Free stuff and anger vs solutions --
 

This year’s election is shaping up to be a contest between free stuff and anger. The over reaction to neither one will solve our nation’s problems.

A 3rd grade teacher relates a telling story: a boy and a girl are finalists to be their class president. The boy gives an excellent speech and receives a raucous ovation when he finishes. The girl stands up and says, simply “If you will vote for me I’ll give you ice cream” and sits down. When asked how she will pay for the ice cream she says she doesn’t know. But the class doesn’t care; they just want their ice cream. She wins in a landslide. Well that’s how Obama won in 2012 and that’s how Clinton, and Sanders, are running today but their supporters don’t care. They just want their ice cream.

Trump’s promises (when you look under the hood) appear to be inconsistent with reality but his supporters don’t care because they are (justifiably) angry and they too want their ice cream. And their ice cream is to dump the current establishment. While the GOP seems to be impotent against the Dem’s relentless pull to the left, upon closer inspection, it’s clear that they are simply part of the establishment and therefore they must also go. Trump promises that he is the antidote. On the surface his promise to “make us great again” has a nice sound to it, but as you dig down it simply rings hollow.

Neither our desire for ice cream nor our over reaction to anger will right our sinking ship. That sucking sound you hear is the inevitability of an implosion nearing critical mass. Do your research and then go vote.

tq

tq, I really wish you were wrong, but I think you've hit the nail on its proverbial head. It doesn't matter who runs, it doesn't matter if there is even a thread of decency or morality in that individual, the fact that someone is absolutely clueless of what being the POTUS truly means is irrelevant, all that matters to too many is that someone say what they want to hear. Whether it is possible to do what is promised is absolutely irrelevant. What is best for this beloved nation is absolutely irrelevant. Until voters stand up and say they want someone strong, decent, relatively intelligent, with at least an inkling of what being President means and a willingness to do what is right regardless, we'll continue getting blowhards, liars, womanizers and clueless fools.

Red

Making Empty Promises

Check out The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises | PolitiFact

There are 27 pages of Obama promises. Some were kept, some were not and there were quite a bit of compromises along the way. I didn't look at all 27 pages but he sure did promise a quite a bit.

Tell me what you think?

Is there a meter for the others? What did they promise and what did they deliver.

Trump would not have one because he was a business man and as he has said you should expect that he acted in the best interest of his business. It sounds like a line from the Godfather, business, nothing personal.

Nice thought. Too bad that will never happen. The presidency is a popularity contest. Whoever promises you the most gets your vote. Welcome to America.

I have become unusually cynical with most politicians but in particular with the present occupant of the WH and the leading candidate (to date) who is trying to replace him. The only thing that I believe when either one of them speaks is that they have opened their mouths and in all likelihood told another lie.

I have learned never to believe all that one says as something can be taken out of context. Being here instead of there makes it impossible to discern the complete truth.

While I have never seen a perfect candidate the only one remaining that I believe really has our country's interest at heart is Cruz.

tq

If Trump is elected President, the public would find out he is all bluster. Congress would not work with him. He could not unilaterally tear p trade agreements with foreign countries, he could not tell civil service employees they are fired, etc.

Same with Cruz. He could not repeal ACA with an executive order. It is the law of the land. Cruz could not do away with the IRS or EPA or Dept of Education - a President does not have that authority. Congress would never pass anything from Cruz.

Sanders could not get any of his campaign ideas through Congress. For the free college, that would be tied up in committees for his entire term. A higher minimum wage is in place right now and the wage will increase no matter who is President but not to $15.

Clinton has the best chance of compromising with Congress on issues that will benefit the most people. It will be a lot of backsctratching but that is how to get programs through the legislative process.

In short, there is no free ice cream for everyone. You may end up with a small bowl of ice cream and will have to pay for it.

While I like Cruz because he does NOT compromise, I recognize that there could be some problems with getting some of his agenda passed but our country has moved left for decades now because the GOP (they say in order to "get along") has compromised time and again. We are closer to destruction that we have ever been. If we want to actually make our country strong again, we must, as a nation, move back to the right.

We did not become the greatest country that ever existed due to government programs but instead because of capitalism. While capitalism may not be perfect if you want to raise all ships then you need an economic engine and that is NOT more government programs. The government takes from the producers. We have become a nation of haves and have nots. The current administration has worked very successfully at dividing us in exactly that way. Those of us who produce are greedy because we want to keep that which we worked for. The greedy ones are the ones who want to take from us and then holler for even more.

God doesn't like repubs, if he did he wouldn't have given you repubs the bunch of losers you have running for President. Hillary will win. that is who he wants.

Can these "guest" posts be edited by the OP?

Are you in the top 1% or the bottom 90% who own just as much? Where did the middle class go?

I will be so bold as you say that you are simply wrong -- God loves all and I don't think He allows Himself to become involved with the idiocy that we humans tend to relegate ourselves to. Look at the Israelis in the "Bible" times and the Romans as of comparatively lately. He allowed mankind to destroy itself and that's what He's doing right now.

We're the idiots and we're destroying ourselves from within.

