• -

    I don’t think my questions or demeanor are unreasonable. It’s unreasonable to broadcast a myopic viewpoint on a blog and not address dissenting opinions. Mike has chosen to cop out with being “too old” to strain his ideas through a rigorous filter. I guess Mike is an “old” dog, and independent thought is a new trick. I would love to be proven wrong.

    And I’m sorry you can’t grasp the concept of “degrees of statism”. I tried to explain in concise terms how a position that calls for government intervention is statist (by definition) to some degree (roughly proportionate to the amount of govt called for). Plus, I never used the word “Satanism” or any “code words”. I don’t need to speak in code to get my point across.

    I truly want to have honest & fruitful discussions.

    July 20, 2009 at 4:24 p.m.

  • -
    Mike, all I’m selling is the part of your brain (consciousness) you’re not using. If you don’t use it, someone else will.

    Now, I’m not calling you anything, but I am calling you out. We can all benefit from a little public discourse. I’m an information junkie and am not too proud to be proven wrong. If you have some information that’s useful, I want to know about it. It’s very obvious you’re intelligent, so I’ll never understand your reluctance to put your ideas to the test. And I don’t think I’m being unreasonable.

    So be it.

    July 17, 2009 at 5:09 p.m.

  • BSspotter
    It must be my lucky day, because I was just going to amend my response by saying that you seem to be a nice reasonable man but you last statement makes me think you are a pushy annoying salesman.

    Two things, I don’t do interviews or requests.

    ……Call me whatever you want, but I am too old to play games and you won’t get an answer from me..Now, shoo, go find someone else to pester.

    I did visit your blog…nice

    Have a good night

    July 17, 2009 at 4:51 p.m.

  • And you can stay tuned to my blog:

    July 17, 2009 at 4:36 p.m.

  • --

    Where’s the harm in trying to answer those questions? What are you afraid of?

    By the way, I don’t agree with everything Ron Paul says either, but I admire his spirit to challenge the system to adhere to the law. But really, Mike, an ideology/movement has to be popular BEFORE you’ll pay attention to it? The merit of that position doesn’t matter? Baaah.

    And Paul has the majority of his fellow Representatives attention with HR-1207: Audit the Fed Bill. He has 270 co-sponsors, 218 being a majority. But it will surely get butchered or watered down by Barney Frank in committee, despite the overwhelming support. The similar bill in the Senate is meeting resistance because they’re less accountable to the people. Do you have an argument against Federal Reserve transparency?

    So, you’ve partially proved my point that you can’t think outside of that cramped little Left-vs-Right box. You had to pigeonhole me into one of your predefined, low-resolution political categories and dismiss my position with a canned answer.

    I will challenge you again to be a trooper and enlighten me with a response to those health care questions. Anyone else want to hear Mike’s take? Me too.

    July 17, 2009 at 4:35 p.m.

  • Catahula
    You question my honesty when I wrote this statement “As I flipped through the tuner all I could find was right wing talk shows complaining about the House Healthcare proposal.”…. I meant two things by that statement 1. Right wing stations were all I could pick up…2. The message was the same….. I was trying to get to sleep, flipping through the stations, and you want to compare what I heard… It’s not even close to being apples and oranges.

    I don’t really care if you disagree with me on any topic, respectfully or not.

    I end a lot of my posts by admitting I do not have all the answers, but I’m old enough and have enough experience on this forum, to know what posters I can have a dialogue with….. With some, it is a complete waste of their time and mime.

    July 17, 2009 at 4:24 p.m.

  • BSspotter
    There is a reason I have ignored your post and your request….. I am too old to listen to the Ron Paulite’s vision of the world, according to the gospel of Ron Paul…. There is a reason he only got 42 electoral delegates, he is way out there…..

    We’re not going to eliminate the Internal Revenue, the CIA, Fed, EPA or the teachers union; so it is a complete waste of my time to even discuss such matters.

    And as I keep saying, when you find those like -minded people that want to see government reduced to the size of a Radio Shack outlet, win at the ballot box and get a majority of the 535 legislator's attention, then people will take you seriously. Right now that movement is no more than a novelty. It is still about Republicans and Democrats….

    Don’t get me wrong, I like Ron Paul, and he does make sense on some subjects, but I have yet to meet, any of his supporters that believe everything he says. There will always say something like this, “well I wouldn’t go as far’ as to bring all of our military home.”

    I’m not that gullible, the two -party system has its faults, but it’s easy being out of power and having all the answers ,because you will ever be tested.

    You have a good day, and I’m pretty sure you can find some converts in other threads…. I’m not one of them.

    When and if a National Healthcare plan comes up, I will be happy to discuss the merits and faults of such a system.

    I hope you did not take my response as a personal attack, but more as a “don’t bother me with that nonsense” in a kind way..

    July 17, 2009 at 3:53 p.m.

  • Vet you say "we are a nation that will not spend billions to keep its 300 million citizens alive, healthy and productive." Do you know for a fact that universal health care will do that? I strongly suspect you don't.

    The evidence suggests quite the opposite. It says health care will be worse and more people will have improper care and premature deaths.

    And Mike makes a similar mistake. He says health care needs to be fixed because it is so expensive. The fact is Medicare and Medicaid was enacted to make health care "affordable", but instead health care cost have escalated at two to three times the rate of inflation. So more government financed health care is suppose to make it "more affordable" ?

    The evidence strongly suggests it will become more expensive and it will bankrupt our country. Oh I know Mike says "they" are not going to make it "universal." That's what they say but that's not what they want and they know that once this door is opened, universal health care will be the result.

    I had a good chuckle the other day when some Democratic congressman said that health care reform will drive down the cost and "improve" the quality of health care - you can do one or the other but not both.

    July 17, 2009 at 3:32 p.m.

  • Wonder if you would be honest enough to say what station you listened to.
    My radio station is actually reading the pages of the bill outloud so that you can be educated on the facts in the morning.
    And if it the callers you are listening to --then that is just like all this gabbing. There are so many view points; it is like blind men touching the elephant.
    Many of us are wrong. But Mike, I have to respectfully disagree with you on the medical bill.

    July 17, 2009 at 3:11 p.m.

  • Sorry, that's what I get for trying to paint and post at the same time.
    Too many MOON jokes to put on here. They may get deleted.

    July 17, 2009 at 3:10 p.m.

  • Come on Vet you can do better than that..

    July 17, 2009 at 3:07 p.m.

  • -
    Mike, my questions still stand:

    I welcome anyone to take a shot at it, though.

    Everyone, stating the obvious that (opposing) politicians are corrupt is NOT an argument FOR nationalized health care. If anything, it argues against letting any government entity administer such a system.

    July 17, 2009 at 3:02 p.m.

  • And I'm sure only LUNAtics would know where that cantina is.

    July 17, 2009 at 2:57 p.m.

  • I know where you and Vet can get tickets to the MOON. Go to "H" street and turn left on "D" street, their is a cantina there called I promised you the moon.

    July 17, 2009 at 2:52 p.m.

  • Truly I thought you might be smart enough not to just throw out a right- wing bogeyman scare tactic, instead of concentrating on the problems and the merits of the Health Reform bill, as it written….. The lobbyist have input on every page of this Health Care Reform bill…. I saw this afternoon where Susan Collins, Orrin Hatch and about four other republicans are taking part in this Health Care reform bill but I also saw some stumbling blocks, like the president’s time-line.

    One more time, the naysayers the skeptics and the republicans know if this Health Care Reform bill is successful, it will mean four more years for the Obama Administration and at least 12 more years of Democrat domination because a majority of them will be seen to be obstructionists ,with no solutions of their own….IMO

    You have a good day; I have other things to do this afternoon.

    BTW I saw that study several years ago and it did not prove your statement.

    July 17, 2009 at 2:39 p.m.

  • Truly I thought you might be smart enough and notice how short that last sentence was based on a study?

    July 17, 2009 at 2:21 p.m.

  • And he didn't have to go to "C" street.

    July 17, 2009 at 2 p.m.

  • It's all Clinton's fault.

    July 17, 2009 at 1:53 p.m.

  • Darn Vet, I was going to use that if the “Moon shot example” myself.

    Itisi, in your quest to make the illegal immigrants, the bogeyman, you should read before you post.
    You posted the last sentence “The current house bill makes a commitment to all people who are lawfully present to be covered in the new health care plan.”…. What is it about “lawfully present” that you don’t understand?


    I heard Rachel Maddow describe that “C” street building, a conservative frat house.

    Another Republican senator who lived in that building, a Rep. Chip Pickering from Mississippi had an affair inside that building…. The wife of Mr. Pickering is suing the mistress.. Does Senator Colburn have a law degree? That makes three from same “C”street building, that’s quite a bible study group.

    You remember Steve Largent, it seems like he was a counselor to all three… Today, Steve Largent is a lobbyist for the same firm that Pickering‘s mistress owns.

