Don't let it be said

[Chaser™]

I actually was just trying to slip in a one liner but obviously failed 


Out I Go

[ronws]

Well, Chez, at least we can agree on some of the economics. But in varying degrees. Maybe american govt sucks at business, as it has often been proven. Maybe Great Britain does it better. Which would illustrate my point in perhaps a slightly less antagonistic way. Every time the american govt tries to control or fix something, they screw it up and bury it in red tape. So, at least in the America, the solution, to me and a large majority, believe it or not, is to have less govt control. We could fix our healthcare through free market with a minimum of taxes and save a govt option, limited, for those who are truly poor and destitute. For those making a decent wage, they could afford their own but it would require less taxes and allowing us to invest our own money in, for one thing, HSAs.

(H)ealth (S)ervice (A)ccounts. Right now, thanks to fed govt regulation, you can only get one if you already pay a high premium policy and then, you can only build value up to $ 3,000 USD per year. Get rid of that stupid limit. An HSA is essentially a managed investment fund, similar to our 401 (k) retirement fund. In your 20's, you could start out literally putting in just dimes and nickels. As you grow older and make more money, you could put in more. Employers could offer as one of their benefits, a participation in your HSA like some of them do with your 401 (k). I worked at one company where we didn't have paid holidays but the employer participated up to 15 % annually in your 401 (k) until the yearly contribution had reached $ 10k and then you could continue contributing for that year as you please. And he also contributed when there was massive profit on a project. I received just such a profit sharing event from him and they had set up a 401 (k) account for it for me. By the time you are in your 40's, when you are more likely to need some healthcare (it's called growing old and falling apart), you could easily have $ 1 M in accrued value. At that time, you could take some out and buy catastrophic health insurance and still have a large cash base left over for ordinary health care. If you die and there is still value in your healthcare account, you could leave it to a beneficiary. If they roll it over to their HSA, they pay no taxes. If they cash out, then they pay taxes.

Right now, in America, you can't take your insurance policy from one state or job to another. You have to get a new one when you move. And that is thanks to fed regs. If we made insurance portable, then all the companies would be competitvely wrangling for your dollar and it would keep rates down and benefits up. Also, by having tort reform and placing a limit on malpractice suits, you would limit the cost of doctors' and hospitals' insurance cost, which would make their costs managable, and therefore managable to you, the consumer. With HSAs, most of us wouldn't need medicaid and medicare and that could be largely left to just the truly indigent.

But those aren't likely to happen just now because we have an administration who cannot, even by the admission of the admin's own financial officers, stop from raising taxes.

The solution to getting healthcare for more people is not in having the govt assume the operation of it, it is to have the govt step back and let the people get their own.

I was going to say that maybe Europe is doing it better but then I see what is happening with the Euro and Germany and Greece and think maybe that would be premature to say. Greece is merely saying that they might have to reduce some of the benefits to surviving relatives of deceased govt employees and the people are going to riot. The problem is, Greece simply doesn't have the money to pay for what they promised. Just like America currently doesn't have the money to pay what they are promising with this administration. And raising taxes will kill jobs. It then becomes to expensive for a company to operate and they simply go out of business and now, you have a hundred to several thousand people out of work and no way to pay for their upkeep or the govt taxes that will have to be imposed to pay for this.

I understand that you have it in for our wartime actions and you think that support vets is tantamount to supporting our military policy. My view is different. We need a military to defend us and we need to take care of the vets who paid the price for freedom. It's one of the few things I don't mind paying taxes for. So, we'll just have to disagree on that.

But we may agree that at least some of the govt regulation on business is excessive and detrimental. But we are currently stuck with a president who sees more federal control as the solution and no one can seem to shake him off of that.

[chezequerz]

I understand that you have it in for our wartime actions and you think that support vets is tantamount to supporting our military policy. My view is different. We need a military to defend us and we need to take care of the vets who paid the price for freedom. It's one of the few things I don't mind paying taxes for. So, we'll just have to disagree on that.

But we may agree that at least some of the govt regulation on business is excessive and detrimental. But we are currently stuck with a president who sees more federal control as the solution and no one can seem to shake him off of that.

oh absolutely agree too much government (although i agree with his health care plan that's another discussion entirely) my favourite part was watching the democrats justify cutting the 3billion dollars made by large snakes by saying it's going to cost 10 billion to repair the everglades...that's a fantastic idea it's going to cost money so let's loose money.

but as for the military i'll just highlight something i said earlier i believe you may have missed it:

As for paying veterans i 100% support paying them lord knows some of them deserve it.

The USA is a xenophobic often moronic country full of people who are exactly the same. That said so is the UK and many other countries but a lot of what is done by the USA even under Bush is morally just from their view point.

i know intentions don't make up for actions but it's important to see the motive too.

i don't support fruitless Sisyphean wars however it's very important to support the people who fight them.

