In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:
The Republicans have refused to cut the $20B in subsidies given to oil
companies while looking to make "political vengeance" cuts on anything they
feel is socialism. Whether it's NPR or Planned Parenthood, helping people
isn't high on their agenda.
WHile the Dems go after the oil companies (and others) largely for
political vengance. You will note that both go after those (and the
interests of those) who have the audacity to vote against them.
Otherwise they'd realize there's plenty of good
the such organizations do that has a proven societal benefit and that they'd
be actually killing US jobs, just about the last thing Americans want right
now.
Yet the are more than willing to shut oil production, etc., not only
cutting jobs directly, but also by increasing oil prices which has an
even greater impact on jobs.
Killing them seems to be a higher priority since we're still fighting
two wars that are at least as senseless as Vietnam, and certainly longer
lasting and more expensive. But there may be signs that the Tea Party's
effect is perhaps paradoxical. The Republicans lost a key seat in NY State
and even Rove admits that "don't touch my Medicare" played a role::
http://www.rove.com/articles/318
Actually it was largely because the Dems were able to demonize
instead of talk about the facts. There was to be no change whatsoever
for those over 55. The money was being taken out was about the same. The
Mcare package under Obamacare will take much of the savings from the
Docs. What is being ignored by the Dems, and unable to be articulated by
the GOP is that OC may kill Medicare just as dead. MCare already pays
about 65 cents for every dollar the Evil Insurance companies pay. Docs
are already starting to refuse new MCare patients, doing some of the
same economic calculations as the airlines do to increase yield. (BTW:
MCaid pays even less compared to the EICs. In what may be a harbinger of
things to come, a poll of ER docs said that at least weekly they see one
or more MCaid patients because no docs will accept them.)
MCare is not sustainable, has never been sustainable and
politicians (of both side to be truthful) have been ignoring it to the
point that the system is in endanger of collapsing entirely.
Many believe that happened, in large part, because the Republican candidate
backed the Ryan Medicare "privatization/voucher" plan that smells
suspiciously of Bush's ill-fated attempt to privatize Social Security.
Which again was largely demonized. The Bush plan specifically stated
that (1). it was entirely voluntary (2) only part of it would be
available for investing (3) the rest of the taxes would stay where they
were and there was to be a minimum payment either way.
It was also a good idea for the person. The SS trustees note that
if you look at what most people get, the return on investment is less
than 1%, for minorities and those currently less than 50, there is
actually a negative rate of return.
Compare that with a 7% compounded annual return for the S&P over
ANY 20 year period (including the meltdown)--and that doesn't include
the extra return from dividends.
Apparently the Republicans learned nothing from that fiasco, and so are
trying it all over again to see if they can get it to stick this time. Evem
with Clinton's backing, the Ryan plan appears doomed but I'll bet the
Republicans keep pushing on it until they lose the vote of almost every
senior in the US. People like you and me, that have paid into Medicare and
SS all their lives aren't going to stand for anyone monkeying around with
benefits that we feel we have earned (even if our contribution is small
compared to the benefit amount).
Someone has to or the benefits won't be there.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke