Government Health Care Fraud
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:41:51 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

What??? Bush bankrupted the economy and you're blaming Obama????

The thing that really is going to bankrupt the country is the
entitlements.
That was an 80 year process where nobody was willing to say no and
nobody was willing to actually pay for it. They just passed the cost
on to the next generation. Minor stuff like the 4 or 5 wars were
trivial since they have an end. There is no end to the entitlements
and they will gobble up an ever increasing part of the GDP until we
fix the problem or until the country actually does bankrupt itself.
This medical insurance boondoggle is just more grease for the slippery
slope. To start with, does anyone really think congress will actually
make the Medicare cuts part of the "savings" are based on?

I think you're right in the long run... entitlements need to be dealt with
appropriately. That doesn't mean ending them, ala GWB moving them to the
stock market.

The "cuts" are mostly for waste and fraud, and I think some of them, perhaps
even a significant portion of them will be acted upon. One can take the
extremely pessimistic view that they won't be of course.

Do you think the insurance companies won't restructure the "Cadillac
plans" enough by 2018 (the current "cut in" data) that they avoid that
tax?

I'm not a big fan of the current bill in it's entirety, but portions of it
are good and it can be fixed, much like other programs are fixed after the
initial legislation passes.

Do you think they will actually raise any of the taxes necessary to
fund this?

On the rich, I hope so. They can afford it.

If so, you have been living in a cave for the last 40 years.

No... mostly nice houses. :)

All the spending is immediate and the funding is years down the road.

Well, that's an exaggeration. Much of the funding of many programs is
collected as taxes yearly. It's "down the road," but not necessarily years
down the road.


There is also no restraint on what insurance companies will charge,
only the mandate that they have to cover more people. They would do
that tomorrow ... if we were willing to pay for it. This bill makes
sure we will. You will see this October when the new policies come
out. The election in November. Any questions about how that will come
out?


Yes, we need to regulate them. This is one item that needs to get fixed via
legislation. However, if a public option was included, we wouldn't need as
much regulation. It's wildly popular with the public, but for some reason
the Dems in the Senate are afraid of doing what's popular (and right).

--
Nom=de=Plume

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 22:07:12 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 07/03/2010 7:56 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 19:44:01 -0700,
wrote:

yep. thinks that all working people are lazy...cant believe we
actually work

Cool. Save your money as Obama is at some point going to have to pass
on the tax bill for this insane debt-bailout spending.

guess he thinks obama's been president for 9 years. guess he forgot
bush ****ed away a TRILLION dollars in iraq

a TRILLION dollars. and he says NOTHING about that.

because bush is rich and white.


The mesiah has spent, now you must pay.

the money was spent before obama ever took office. you're just too
economically illterate to know that. it's simpler and easier to blame
it on the darkie

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 21:52:41 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On S

I doubt you are middle class, just someone who doesn't like their new
station in life as a poor working class. If you work? You work?

yep. thinks that all working people are lazy...cant believe we
actually work


Since Obama and the corrupt Congress has spent much more than Bush even
thought of spending,

uh...wrong. at least they spent it HERE. bush ****ed it away in iraq.
and look how the iraqis love us for saving their country!! wasnt that
trillion well spent!

and bush set up the TARP program. obama just implemented it




And interest rates will
definitely be higher. What are you going to do then? There will be no
money for bailouts, no money for healthcare. The government if it is the
banker for healthcare, will just keep the money and meter out a minimum of
heathcare. What has the stimulus accomplished? Other than keeping overpaid
government workers on the payrole.

we're already headed for collapse of healthcare. if the GOP had a plan
they would have done something. they didn't.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:35:43 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 07/03/2010 11:30 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...


"Interest rates will definitely be higher." You must be an oracle. Duhh...
they're currently at historic lows, so that's not much of a leap in logic.

They can't go lower than zero.

Obama spent FAR less than Bush. Interesting how you right nuts forget about
the $10T in tax cuts for the rich and the Iraqi war's $6T.

Not as rate/time. For rate over time, Obama is debt-spending more than
4 times faster. By the end of 2010, 2 years, Obama will have debt spent
about the same as Bush did in 8 years.

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?


"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

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:30:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


I am with you on this, but bpuharic and nom-du-plume types are clearly
an issue because they support Obama's madness. I am not sure if it is
selfishness or stupidity or both, but they sure follow the pied piper
like good little sheep.

gee. he forgets..or ignores, the fact the rich WHITE guy spent a
TRILLION in iraq for NOTHING. at least obama is spending on the US
economy. bush paid his rich halliburton/KKR buddies.


One thing no Obamanite wants to realize is how much unemployment has
Obama debt-bailout spend cost in jobs?

you mean because unemployment has dropped 3% over the last few months?
that what you complaining about?

you want it at 25%. good luck with that, right winger

Government Health Care Fraud
 

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:30:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


I am with you on this, but bpuharic and nom-du-plume types are clearly
an issue because they support Obama's madness. I am not sure if it is
selfishness or stupidity or both, but they sure follow the pied piper
like good little sheep.

gee. he forgets..or ignores, the fact the rich WHITE guy spent a
TRILLION in iraq for NOTHING. at least obama is spending on the US
economy. bush paid his rich halliburton/KKR buddies.


One thing no Obamanite wants to realize is how much unemployment has
Obama debt-bailout spend cost in jobs?

you mean because unemployment has dropped 3% over the last few months?
that what you complaining about?

you want it at 25%. good luck with that, right winger


Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle. Perhaps
it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume

Government Health Care Fraud
 

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:30:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


I am with you on this, but bpuharic and nom-du-plume types are clearly
an issue because they support Obama's madness. I am not sure if it is
selfishness or stupidity or both, but they sure follow the pied piper
like good little sheep.

gee. he forgets..or ignores, the fact the rich WHITE guy spent a
TRILLION in iraq for NOTHING. at least obama is spending on the US
economy. bush paid his rich halliburton/KKR buddies.


One thing no Obamanite wants to realize is how much unemployment has
Obama debt-bailout spend cost in jobs?

you mean because unemployment has dropped 3% over the last few months?
that what you complaining about?

you want it at 25%. good luck with that, right winger


Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle. Perhaps
it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume


That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:30:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


I am with you on this, but bpuharic and nom-du-plume types are clearly
an issue because they support Obama's madness. I am not sure if it is
selfishness or stupidity or both, but they sure follow the pied piper
like good little sheep.

gee. he forgets..or ignores, the fact the rich WHITE guy spent a
TRILLION in iraq for NOTHING. at least obama is spending on the US
economy. bush paid his rich halliburton/KKR buddies.


One thing no Obamanite wants to realize is how much unemployment has
Obama debt-bailout spend cost in jobs?

you mean because unemployment has dropped 3% over the last few months?
that what you complaining about?

you want it at 25%. good luck with that, right winger


Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle.
Perhaps it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume


That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

Good God... it's a mirror of what Bush caused. You really need to stop
listening to Rush.

There's a recovery underway. It may not be strong, it might not even be
sustainable. We'll have to wait and see, but to deny reality....

FYI, it's fewer jobs being loss, not less jobs being lost, but you got it
right fewer jobs are being lost. Yes, there are people dropping off the
unemployment roles and are no longer being counted. Yes, the unemployment
numbers are worse because of this fact, but the rate of job loss is slowing.
Just about all economists agree that the job situation isn't getting worse
but getting better.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Government Health Care Fraud
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:30:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


I am with you on this, but bpuharic and nom-du-plume types are clearly
an issue because they support Obama's madness. I am not sure if it is
selfishness or stupidity or both, but they sure follow the pied piper
like good little sheep.
gee. he forgets..or ignores, the fact the rich WHITE guy spent a
TRILLION in iraq for NOTHING. at least obama is spending on the US
economy. bush paid his rich halliburton/KKR buddies.

One thing no Obamanite wants to realize is how much unemployment has
Obama debt-bailout spend cost in jobs?
you mean because unemployment has dropped 3% over the last few months?
that what you complaining about?

you want it at 25%. good luck with that, right winger

Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle.
Perhaps it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume

That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

Good God... it's a mirror of what Bush caused. You really need to stop
listening to Rush.

There's a recovery underway. It may not be strong, it might not even be
sustainable. We'll have to wait and see, but to deny reality....

FYI, it's fewer jobs being loss, not less jobs being lost, but you got it
right fewer jobs are being lost. Yes, there are people dropping off the
unemployment roles and are no longer being counted. Yes, the unemployment
numbers are worse because of this fact, but the rate of job loss is slowing.
Just about all economists agree that the job situation isn't getting worse
but getting better.

The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:08:28 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:





Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle. Perhaps
it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume


That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

really? creating 1.5M jobs is a failure?

oh, yes, i forgot. the right wing thinks that if it helps the middle
class, it's a failure. only programs that help the rich can be
successful

it's a matter of their fundamenalist faith

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:



The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/9/10 6:29 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:



The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.


I would not dispute that there are many on the "wealthy right" who would
like to totally destroy the "worker class" in this country so they can
build a new worker class willing to work for peanuts, with virtually no
benefits...ala the Wal-Mart model. They'd like nothing better than a
return here to 19th Century employer-employee relationships, where the
employees are no better off than workers in China and much of the rest
of the Pacific Rim, India, Africa, and Central America. The wealthy
right, after all, doesn't think it is wealthy enough.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/8/2010 1:41 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:



I'm sorry you're struggling. I'm sure the RNC would like your meager
donation, since you're a reactionary and they have a fear-based strategy.

Doesn't mater the reason, now is not a good time to be you.

Really? I'm doing just fine. Obviously you aren't. I'm sorry for you.

Q: What’s the difference between a shame and a pity?
A: If a busload of lawyers goes over a cliff, and there are no
survivors, that’s known as a pity. If there were any empty seats, that’s
a shame.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/8/2010 1:42 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
?
--
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.


Yes, you "play it safe." No doubt about that. Except, not being very bright,
playing it safe means you don't get out much.

Isn't it a shame how 99% of the lawyers give the whole profession a bad name

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/9/10 6:48 AM, HK wrote:
On 3/8/2010 1:41 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:



I'm sorry you're struggling. I'm sure the RNC would like your meager
donation, since you're a reactionary and they have a fear-based
strategy.

Doesn't mater the reason, now is not a good time to be you.

Really? I'm doing just fine. Obviously you aren't. I'm sorry for you.

Q: What’s the difference between a shame and a pity?
A: If a busload of lawyers goes over a cliff, and there are no
survivors, that’s known as a pity. If there were any empty seats, that’s
a shame.


Spoofer active again. Too bad.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/9/10 6:50 AM, HK wrote:
On 3/8/2010 1:42 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
?
--
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.


Yes, you "play it safe." No doubt about that. Except, not being very
bright,
playing it safe means you don't get out much.

Isn't it a shame how 99% of the lawyers give the whole profession a bad
name

Spoofer active again. Too bad.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:


The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.

Why would anyone want to drive the unemployment rate up? Why would
anyone be angry that the middle class exists? You are talking pure
donkey****, just like Harry told you to.
I would think that business would want the consumer to be able to freely
spend...spend...spend. You don't see any advertising targeted to the
unemployed or down and out, do you?

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/9/2010 8:47 AM, anon-e-moose wrote:
bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:


The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.

Why would anyone want to drive the unemployment rate up? Why would
anyone be angry that the middle class exists? You are talking pure
donkey****, just like Harry told you to.
I would think that business would want the consumer to be able to freely
spend...spend...spend. You don't see any advertising targeted to the
unemployed or down and out, do you?

You stupid POS, if I say corporations want to eliminate middle class,
then it is true. I don't just make stuff up. I am a professional
writer, and we have standards.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On 3/9/10 9:33 AM, HK wrote:
On 3/9/2010 8:47 AM, anon-e-moose wrote:
bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:


The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.

Why would anyone want to drive the unemployment rate up? Why would
anyone be angry that the middle class exists? You are talking pure
donkey****, just like Harry told you to.
I would think that business would want the consumer to be able to freely
spend...spend...spend. You don't see any advertising targeted to the
unemployed or down and out, do you?

You stupid POS, if I say corporations want to eliminate middle class,
then it is true. I don't just make stuff up. I am a professional writer,
and we have standards.


Spoofer active again...too bad for rec.boats.


--


If the X-MimeOLE "header" doesn't say:

Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8)
Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3

then it isn't me, it's an ID spoofer.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:08:28 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:





Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle.
Perhaps
it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume


That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

really? creating 1.5M jobs is a failure?

oh, yes, i forgot. the right wing thinks that if it helps the middle
class, it's a failure. only programs that help the rich can be
successful

it's a matter of their fundamenalist faith



Creating what 1.5 million jobs? Please list a few. Semantics, or new speak
jobs maybe. Sending a bunch of bucks to the San Francisco Muni for bus
maintenance is considered "creating jobs". Keeping an overpaid,
incompetentently run government bureau in business is more like it.

San Francisco is facing a $350-750 million dollar deficit. This is a city
with about 800,000 residents. Prime example of most government entities
these days. Way over spending. At the low end, that is a $500 per
person deficit. The city buget is $6.6 billion bucks. That is over $8k per
resident. How the hell can a city spend that much per person and figure
that they will be solvent? This on top of state taxes, Federal taxes, and
having to put food on the table for the taxpayer.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

"anon-e-moose" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:30:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


I am with you on this, but bpuharic and nom-du-plume types are
clearly
an issue because they support Obama's madness. I am not sure if it
is
selfishness or stupidity or both, but they sure follow the pied piper
like good little sheep.
gee. he forgets..or ignores, the fact the rich WHITE guy spent a
TRILLION in iraq for NOTHING. at least obama is spending on the US
economy. bush paid his rich halliburton/KKR buddies.

One thing no Obamanite wants to realize is how much unemployment has
Obama debt-bailout spend cost in jobs?
you mean because unemployment has dropped 3% over the last few months?
that what you complaining about?

you want it at 25%. good luck with that, right winger

Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle.
Perhaps it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume

That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely
failed. There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not
that many jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

Good God... it's a mirror of what Bush caused. You really need to stop
listening to Rush.

There's a recovery underway. It may not be strong, it might not even be
sustainable. We'll have to wait and see, but to deny reality....

FYI, it's fewer jobs being loss, not less jobs being lost, but you got it
right fewer jobs are being lost. Yes, there are people dropping off the
unemployment roles and are no longer being counted. Yes, the unemployment
numbers are worse because of this fact, but the rate of job loss is
slowing. Just about all economists agree that the job situation isn't
getting worse but getting better.

The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's wonderful
news.


It's better than sinking at a faster rate. While not wonderful news...
perhaps you can show where anyone is claiming that? ... it's better than the
alternative.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Government Health Care Fraud
 

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:08:28 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:





Well, to give him credit, the chart at this site is pretty subtle.
Perhaps
it's too subtle for Canuck.

http://palatnikfactor.com/2010/02/06...resident-bush/

--
Nom=de=Plume


That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

really? creating 1.5M jobs is a failure?

oh, yes, i forgot. the right wing thinks that if it helps the middle
class, it's a failure. only programs that help the rich can be
successful

it's a matter of their fundamenalist faith



Creating what 1.5 million jobs? Please list a few. Semantics, or new
speak jobs maybe. Sending a bunch of bucks to the San Francisco Muni for
bus maintenance is considered "creating jobs". Keeping an overpaid,
incompetentently run government bureau in business is more like it.

San Francisco is facing a $350-750 million dollar deficit. This is a
city with about 800,000 residents. Prime example of most government
entities these days. Way over spending. At the low end, that is a
$500 per person deficit. The city buget is $6.6 billion bucks. That is
over $8k per resident. How the hell can a city spend that much per person
and figure that they will be solvent? This on top of state taxes, Federal
taxes, and having to put food on the table for the taxpayer.



Do your own reseach. The jobs created or saved is documented on several
sites. Of course, feel free to dispute the numbers.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:47:44 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:


The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.

yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.

Why would anyone want to drive the unemployment rate up?

-cheap labor
-to reinforce the fact they're rich and can do it

Why would
anyone be angry that the middle class exists? You are talking pure
donkey****, just like Harry told you to.

gee. look at mexico. why would 10 or 15 families rule the country
while tens of millions live in poverty?

you guys think this is a novel idea. it aint. as napoleon once said,
'religion is the only thing that keeps the poor from killing the rich'


I would think that business would want the consumer to be able to freely
spend...spend...spend. You don't see any advertising targeted to the
unemployed or down and out, do you?

if this is the case why hasnt the middle class had a pay increase in
10 years even though productivity has gone up 25%?

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:50:15 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:08:28 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:




That chart showes that Obama's "Stimulus" has failed. Resolutely failed.
There are less jobs being lost each month because there are not that many
jobs being done. Show us a chart of the real unemployment.

really? creating 1.5M jobs is a failure?

oh, yes, i forgot. the right wing thinks that if it helps the middle
class, it's a failure. only programs that help the rich can be
successful

it's a matter of their fundamenalist faith



Creating what 1.5 million jobs? Please list a few.

do your own damn research

start here. learn something instead of drinking the right wing kool
aid, OK?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/bu...nhardt.html?hp

Government Health Care Fraud
 

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:47:44 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:31:55 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:


The ship is still sinking but at a slower rate. Hot damn. That's
wonderful news.
yeah that can happen. in spite of right wing efforts to drive
unempolyment to 25%, they haven't succeeded. they're just angry the
middle class still exists.
Why would anyone want to drive the unemployment rate up?

-cheap labor
-to reinforce the fact they're rich and can do it

Why would
anyone be angry that the middle class exists? You are talking pure
donkey****, just like Harry told you to.

gee. look at mexico. why would 10 or 15 families rule the country
while tens of millions live in poverty?

you guys think this is a novel idea. it aint. as napoleon once said,
'religion is the only thing that keeps the poor from killing the rich'


I would think that business would want the consumer to be able to freely
spend...spend...spend. You don't see any advertising targeted to the
unemployed or down and out, do you?

if this is the case why hasnt the middle class had a pay increase in
10 years even though productivity has gone up 25%?


You have quite an imagination.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

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

On 07/03/2010 11:30 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...


"Interest rates will definitely be higher." You must be an oracle. Duhh...
they're currently at historic lows, so that's not much of a leap in logic.

They can't go lower than zero.

Obama spent FAR less than Bush. Interesting how you right nuts forget about
the $10T in tax cuts for the rich and the Iraqi war's $6T.

Not as rate/time. For rate over time, Obama is debt-spending more than
4 times faster. By the end of 2010, 2 years, Obama will have debt spent
about the same as Bush did in 8 years.

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?

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

"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.

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!

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

Government Health Care Fraud
 

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

Government Health Care Fraud
 

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:30:21 -0500, anon-e-moose
wrote:

bpuharic wrote:


you guys think this is a novel idea. it aint. as napoleon once said,
'religion is the only thing that keeps the poor from killing the rich'


I would think that business would want the consumer to be able to freely
spend...spend...spend. You don't see any advertising targeted to the
unemployed or down and out, do you?

if this is the case why hasnt the middle class had a pay increase in
10 years even though productivity has gone up 25%?


You have quite an imagination.

and you have no information except the fairy tales of the right