[NewGNRnOldGNR]

 

1. The UN? seriously? Oh God, the UN condemns! what are they gonna do? Write an angry letter?

2. Obviously nothing I say is gonna change your view point, so I'm not even gonna try. To call soldiers who give their lives for freedom and their lives for their country "butchers" is just plain pathetic and sad. But that's my opinion, so it's just as valid as yours.

Well, In August I'm gonna join the Marine Corps, and I'm proud to. Can't wait ta get over seas and butcher me sum Afghanis! Good BBQ meat I hear!

The U.S.A are accountable to the U.N like every other nation which has membership. The U.S.A always appear to disregard rules and alter the latter to suit their own selfish and undemocratic endeavours, and they should be held to account for their actions. They (U.S.A) will not be warned in regards to their actions as the U.N is filled with capitalist pigs who care for nothing more than the U.S.A's money to buy silence. The U.S.A should in reality be suspended from global proceedings, but there are too few genuine leaders within the establishment to take such a hard-line and conscious approach.

Come off it, give their lives for freedom, are you serious? You need to rid your mind of this romanticised view of what U.S “soldiers” are doing in Afghanistan. Who exactly are they liberating? Why be no naïve to give your life for a country, a piece of land which is under no threat from any foreign body? Your country could not give a damn about your “soldiers”, why give your life for selfish and self-indulgent principles? It's a huge waste of life, there is no purpose to this senseless “war”. What I find pathetic and sad is that young men like you think they're fighting for a just cause, and are willing to give their lives to be thrust from regular people to community Napoleons. The U.S.A's presence in Afghanistan is not about maintaining their so called land of liberation, it's mainly about oil. Look at it logically, on the 3rd of November 1998 Afghanistan stopped the U.S oil pipeline, a year later the U.S.A makes its first strike.

The Marine Corps, is that the same Marine Corps who shot a dog dead in Afghanistan and laughed hysterically? They're brave boys indeed. I could have an element of respect for those who fight on the ground, but up in the air is the stuff of cowards. I hope Afghanistan wakes you up to the real dirty reality of war, remember me when your higher being tells you to drop a bomb on unarmed civilians, and you hear the next day in the news that you were “shot at first” by Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

[Chaser™]

NewN'Old....I am gonna agree with you. On just about everything you said. 

[chezequerz]

The U.S.A are accountable to the U.N like every other nation which has membership. The U.S.A always appear to disregard rules and alter the latter to suit their own selfish and undemocratic endeavours, and they should be held to account for their actions. They (U.S.A) will not be warned in regards to their actions as the U.N is filled with capitalist pigs who care for nothing more than the U.S.A's money to buy silence. The U.S.A should in reality be suspended from global proceedings, but there are too few genuine leaders within the establishment to take such a hard-line and conscious approach.

Come off it, give their lives for freedom, are you serious? You need to rid your mind of this romanticised view of what U.S “soldiers” are doing in Afghanistan. Who exactly are they liberating? Why be no naïve to give your life for a country, a piece of land which is under no threat from any foreign body? Your country could not give a damn about your “soldiers”, why give your life for selfish and self-indulgent principles? It's a huge waste of life, there is no purpose to this senseless “war”. What I find pathetic and sad is that young men like you think they're fighting for a just cause, and are willing to give their lives to be thrust from regular people to community Napoleons. The U.S.A's presence in Afghanistan is not about maintaining their so called land of liberation, it's mainly about oil. Look at it logically, on the 3rd of November 1998 Afghanistan stopped the U.S oil pipeline, a year later the U.S.A makes its first strike.

The Marine Corps, is that the same Marine Corps who shot a dog dead in Afghanistan and laughed hysterically? They're brave boys indeed. I could have an element of respect for those who fight on the ground, but up in the air is the stuff of cowards. I hope Afghanistan wakes you up to the real dirty reality of war, remember me when your higher being tells you to drop a bomb on unarmed civilians, and you hear the next day in the news that you were “shot at first” by Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.

the USA don't really answer to the UN nor do any other country the UN's role is only as big as it's member states and if none will oppose the USA or the UK or China like they should have does the UN really have any power. It's little more than an adviser to any real conflicts when you think about it. If it can't gain the support of it's larger members such as the USA then it doesn't act.

i think that there is always going to be a percentage of people who do things for the romantic view, just like there will be some there for the money they earn, some for their political options after, some for the thrill of it, some because they had no alternative. It's nothing new.

i do agree though we should not look at them as if that is the primary motive but regardless of why they do it they are in fact fighting for the country.

unlike Iraq there's actually no oil in Afghanistan.

although a potential link to the theoretic three country pipeline is possible however the war was always going to cost significantly more than the pipe would earn. So it's all up for debate. I'm not disagreeing but there's not one reason for the war there are at least 5.

[ronws]

i don't support fruitless Sisyphean wars however it's very important to support the people who fight them.

Don't let it be said that I can't give you credit where it is due. I think you get points for using Sisyphean in a statement.