On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:24:13 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 08/03/2010 3:45 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:35:43 -0700,
wrote:



to keep the US economy afloat. bush poured a TRILLION into iraq

what did that get us? any more jobs? more security? anything at all
for a TRILLION dollars?

And what do you think about Obama flushing $2 trillion in the first
year? And now another $1.6 trillion this year?

that prevented 25% unemployment and created 1.5M jobs?

good deal!

oh...and you DO realize that, even after ALL the spending is done over
the next 10 years, the debt burden, adjusted for inflation, will be
about the same as it was in 1990.

oh. you're a right winger and don't do math...you just want MORE
UNEMPLOYMENT!!


Don't forget democrates voted for Iraq too. And TARP.

sure we voted for iraq. because bush was a convincing liar. just like
he was when he put the tax cuts in for the rich.



"No money for healthcare." So, a public option or even better a single-payer
system would have 100s of billions. Nope, can't do that, right?

Eventually, when you can't pay for something you lose it. Just takes time.

which was already happening in healthcare, with double digit increases
over the last 10 years

Yep. Might be again. Work out home prices since about 1970 using the
government published inflation tables. Then see if you can find a
property remotely at that price where you live.

People need health care, they don't need most other business the same
way, So health care will track real inflation, not the bogus governemnt
numbers.

except in other countries, the rate of increase in healthcare costs
is lower than it is here

but we're perfect, right?


But there is the point, do you want corrupt corporates to rip you off?
Or corrupt big fat government to rip you off? You choose!

govt i can do something about

corporations? not so much