Support NeoGAF

[HylianTom]

Yep, thats what I meant. I never thought I'd see the day when the Republican leadership was actually hesitant in doing what Wall Street commanded of it and yet, here we are. The Republican leadership doesn't know who to listen to: the Tea Party or big business. The Tea Party has put fear into the Republican machine to either do as they say or they will be out of a job.

Here's the big question.. do you think that the GOP's relationship with big business will ever be strained to the point where a significant portion of the business community finally says, "Screw this shit. They [the GOP] have gone too far. We're voting for the Democrat this time. We might not always agree, but at least they're sane." ??

 

[Clipjoint]

We are in a woefully sluggish economy with painfully high unemployment that could very easily slip back into recession!!!

Painfully high unemployment that is even dwarfed by the amount of underemployment we have today. We need real stimulus - not a disguised tax cut like the last stimulus package - and a jobs program that gets the economy up and running again.

Banks and corporations are sitting on BOATLOADS of cash. They're not going to stop hoarding it simply because grandma has to pay her own doctor bills and ends up dying early because she was too poor to visit a specialist.

 

[mckmas8808]

I don't think anybody is saying we need an equally inane and incoherent movement as the tea party for the left. The point is that there ought to be an organized movement period to discipline elected officials (and, importantly, to given them negotiating leverage). That is all that is meant. We would all agree that a left movement ought to be coherent and rooted in serving the best interests of the American public as a whole, i.e., not incoherent and manipulated like the tea party.
!

Okay I agree, but that's not the tea party. So any comparisons to them seem ill conceived in my opinion.

And sadly this country is still leans right, so I don't see organized left wing movement with the kind of power I'd like to see.

The last time we had that in our country was in the 60s right? Would you agree with that?..

Painfully high unemployment that is even dwarfed by the amount of underemployment we have today. We need real stimulus - not a disguised tax cut like the last stimulus package - and a jobs program that gets the economy up and running again.
.

Then we'll need at least 65 DEMs in the Senate and probably at least 250 DEMs in the House in order to do that stuff. And I would like to see that too.

 

[loosus]

What cuts do we need?
Enough with this abstract bullshit.
You seem to think that there are certain government programs that we'll be better off if they're cut.
And I agree.
But this discussion have to be about the details.
Not that cuts vs taxes dollar ratio silliness.

It's already obvious what needs cutting: Social Security, Medicare, the war budgets, and the military. This has been discussed extensively. It's no longer an abstract concept.

By the way, discretionary spending (which is what I assume you meant by "certain government programs") needs cuts the least. It's not significant enough to worry about at this point, when we're going for huge cuts. That could be dealt with next year.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

It's already obvious what needs cutting: Social Security, Medicare, the war budgets, and the military. This has been discussed extensively. It's no longer an abstract concept.

By the way, discretionary spending (which is what I assume you meant by "certain government programs") needs cuts the least. It's not significant enough to worry about at this point, when we're going for huge cuts. That could be dealt with next year.

SS and Medicare do not have to be cut.

 

[loosus]

SS and Medicare do not have to be cut.

They should be.

 

[Evlar]

They should be.

Why? You have elderly family members you really, really want to support yourself?

 

[reilo]

They should be.

Why?

 

[Chichikov]

It's already obvious what needs cutting: Social Security, Medicare, the war budgets, and the military. This has been discussed extensively. It's no longer an abstract concept.

It is not obvious to me that we need to cut the services of our very modest welfare system.
I actually think we should expand it.

By the way, discretionary spending (which is what I assume you meant by "certain government programs") needs cuts the least. It's not significant enough to worry about at this point, when we're going for huge cuts. That could be dealt with next year.

I didn't talk about discretionary spending, but I agree.

 

[TacticalFox88]

SS and Medicare do not have to be cut.

They do need restructuring to account for inflation, drops in the economy and what not.

 

[Clevinger]

Why? You have elderly family members you really, really want to support yourself?

Or that you're really, really tired of.

 

[speculawyer]

Painfully high unemployment that is even dwarfed by the amount of underemployment we have today. We need real stimulus - not a disguised tax cut like the last stimulus package - and a jobs program that gets the economy up and running again.

But this just doesn't work like it did many decades ago due to globalization. Stimulus spending would merely stimulate the economies of China, Venezuela, Canada, South Korea, etc.

