their fixed costs, etc. You know, just like reality.

Ninja, now this is key, pay attention. All this is over time, this is the distinction between accounting (specific transactions) and economics (long term results).

I think MSU will win by a field goal in double overtime.

Happy New Year to you too Ninja.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
PTCO, I Have To Put Words

in your mouth because your own words make no sense! At least you seem to have learned something in this recent exchange though!

PTCO quote open:

'Yes, you are correct, consumers can simply not purchase a product if prices are increased or they can buy substitutes. They do these things, but what of the corporations that must adjust through price increases? Well if they can't adjust their costs and consumers refuse to accept the price increase, then their margin (ROI) is reduced, ergo they lose investors, layoff workers because of reduced demand, shutdown factories to adjust their fixed costs, etc. You know, just like reality.'

PTCO quote close.

I am glad you finally accept the fact that someone other than consumers bears the burden of higher taxes if corporations cannot directly offset with higher prices or other means! Case closed--another Ninja victor over ignorance and wrong-thinking!

However, as for losing investors, that is not possible. Unless a corporation buys back its stock, the number of shares outstanding is fixed! An investor cannot sell shares unless another one buys them! Looks like you need Finance 101 too!

Also, assuming that an investor does find a willing buyer in the face of a tax hike, the price will in all likelihood reflect a discount for the higher tax rate! So, the investor has already paid a price for the tax increase in the form of a lower stock price!

Anyway, I'm glad that you admitted that I am correct! If you do this more often, you will have a happier life and be on the path to living in the real world! You might even tap into the Tao by accident!

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
....

...

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Bigfoot, the GOP wants to do away with both Social Security

and Medicare. Even though that smells like freedom to the GOP, it will be a weak hand to play in the next election cycle.

TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005
Gort where you getting this stuff

You need a new source for your information

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Ahhrr Tin Can, perhaps that bow wave has

reduced visibility to your bridge and your moral compass is pulling you too far starboard and it escapes your view! Ahhrr!

On these very pages of “The Citizen” forum alone, Social Security and Medicare have been called socialism, a Ponzi scheme, too expensive, welfare, and worst by GOP/Teaparty water carriers. They’re just repeating what they have been conditioned to say by their political leaders.

If the GOP/Teaparty ever gets the votes, Social Security and Medicare will be taken apart piece by piece until it no longer exists.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort

I assume you feel that taking apart SS and Medicare is a bad thing? ;-)

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, yes I do. It would be a disaster

to dismantle Social Security and Medicare. What puzzles me is so few are willing to publicly defend Social Security and Medicare, now that it’s under such a direct threat from the GOP.

BTW, it was very cleaver of you to pick up on how I felt about the Social Security and Medicare issue. Tell me, what gave me away? 8 - )

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - Whether

we agree or not, I can count on you being consistent.

Why do you think dismantling SS and Medicare would be a disaster? Not to be too cynical here, but I think they were simply put in place by the political elite to get re-elected, they certainly will fail in the long run. After all the premise under which they were formulated no longer holds. That is that the proportion of available workers will always rise. As we have seen over the last decade or so American workers are declining as a percentage of the overall population. So, these two government programs will fail, we should be looking at how we can eliminate them and lean on personal responsibility instead. The only "safety net" that we should provide for is our own. If we did this then the family unit as a whole would be better off and a lot stronger than it is today.

BTW, the GOP is not a threat to these two programs, they want to get re-elected too. ;-)

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_O, dismantling Social Security and Medicare

will be a disaster because it would increase the number of poor among the elderly.

BTW, just because the GOP don’t mention it in the campaign, doesn’t mean they won’t do away with Social Security and Medicare if they get the votes. The special interest people that push the GOP’s buttons would insist on it.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - Do you

think SS keeps people out of poverty? You don't really believe this do you? I would agree that it would increase the number of elderly that would continue to work, but I don't think it would drive them into the poor house.

Please calm your fears about the GOP, in order to undo SS and Medicare would require something that politicians lack....a backbone.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, yes, I do think Social Security and Medicare

keeps many of the elderly out of poverty. I hear that ‘flip’ answer about how the elderly can just continue to work all the time but who would want to hire them or sell them medical insurance at a price they can afford?

The answer is, not enough to satisfy the demand and that is the reason we have Social Security and Medicare in the first place.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
It's so easy Gort...

Those that are on it stay on it... Those that have paid in get it back over 10-20 years in the form of tax breaks and those that have never paid in never will. The program is fixed and goes away in one generation.

It is a fact if you took the same money and just put it into a regular low return savings account over the same time period you would now have accumulated over double what you have in your so called Government "secured" trust fund.