    Mr. Ensign’s might have some problems with Internal Revenue because a “the $96,000 cannot be giving for future favors.”…. Senator Ensign called it a gift but his parents said a portion of it was for severance pay ($25,000)…. That $25,000 was not listed in Senator Ensign Ethic disclosure form…. If guilty of not reporting, could mean five years in a Federal penitentiary..
    Remember all the noise about the tax problems of the president's nominees..Not a word from them about these guys.

    Could they blame it all on the illegal immigrants?

    July 17, 2009 at 1:37 p.m.

  • Amazing, ain't it? 40 years ago we were a nation that spent billions of dollars on the crap shoot of putting three men on top of 3,200 tons of hellfire wrapped in an aluminum skin and firing the whole thing at a dead rock 240,000 miles away because our destiny demanded it.
    40 years later we are a nation that will not spend billions to keep its 300 million citizens alive, healthy and productive because the insurance industry lobbyists who own our politicians forbid it.
    Now if I can be excused, I have to see if there are any openings at C Street in Washington. Sounds like a fun place.

    July 17, 2009 at 12:47 p.m.

  • LULAC supports a public health plan and the elimination of disparities within the national health care system as key components of comprehensive health reform," said Rev. Deacon Sal Alvarez, Chair of the National LULAC Health Commission.
    According to a recent study done by the Pew Hispanic Center, of the uninsured population in the United States, one out of every three persons are Hispanic. Forty-five percent of all undocumented children are uninsured and 59 percent of all undocumented adults are uninsured. The current house bill makes a commitment to all people who are lawfully present to be covered in the new health care plan.

    July 17, 2009 at 12:25 p.m.

  • This is what I found from the Kaiser News report dated July 9,2009

    "As Congress wrangles with overhauling the health care system, there is one population not being discussed. No proposal for a national health plan would cover the nation's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants

    July 17, 2009 at 12:06 p.m.

  • Itisi
    What do you mean by “Now you La Raza demanding government healthcare for illegal aliens?” can you cite a source?

    The large number of democrats that have problems with the current Health Care reform bill are Blue Dog Democrats (conservative democrats from conservative districts) 52 in number…… Follow the money, check the lobbyist contributions ….Yes, it is about the cost, but if we continue to ignore the problem, we will still get the $2.6 trillion bill at the end of the year.

    These dogfights between republicans and democrats have been going on for years, so whenever you think about this president, he is a politician that wants to get re-elected. He knows that a poorly crafted bill or if policies do not we work, he will first lose house and senate seats, then if economy does not turn around by the year 2011, he will not be re-elected.

    As I continue to say, the naysayer and skeptics will never approve anything that this Democratic Congress or the president wants to do, so he needs to take the bull by the horns, and accept responsibility and defeat, if it does not work. I understand that the opposition has to whine and gripe but a true certain solution would solidify their position in the upcoming elections.
    As I said before, I’m not going to pretend that I have all the answers, or that the president’s policy will work but I have put my money where my mouth is, and reinvested in the market because I feel confident this administration will make adjustments, so we can begin getting out of this recession by the end of the year. I will allow for bumps in the road along the way, but I’m still waiting for the GOP’s solutions.

    A lot of the stimulus money will start to kick in the next three months in the latter part of 2011; we will see the results (good or bad)…. I already hear talk coming from the republican leadership that, “yes, we’re showing some signs of recovery, but if we would have been better off ,if only we would have instilled their plan."..That is to be expected.

    BTW I guess you know that if you entered your post on the many anti-Obama blogs you would get a “atta boy” and you would be with likeminded individuals.

    No,I want you to point out the section in the proposed bill..I am a simple man, but I don't like accusations without documentation...That's how rumors are taken for fact.

    July 17, 2009 at 11:53 a.m.

  • Go to the LA Raza web site, that will clear up that Q & A..

    July 17, 2009 at 11:47 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    July 17, 2009 at 11:34 a.m.

  • First off do not call it Healthcare Reform, it is a new Healthcare system, designed by the President to give European style healthcare to American citizens. The President does not care about the cost, if he did, he would have went back to the drawing board and came up with a new plan.

    Healthcare Reform; congress can fix what we already have it really needs an overhaul w/out a doubt.

    Now you La Raza demanding government healthcare for illegal aliens, and you can bet the President will give La Raza what ever they want. Now there is a large number of Democrats backing away from the President healthcare plan solely because of the cost.

    Democrats and Republicans better wake up. Cap & Trade along with a new healthcare system will put this country in a position that has never been seen. The President better wake up because he is putting a burden on the taxpayer and it does not matter if you’re rich or poor. Partly opinion and based on fact..

    July 17, 2009 at 10:57 a.m.

  • ---

    I have to repost one of my earlier comments because it applies here too. These national health care pushers are full-blown Marxists (I don’t use that term lightly), and they know well what effects these policies will have on the macro-economy and our micro-economies. Collectivism (fascism/socialism) can’t exist when the means of production are scattered and independent.

    The following three-paragraph comment was posted on the John Deere story:

    “CONSOLIDATION!! This is what you should expect in our top-heavy society. Consolidation in business. Consolidation of means of production, especially food. Consolidation of money & banking. Consolidation of power in government. What’s next, consolidation of people into happy-fun camps? Nah.

    There’s very little hope in reversing this trend because government is increasing the cost of entry into markets with new taxes, environmental restrictions, and accounting regulations. Under these conditions, competition can’t emerge. (“Competition is a sin” – John D. Rockefeller) Competition is the hidden force that creates lower prices, product diversity, efficient business models, proper allocation of resources, and innovation – pretty much all the positive economic outcomes our elected/appointed central planners think they can generate by edict. I hope you’re ready to discover what lack of competition yields. (This isn’t just a product of this administration, so don’t you dare flip into “blame Obama” mode. There’s a bigger picture!)

    Look, we just saw the struggling auto companies adopt a business model (govt coercion?) similar to John Deere’s. Either GET ANGRY or get used to it. We have to remember where the power should lie in American society – The Individual, from the bottom up. As long as we keep feeding their top-down power structures, we’re destined to have the proverbial boot stomping on our faces.”

    July 17, 2009 at 10:23 a.m.

  • Correction legion
    The 1993 effort did not count because a health care bill could have been passed with about 42 GOPers but Hillary got greedy and wanted it her way,so I count that as kicking it down the road.

    July 17, 2009 at 9:52 a.m.

  • Legion357
    I’m not arguing your point, and I wholeheartedly agree with your, by the way statement.

    I’m not against big business or small-business because my portfolio depends on them making a profit but my emphasis is on the middle- class, who are being hit the hardest with the rising cost of Health Care, education, and debt. I remember about three years ago when Bill Maher asked Mark Cuban, how he felt when the lawmakers’ want to impose taxes on the rich. Mark Cuban said “I have a roomful of tax lawyers whose job it is to minimize the effect.” The middle class does not have that luxury. That was a Point I was trying to make when I mentioned the listeners of talk radio. They entered into what I call “the sound bite generation” because they’d turn their attention on a 3 to 5% surtax, which really won’t affect the wealthy as much as the Medicaid and Medicare cuts will do to the recipient’s, hospital’s and, doctors etc. That is the reason the CBO came out with a damaging report saying that the current proposal will increase cost. The Obama Administration needs to accept the report, go back to the drawing board and resubmit the proposal.

    Health Care reform has been kicked down the road for 30 years, now we find all the major players at the table with the hospitals, Big Pharma, and the AMA finding ways they can reduce cost to the taxpayers. They were not at the table last year.

    BTW The president is finally getting engaged and is going after, as he puts it, “those that sit on the sidelines and just gripe and whine.” About four administration department heads wrote letters to the Arizona governor asking her to return the funds that John McCain and John Kyl said are not helping the economy. The governor called it a threat but accepted the funds anyway. Can’t have it both ways.

    July 17, 2009 at 9:47 a.m.

  • And oh yeah Mike I got a chuckle out of your claim it's only a 3% tax increase - This is from the Wall Street Journal:

    Every detail isn't known, but late last week Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel disclosed that his draft bill would impose a "surtax" on individuals with adjusted gross income of more than $280,000 a year.

    This would hit job creators especially hard because more than six of every 10 who earn that much are small business owners, operators or investors, according to a 2007 Treasury study.

    That study also found that almost half of the income taxed at this highest rate is small business income from the more than 500,000 sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations whose owners pay the individual rate.

    In addition, many more smaller business owners with lower profits would be hit by the Rangel plan's payroll tax surcharge. That surcharge would apply to all firms with 25 or more workers that don't offer health insurance to their employees, and it would amount to an astonishing eight percentage point fee above the current 15% payroll levy.

    Here's the ugly income-tax math. First, Mr. Obama has promised to let the lower Bush tax rates expire after 2010. This would raise the top personal income tax rate to 39.6% from 35%, and the next rate to 36% from 33%.

    The Bush expiration would also phase out various tax deductions and exemptions, bringing the top marginal rate to as high as 41%.

    Then add the Rangel Surtax of one percentage point, starting at $280,000 ($350,000 for couples), plus another percentage point at $400,000 ($500,000 for couples), rising to three points on more than $800,000 ($1 million) in 2011.

    But wait, there's more. The surcharge could rise by two more percentage points in 2013 if health-care costs are larger than advertised -- which is a near-certainty.

    Add all of this up and the top marginal tax rate would climb to 46%, which hasn't been seen in the U.S. since the Reagan tax reform of 1986 cut the top rate to 28% from 50%.

    States have also been raising their income tax rates, so in California and New York City the top rate would be around 58%. The Tax Foundation reports that at least half of all states would have combined state-federal tax rates of more than 50%.

    Mr. Rangel also wants to apply his surcharges to investment income like capital gains. So the combined effect of repealing the Bush tax cuts and the new surcharges would be to raise the tax on stock appreciation by at least 60% -- to as high as 24% from 15% today.

    President Obama has been worrying about a capital squeeze on small businesses, but raising the capital gains tax would only further starve them of funds.

    July 17, 2009 at 9:41 a.m.

  • Mike, thanks for citing the "Tax Policy Center" you might as well have referenced "The Daily Worker."

    "The Tax Policy Center is the product of the left-leaning Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute."

    Raising taxes on "investors" will - I know this comes as a shock - reduce investment because it will lower the return on investment.

    What socialists don't understand is the relation between risk and return. The greater the risk the greater is the return demanded to make that investment. Starting a business is a risky business. It's the investor that takes that risk as it should be.

    So if taxes are raised there will be less entrepreneurship not more. But what really drives the economy into the ditch more than tax policy is excessive spending, like we are doing now.

    Congress has the markets in such turmoil I doubt any new investments are being considered.

    July 17, 2009 at 9:01 a.m.

  • Mike,

    I don’t suckle on the teat of either political party and am not persuaded or impressed by political pong. Can you explain in detail to folks like me who don’t have burdensome, objectivity-destroying allegiances how nationalized heath care will benefit America in the long term? Will we be healthier in 50 years because of it or in spite of it? Will it be more successful that other government ventures into health care? And please don’t overlook how our government fails at nearly EVERYTHING it ever does on a national scale. Please present other instances of how government intervention lowered the cost or improved the quality of a service or product. Also, take a moment to consider the ways government already intervenes in our health care system and ponder the impact.

    I’ll get you started:
    - HMO Act of 1973 (created those horrible HMOs)
    - Non-negotiable Medicare prescription drug plan (maximum cost boondoggle!)
    - Medicare & Medicaid (10s of trillions in unfunded liabilities)

    Now consider the culture our welfare system has created. Instead of being a safety net, it’s an inescapable black hole. Plus, the GAO projects Social Security to be a $40-50T liability. When will the experiment with my grandkids’ futures end?!

    What’s keeping our current health care system from operating in and benefitting from a true free market, like for instance, the MP3 player, computer or cell phone markets? In most other free markets open to competition, prices go down and quality increases over time. (We haven’t had a true free market in decades, but there’s still enough competition to partially simulate market forces.)

    Please try to convince me that central planning works, and leave out all the emotional talking points. Talk to me like I’m Murray Rothbard.

    Oh, one more question: How long will I have to wait for surgery to repair the sphincters that have been annihilated by the taxman?

    July 16, 2009 at 9:59 p.m.

  • I saw on the scroller on HLN this morning..Democrats pushing health insurance tax to pay for their healthcare plan. They are going to tax MY health insurance payments to pay for their program. That, to me, is wrong. I will essentially be punished for having the very thing they are going to force me to have. I'm sooo confused....I guess I should just start mailing my paychecks to DC so I can stop worrying about when they are going to come take it, at least I will have some control/say in the situation.

    July 16, 2009 at 8:07 p.m.

  • LOL,(the blame the current administration and go for it.)

    One point tho, which segment of the country business employee the most people?

    Sure big business can say they employee 25,000 workers( or pick any number).

    The fact of the matter is, is that small businesses as a group, employee the majority of workers.

    If a small business hires, say two more workers, at $8 a hour, that is $620 a week, minus taxes, that the workers spend on goods,and that in itself drives up demand on the companies they buy goods from.

    Besides putting more payroll taxes in the federal coffers, it increases consumer demand,more money to spend.

    Call it trickle down or whatever you want, but I am not talking about multi billion dollar investment firms.

    By the way, with all the TARP funds the banks and investment firms received, how many new hires did they make? I don't know for sure, but every single one of them terminated employees,reported large profits and have not rehired or replaced employees.

    July 16, 2009 at 7:56 p.m.