I'd like to believe it would work but I don't see sufficient evidence. And if it failed, you would then end up with a tepid economy and an even larger debt.

But even discussing this is kinda pointless since there is no political will for such a stimulus. Perhaps if things get worse there will be.

 

[HylianTom]

I'd almost prefer more WPA/CCC-type stimulus over any other kind. There's tons of infrastructure that needs updating/repair across the nation.

 

[Byakuya769]

But this just doesn't work like it did many decades ago due to globalization. Stimulus spending would merely stimulate the economies of China, Venezuela, Canada, South Korea, etc.

I'd like to believe it would work but I don't see sufficient evidence. And if it failed, you would then end up with a tepid economy and an even larger debt.

But even discussing this is kinda pointless since there is no political will for such a stimulus. Perhaps if things get worse there will be.

Every single raw material doesn't need to come from the US to stimulate the economy by getting ppl who will otherwise be sitting at home watching tv back into the workforce. Further there is no concrete rule that we cannot attempt to get most of our materials from here.

 

[Clipjoint]

But this just doesn't work like it did many decades ago due to globalization. Stimulus spending would merely stimulate the economies of China, Venezuela, Canada, South Korea, etc.

I'd like to believe it would work but I don't see sufficient evidence. And if it failed, you would then end up with a tepid economy and an even larger debt.

But even discussing this is kinda pointless since there is no political will for such a stimulus. Perhaps if things get worse there will be.

I don't mean straight cash like Bush gave out, I mean a massive infrastructure program to put us on equal footing with Europe and Asia. Get people working in a way that benefits the whole country.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

I'd almost prefer more WPA/CCC-type stimulus over any other kind. There's tons of infrastructure that needs updating/repair across the nation.

Not that I'm against additional stimulus but that's what they said the first one was supposed to do.

 

[mckmas8808]

SS and Medicare do not have to be cut.

They do need to be worked on. I don't believe benefits have to be cut, but both can't keep going the way that they are without "suring" them up a bit. Medicare needs ALOT of help. SS needs a little help.

I believe we can help both without cutting benefits. You can agree to that right?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

They do need to be worked on. I don't believe benefits have to be cut, but both can't keep going the way that they are without "suring" them up a bit. Medicare needs ALOT of help. SS needs a little help.

I believe we can help both without cutting benefits. You can agree to that right?

I'm in a camp that believes everyone in the entire country should be able to apply for Medicare.

Lowering health care costs all around would cause Medicare's cost to go down dramatically, without having to ever touch Medicare's funding.

 

[mckmas8808]

Not that I'm against additional stimulus but that's what they said the first one was supposed to do.

You did notice that we went from -800,000 jobs a month to +50,000-250,000 jobs a month right? A couple million people's jobs were saved or created (ToxicAdam don't do it!) due to the bill. If we could do another bill that could be at least another $250 Billion, but mostly infrastructure spending I think many more jobs could be created.

 

[HylianTom]

Not that I'm against additional stimulus but that's what they said the first one was supposed to do.

True. I'd see the highway signs all around the New Orleans area about how these were "shovel-ready" projects. I just think that it didn't go far enough.. it's going to take lots more to get back up to acceptable levels.
(and just to be clear: The last thing we need is new car infrastructure; people might not realize it yet, but we're going to be driving less in the future. We just need to repair our existing infrastructure .)

 

[mckmas8808]

I'm in a camp that believes everyone in the entire country should be able to apply for Medicare.

Lowering health care costs all around would cause Medicare's cost to go down dramatically, without having to ever touch Medicare's funding.

Man I love these great liberal ideas today. Does any conservative here, or anybody for that matter know why the GOP is against Medicare (option) for all? Even if each person paid into it themselves?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Man I love these great liberal ideas today. Does any conservative here, or anybody for that matter know why the GOP is against Medicare (option) for all? Even if each person paid into it themselves?

Will it turn a profit?

'cause I don't want it if it won't make money.

 

[Deku]

Man I love these great liberal ideas today. Does any conservative here, or anybody for that matter know why the GOP is against Medicare (option) for all? Even if each person paid into it themselves?

Choice would be brought up. And there's some merit to it, especially in the cases where the state extends universal coverage of insurace to areas outside health (ie: car insurance) where in parts of Canada there is effectively only 1 insurer, the government run one.

I don't think US conservatives are against the concept of insurance and spreading the risk and discouraging anti-selection, with which the US private insurance industry has had to deal with given the lack of universal coverage.

I'm fairly conservative, but on the issue of healthcare, I'm in favour of UHC. Even with UHC, there are private, nonprofits and semiprivate insurers selling top off coverages and dental coverages, which is not covered by our UHC.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Will it turn a profit?

'cause I don't want it if it won't make money.

This is the most painfully simplistic things I've read in while.

 

[Clevinger]

I don't think US conservatives are against the concept of insurance and spreading the risk and discouraging anti-selection, with which the US private insurance industry has had to deal with given the lack of universal coverage.

I'm fairly conservative, but on the issue of healthcare, I'm in favour of UHC. Even with UHC, there are private, nonprofits and semiprivate insurers selling top off coverages and dental coverages, which is not covered by our UHC.

Sadly, I don't think you're a typical conservative American.

 

[mckmas8808]

Will it turn a profit?

'cause I don't want it if it won't make money.

I'm being honest with my following question DOO13ER. But are you being serious?

 

[aronnov reborn]

Man I love these great liberal ideas today. Does any conservative here, or anybody for that matter know why the GOP is against Medicare (option) for all? Even if each person paid into it themselves?

because the government would control it.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

I'm being honest with my following question DOO13ER. But are you being serious?

Think it's time to take that sarcasm detector in for some warranty work, son.

 

[mckmas8808]

Think it's time to take that sarcasm detector in for some warranty work, son.

Yeah it is getting a bit old.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

because the government would control it.

Which is inherently bad because...

Apologies, DOO13ER, for missing the joke.

 

[Chichikov]

Does any conservative here, or anybody for that matter know why the GOP is against Medicare (option) for all? Even if each person paid into it themselves?

Historically, the GOP was ideologically opposed to medicare (socialized medicine!).

Only when they realized that it's a political suicide to come out and say so, they've begun to shift their effort to killing it by cutting its funding.

 

[Incognito]

sun rises on west, megan mccardle actually writes something useful!

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...ng-whats-the-end-game-for-republicans/241959/

I know I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but I continue to be mystified by what the base, the activists, and the politicians who are pushing the "no new revenue" stance hope to accomplish.

Let's start by pointing out the obvious: the Democrats do not show any signs of caving. They have offered what seem to be very attractive deals, and been turned down. Think you're going to get a more attractive deal? Every time another poll like this comes out, your bargaining position gets worse. Moreover, in Washington, deals take time. Even if Obama and the Democrats caved right now and gave the GOP massive entitlement cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, the government would be hard-pressed to hammer out the details, draft them into legislative language, get the CBO to score the cuts so you know that they're real, and then whip the votes to get the damn thing passed. Every day you wait makes it less, not more, likely that you can get any deal at all.

Maybe you think the deadline is artificial and Treasury is just exaggerating. I have been very much less than impressed by the arguments I have seen to this effect, because most of the people making them seem to be under the impression that on August 2nd Treasury can just start playing accounting games, when August 2nd is in fact the date when Treasury says it will have exhausted all the accounting games that we've previously used to finesse the debt ceiling. But even if it were true, so what? How does extending the crisis another month get us any closer to a deal? What's going to change?

rest at link

 

[mckmas8808]

Historically, the GOP was ideologically opposed to medicare (socialized medicine!).

Only when they realized that it's a political suicide to come out and say so, they've begun to shift their effort to killing it by cutting its funding.

It's so frustrating. It's weird when so many younger conservatives under the age of 40 stating that they don't want something that their parents and grandparents have.

You'd think more people under 40 would want to have it optional. Most people on Medicare like, so why wouldn't they?

 

[Chichikov]

It's weird when so many younger conservatives under the age of 40 stating that they don't want something that their parents and grandparents have.

I don't think that's true.
The public support for medicare have been extremely strong.

 

[Skiptastic]

I don't think that's true.
The public support for medicare have been extremely strong.

You'd also probably get a lot of support for the idea of Medicare for Kids. All kids under 18 covered by federal health insurance because they are weak and vulnerable and can't control what illnesses they get. I'm actually kind of surprised this wasn't the thrust of the health care bill a couple years ago.

 

[GhaleonEB]

We are in a woefully sluggish economy with painfully high unemployment that could very easily slip back into recession!!!

I'm going to channel Krugman and say, we're in the early years of a lost decade.