Gort it is also a fact that Social Security is now broke.. When it pays out more then it takes in by any definition it means it's broke. Government keeps borrowing from it to buy votes..ie... the latest tax "break" Obama just pushed came from SSI funding. Borrowing from the future to buy votes today is corrupt at best.

Medicare is fixed in the same fashion.. Both programs gives a false sense of security to everyone... We pay into the system thinking it will always be there for us and we know that cannot be true.

As the population ages and fewer and fewer workers pay into the system it becomes an unsustainable model.

Gort they have to change. Status Quo is impossible to maintain we have hit the wall and can not go much further. We are $15 Trillion in debt with no hope of recovery. I know you think we can just keep spending and borrowing with no consequences but you sir are incorrect.

Greece and Italy also thought the same and look where they are at. If you think we can never end up like them you are sadly mistaken.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, you are confusing an investment with insurance.

Social Security and Medicare are not savings investment plans. A 401K or other similar instruments are savings investment plans but Social Security and Medicare is insurance.

I have no illusions of the seriousness of the debt problem but the debt problem was not caused by Social Security and Medicare and shouldn’t be used as the silver bullet to remedy the problem.

My opinion is, the GOP/Teaparty wants to use Social Security and Medicare as their personal ATM machine so they can continue to give millionaires and corporations favorable tax treatment at the expense of the elderly.

Our children will need Social Security and Medicare for the same reasons seniors need it now. You can pontificate around it all you want but that is a fact of life.

Sorry but, I’m not swayed by your ‘doomsday’ GOP/Teaparty argument.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Some get it gort

Obviously you do not...

"Our" Children wouldn't "need" it if we would do the right thing now. Gort it is NOT going to be available to them no matter what you wish would happen.

America is going broke and you and yours ,as well as, I and mine have helped do it to ourselves. We either man up now, bite the bullet and get it done or events will pass us by and force a change we will not like.

Your ideas and ideology were expressed in Greece....How is that working out for them?

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, you got proof that our children won’t

need Social Security and Medicare? Or are we just supposed to take your word for it.

Like I told you before, sorry but, I’m not swayed by your ‘doomsday’ GOP/Teaparty argument.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Here it is

Gort I said if we did the hard things now they wouldn't need it.. I also said they are not going to have it anyway.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

If we do the hard things now we can secure their future then they won't need it but lazy political non solutions is not the answer.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Gort - SS and Medicare

We are in the beginning of America’s silver tsunami. What this means is that more than 10,000 a day for the next 18 years will become recipients of both SS and Medicare.

It just so happens that the US fertility rate started declining after its peak (1955-59) of 3.8 to 1.8 in 1979 and now is around 2.0. (Google)

So with that said, just how will SS and Medicare remain solvent in the coming years as the number of those paying declines while the number recipients grows?

There are five ways to fix this:

*Print and or borrow more money.

*More taxes (thus sucking more money out of the economy).

*Crowding out other government expenditures and if so which ones?

*Reduce benefits to match the in-flow.

*Put a fork in it.

So what should it be??????

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Cyclist, I’ve known since I was a school boy

I was part of the baby boomer generation so I share your frustration we are still debating the issues of Social Security and Medicare.

The key to Social Security is good jobs that pay a living wage that allows for a larger and larger middle class. The key to Medicare is, Medicare for everyone, and move to a single payer system of medical insurance.

So what do you think should be done?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Why don't we go ahead and kill Capitalism

in favor of Socialism. Then Utopia will finally be achieved.

Everyone with a pot in the kitchen and a Chicken in every pot.

Nonsense.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Socialism/Capitalism

When one visits China - you see how a 'socialist/communist' country has incorporated some 'capitalist' ideas.

This is an interesting discussing of the two:

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/socialism-vs-capitalism.html

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, oh listen to this, the ‘all or nothing’ argument.

Capitalism will not go away because we have Social Security or if we increase the size of the risk pool for Medicare and you know it.

Capitalism existed before and after Social Security and Medicare laws were passed. You’re just grandstanding now.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Single Payer is Socialism straight up

Just like stepping into quicksand gort there is no stepping into it just a little bit.

Why is it almost every Country that has single payer is moving away from it and you and yours want to move into it? Great Briton, as well as, Canada both have opened opportunities for private Insurance, yet we want to move to a failed system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/world/europe/25britain.html?_r=1&partn...

"Even as the new coalition government said it would make enormous cuts in the public sector, it initially promised to leave health care alone. But in one of its most surprising moves so far, it has done the opposite, proposing what would be the most radical reorganization of the National Health Service, as the system is called, since its inception in 1948.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers."

Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried...Why is it you think America could do it better?

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Slimedesy

Interstate highway system is socialism straight up!--Get off them roads!
Taxpayer funded military is socialism straight up!--Go fight the Tailban yourself!
FAA is socialism straight up! Get off them planes!
Local police force is socialism straight up--catch them robbers yourself!
Municipal water system is socialism straight up--dig that well boy!

Too many red-dye-loaded Poptarts as a kid I take it?

'I'm the president?'
-Ronald Reagan

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Grow up Ninja

Changing peoples names for insults is juvenile.

But then again that sort of explains your views.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
All Grown Up Stevie!

But, as I recall when I first joined this esteemed blog, you quit in a juvenile huff because Editor Cal saw fit to change some of your words--wah, wah, wah! And you refused to come back until you got your way, wah, wah, wah! Now you are back, without getting your way, trumpeting your arrival with a blowhard article about how you get smacked down by the Occupy folks up in ATL! Also, you pour out the usual tripe about how Obama-bad, socialism-bad, democrats-bad. Me ideas good. Me save world. Me Big Stevie. Why not debate Windows vs. Macintosh while you are at it!

The only people on here who I give rearranged names too are those that bloviate out their backsides! If you have noticed, I call Mike King Mike King, AHG AHG, David's Mom David's Mom, and even PTCO PTCO, though I do give him a hard time too. There are a select few, you among them, that win rearranged names to match their daily spiel of illogical thinking, half-baked ideas, and worn-out words!

I am continually amazed that some on this forum think they can post whatever they wish, no how matter how inane, insipid, dull, or otherwise a waste of time and words, and not have anyone call them out on it!

Now, as one of the few job creators on this forum, I must get back to work pulling that train of civil servant retiree socialism for hangers-on like Figboot and he who must not be named because he is a regular columnist and is off limits to my sharp sword of sarcasm!

BTW, do you think the Falcons can take the Giants this weekend. I think they will lose....

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
Ninja how can that be

You think the Falcons will lose? Thought you were a Bird fan through and through. Learn something new everyday.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
T-Man

I am a rationalist first and foremost! I support the Birds, but the Giant's play against Dallas and the Falcons play against the Bucs leads me to believe that the Giants will prevail this weekend, sorry to say!

The Giant's pass rush looks too strong, and the Bird's secondary looks too weak--either that or they are not being schemed correctly! What they gonna do about Victor Cruz?! Maybe have Julio or Roddy play DB in addition to receiver so they can guard him? I don't see Dunta getting the job done!

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
Ninja

I think the Falcons will lose also if they can't get a running game going. Not a Falcons fan but like to see their receivers in action. They are some of the best.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Ahh the Irony of that statement
Ninja Guy wrote:

I am continually amazed that some on this forum think they can post whatever they wish, no how matter how inane, insipid, dull, or otherwise a waste of time and words, and not have anyone call them out on it!

is not lost on me.

If you have an argument Ninja make one other then that are you not simply posting whatever you wish, no matter how inane, insipid, dull, or otherwise a waste of time and words, and not have anyone call them out on it!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Ninja - You're

not going to take that are you? Come on.....

Your not ironic, your a legend in your own mind, right?

Do you think Newcastle can go all the way? What's happened to United?

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
PTCO, I don't know if I am

going to take it or not, as I can't really make sense of Slindsey's words. I guess he is trying to say that I too make such comments and trash up the blog with useless writing. Yes, I do make inane comments, but not of my own making--I simply play on the illogical and pompous words and ideas of others, rifting poetically like erudite version of Eminem! I once saw Liverpool play Chelsea, but couldn't really make sense of a game that has no first downs or cheerleaders!

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Everyoneu knows you don't pick fights with Ninjas

They attack from darkness; never fight fairly, show no emotion, use your emotions against you, and distract with football commentary. Best to avoid them, use well lit paths, and stay in groups .

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Kevink, At Last Someone

who understands the Ninja, and my raison d'être on the Citizen blogs! The issues around here are wearing thin, so I may have to sign up on a small-town online paper in Iowa to call out the local farmers there for ruining America with their addiction to socialism in the form of crop subsidies! Should be easy pickings, but I might have to change my avatar, as they might not know what a Ninja is! Perhaps Camo Guy would be better up there, and in Brooks and the Inman Community here as well!

Oh well, back to the grind as a job creator and pulling that socialist civil servant retiree wagon with that loafing Bigfoot in it. I'm starting to feel like Boxer in Animal Farm! Might be time to pull a John Gault and head on out to Koh Samui! I wonder of my kids can train elephants? They haven't done too well with the cat thus far. But, I've got more than a few offspring, so if one get's stepped on there are replacements!

The press outside of NY likes the Falcons. Perhaps I am being too pessimistic? Since I don't have a TV, I will have to get to Best Buy early to get a good seat!

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, Canada and Great Britain actually have two very

different systems. If I understand it correctly, Canada has not one but about 15 health plans. One for each state and province and the health care providers don’t work for the government. This makes Canada more like Romney/Care in MA, than Great Britain. (Does this make Governor Romney is a Socialist? Are you going to vote for a socialist? Of course you are, ABO right?)

Now Great Britain does have a socialist system, not only do they own the risk pool they also own the means of production. After scanning your article it reads to me like the scheme is to have doctors manage the health care system. This left me with two questions. First why would doctors want to be financial managers for a health care system when they are trained as health care providers? Second, even if the doctors agreed to do it, you’re still left with a single payer insurance system and the doctors still work for the state.

It doesn’t look to me like they want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Now, what exacyly is the GOP health insurance plan?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Gort Government should not be involved in our healthcare

Because they are, we can not have a Market driven solution to rising prices. Remember it's the Government that stops us from being able to shop for insurance across State lines.

You want a solution get Government out of the business of social engineering.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
S.Lindsey and Healthcare

Gov't is in healthcare already. You see your own tax dollars go to support the poor and uninsured individuals. Your tax money is being passsed from the Gov't to the Hospital/doctor. What makes a Healthcare plan for these folk's so wrong?

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
T-woman

What incentive do the poor/uninsured have to eat healthy and excercise if their health care is covered? If taxpayers are paying for their healthcare, then taxpayers should be able to dictate what they eat and how much exercise they get each day. If they are spending their money on big-macs, twinkies, cigarettes, and liquor, then they should not be entitled to taxpayer funded healthcare.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
Joe K

See you made it into the New Year Jaggoff. We have been paying the bill since forever. Grady and hospitals like them would've closed their doors long ago without financial support for the uninsured who seek services there. Heck the Fayette Countuy Hospital/Piedmont is the same. Where do you think county hospitals get their money to keep the doors open jaggoff.

Okay monitor what they eat and smoke. What would you say one social worker per family. Where is that tax money coming from.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
What does the "T" stand for?

T must stand for "Typical Bed Wetting Liberal".

Just because we have been paying the bill forever, doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do, idiot. What do you get when you start handing out stuff for free? You get more leaches demanding an entitlement with no accountability.

You just agreed to my argument, moron.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
Joe K

Sorry for the name calling. Some people make you stoop to their level I will do better.
Joe- How do we know who is a leach and who is not, well if all have top have insurance then we will find out where the money goes. Then identify the leaches and fraud. Seek the fraud and save the money.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Gort - SS and Medicare

I see diminished or reduced benefits as one possible way to slow the hemorrhaging. The most "palatable" is to continue to raise the threshold age. This however, only buys a few years as life expectancies in this nation continues to rise even with....will with our terrible healthcare system (eyes rolling). After that, there could be means testing or other mechanisms to determine how much the tax payer/recipient will receive. Of course, if it just runs out of money then the lights go dark. Perhaps then, we'll look at our elected officials in a different light.

It probably comes at no surprise that you and I are far apart on just exactly how this nation should face this issue. I don't see the "paying a living wage" is going to make difference as government(s) (federal, state and local - they have workers and retirees too) will tax more which negates this living wage. Now don't get me wrong, I would love to see a broaden middle class. However, by the time we pay for additional guv spending and the liberal “Age of Aquarius” aka single payer we’ll be tapped out. Oh, and remember if the "guv" prints more money we end up with the decreasing value of our currency and the cycle of inflation.

Keep an eye on Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Ireland and see how they cut their social programs.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
Cyclist, the other piece that Gort cares not about

is the exodus of talent that would happen in a single payer system. A signle payer system would create its "savings" by significantly reducing the payments to providers. Providers will begin to cut services or leave fields entirely if they do not see the financial incentive to stay. Thus demand goes up at the same time that suppliy goes down.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Wedge & a Single Payer System

I believe you're on target--hell, we've already got a shortgage of primary care Docs in GA and if the Govt runs everything, it will get worse! Part of the prob is some place to do internship--slots are hard to come by though an effort is underway to increase those numbers. I've had the same Primary Care Doc for 20+ yrs and he is fearful of what will happen once the Govt is totally in charge--I fully expect him to walk away.