 

[mckmas8808]

I don't think that's true.
The public support for medicare have been extremely strong.

No I'm saying I'm surprise there's no "more" of a push for Medicare for All being that so many people seem to like it. Either people that use it or have parents or grandparents that use it. Overall like you said people like the concept of Medicare.

You'd think more people would request for it to be opened up for them to buy into.

 

[jamesinclair]

Romney is getting a lot of bad press in Mass.

Story:
There is a facility near the harbor that has been running a day camp for underprivileged kids (literacy + tennis) for years and years.

For all these years, parents have used a nearby parking lot for loading/unloading because the street is narrow. Basically, 15 minutes a day. No parking, just drop-off and pick-up. The owner of the lot has always allowed this.

Romney comes in, rents an office for his campaign and...

After complaints all around Romney says...

No.

http://www.universalhub.com/2011/romney-campaign-parents-take-hike#new

 

[polyh3dron]

Honestly, Romney has no chance, the dude is a fucking charlatan and is full of shit when he talks about his job creation skills due to his business experience. His experience is buying up companies and killing jobs.

 

[speculawyer]

I'm going to channel Krugman and say, we're in the early years of a lost decade.

Early years? I'd say we have pretty much had a lost decade already . . . . it will just continue.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Honestly, Romney has no chance, the dude is a fucking charlatan and is full of shit when he talks about his job creation skills due to his business experience. His experience is buying up companies and killing jobs.

So why is he performing well already in polls against Obama, raising good money, and avoiding mistakes (for the most part..)? Considering the economy's decline, the WH is basically Romney's to lose. If he wins the primary he wins next November, unless the economy takes a magical turn for the better.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Early years? I'd say we have pretty much had a lost decade already . . . . it will just continue.

We're about halfway there, but I have vast amounts of confidence in our ability to keep it going.

 

[mckmas8808]

Early years? I'd say we have pretty much had a lost decade already . . . . it will just continue.

It doesn't help that financial caused recessions typically last like 5 years to recover from. So really it'll probably be 2013 before things start to get back to "normal" anyway.

 

[NullPointer]

So why is he performing well already in polls against Obama, raising good money, and avoiding mistakes (for the most part..)? Considering the economy's decline, the WH is basically Romney's to lose. If he wins the primary he wins next November, unless the economy takes a magical turn for the better.

He's the Republican Kerry. Won't happen.

Can't switch horses mid-stream and all that. Stay the course.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

He's the Republican Kerry. Won't happen.

Can't switch horses mid-stream and all that. Stay the course.

Have you seen Wag the Dog?

 

[NullPointer]

Have you seen Wag the Dog?

Its been a really long time.

Ever seen Man Bites Dog?

Either way both Kerry and Romney are flaccid penises in suits.

 

[Chichikov]

No I'm saying I'm surprise there's no "more" of a push for Medicare for All being that so many people seem to like it. Either people that use it or have parents or grandparents that use it. Overall like you said people like the concept of Medicare.

You'd think more people would request for it to be opened up for them to buy into.

I agree, and you can blame that on the democrats.

I am certain medicare for all would've gotten much more public support than the bill we ended up with.

It would've also been better.

Have you seen Wag the Dog?

Ever seen Man Bites Dog?.

I want to play too!
Ever seen Cop Dog?

 

[Suikoguy]

I want to play too!
Ever seen Cop Dog?

No, but I heard it's not about a cop or a dog.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Its been a really long time.

Ever seen Man Bites Dog?

Either way both Kerry and Romney are flaccid penises in suits.

Nope. And well said.

I agree, and you can blame that on the democrats.

I am certain medicare for all would've gotten much more public support than the bill we ended up with.

It would've also been better.

This is something I've thought about a lot. It seems as though most of the attacks that were leveled against PPACA wouldn't have gotten any traction if we'd simply taken the parsimonious and easy-to-understand tack of saying, "let's give Medicare to everyone." And we would have gotten much better results for it.

 

[PhoenixDark]

He's the Republican Kerry. Won't happen.

Can't switch horses mid-stream and all that. Stay the course.

I agree, but even Kerry almost won if not for some votes in Ohio. Romney has an EC path to 270, as others have pointed out. While it's true the electorate won't look like it did in Nov 2010, it certainly won't look as it did in Nov 08 when tons of young people and blacks turned out to vote. They have no reason to show up this time. Nor do Hispanics.