Hillary is not only an un-indicted criminal, she is also simply another socialist. Socialism has *never* worked long term because it can't. Eventually it will cave in on itself. That's happening right before our eyes. The last 7 years has seen the greatest change in a country's direction, I believe, in recent centuries. We've gone from the best to heading towards just another 3rd world country and at a record pace. And if you can't see it then you are simply ignoring the obvious.

The sad thing is that those of you who crave more socialism will be just as damaged and hurt as those of us on the right who are trying to stop this train.

tq

Obama and the socialist cabal have destroyed the middle class. If you want to see a resurgence of those in the middle then you need a capitalistic economy. There is nothing at all complicated about that.

At some point even alcoholics sober up!

It's not complicated? It's easy to fix? How would you fix it?

I’d reduce the size of government, balance the budget, eliminate some of the departments that Cruz is proposing, get rid of the new policies, like Dodd-Frank, that are costing the consumers millions upon millions of dollars each year instead of helping. Make the needed changes to Social Security and Medicare in order to make them viable once again.
Government’s primary function is to protect its people not to pick winners and losers in the business world, of which they are a consummate failure. Government has gotten so bloated that it is no longer capable of being run efficiently. Efficacy is needed and there is none. Government needs to get back to what it was originally intended to do.

Power needs to be returned to the people. 535 people in Washington cannot compete with the genius of 315 million people.

I didn’t say it would be easy, I said it wasn’t complicated.

tq

And wages will go up and jobs will be created so there will be a middle class again. People will figure out for themselves how to educate themselves for the higher paying jobs that are created. Will the 1% will need give to up anything?

I agree completely.

If your last sentence meant, "will the 1% need to give up anything", the answer is no. EVERYBODY wins, the very top, the middle and the lowest. ANYBODY (stipulating that they are physically and emotionally able) who makes a sincere effort will win, but there will always be the top, the middle and the lowest. There will always be the "poor" because "poor" is relative. America's poor are rich compared to most of the rest of the world.

Those who refuse to work or better themselves will always be on the bottom. They may scream that it is unfair that there are the rich, but then (and I didn't make this up :) ) life itself is not fair, but it sure is worth it. :)

tq

The only thing that will fix this country is a real balanced budget. There has to be a direct correlation between what you spend and promise to what you have for revenue. Romney was correct but said it poorly. When 48% pay no federal income tax and a large percentage of 52% remaining get more from government than they pay in the system collapses, as is happening now. It doesn't matter if Bernie, Hillary, Cruz, or Trump is president outcome is going to be the same. We are bankrupt, have lost a great deal of our manufacturing, have spent our children's futures, and are now spending our grandchildren's futures. Arguing about Dems or Reps gives us the cover we need to not face our true selves. IMO

TOTAL BS.

You know nothing about economics, :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

In fact, you know absolutely nothing about anything!

Are you angry because you cannot logically discuss or counter what has been said here?

tq

You may be right. I'm a Cruz fan because I think that at least he will try to do what is right. Not sure he will get much cooperation from either party because certainly the left as well as a goodly number on the right are part of the establishment that has put us here.

Our nation may be too far gone to be able to be saved but I think it's worth another good shot at it.

tq

I can see where a simple person could think this. However, if a person wanted to think a little deeper they might learn that the word free is not used appropriately. Unfortunately, Sanders has done a miserable job explaining himself; Consequently, he'll never be elected.

Example; Medicare for all. It's not free health care it's simply paying for it a different way. Instead of my employer paying my health insurance company for my health care insurance (say $800) instead, my employer will pay me the money ($800) in my monthly check. I would then receive medicare and my taxes would go up to pay for it. (hopefully less than $800).

Now I'm not going to argue if any of this is real workable or not. I know I'll never change the minds of the Fox indoctrinated but at least I attempted to educate you with facts. Something I'm sure doesn't interest the majority of you. After all, who needs facts right? Especially when you have hate and greed on your side.

Your taxes might go up under the plan you proposed, but who pays for the health care in the case of those 47% who pay no federal income tax? And, what do you propose employers do regarding the health care funding for part-time workers?

You did not present facts, you only presented a proposal and an opinion.

As I said in my post I wasn't attempting to change anyone's mind, simply correct the notion that Bernie sold his idea of medicare for all was free. However, here is one question for you? What did we do for those who didn't have insurance before the affordable care act? Did they simply not get health care? Did they conveniently die in the street? You and I know the tax payers paid for it. As republicans like to say: We are a Christian nation. Well, isn't that the Christian thing to do. Please not the sarcasm in my last sentence.

Universal health care or no universal health care, the taxpayer has and always will be paying for those with no coverage. The only thing that Bernie is promising is more government control over the current health care system through what will prove to be just another bloated and ineffectual government program - just like the current VA system. And, before you ask, yes I have used the VA health care system. As a partially disabled veteran it is free of charge to me, but other than routine lab work and an annual physical, I seek treatment outside of the VA system.

Go to your nearest Indian reservation and ask the residents how they feel about the government provided health care they receive. As a liberal, you may be surprised by their answer.

20 Big Ideas From Bernie Sanders to Reverse Inequality,
Expand Safety Nets and Stop America's Plutocrats

20 Big Ideas From Bernie Sanders to Reverse Inequality, Expand Safety Nets and Stop America's Plutocrats | Alternet

Doesn't this sound like it would work? Isn't it reasonable that if a handful of people who have more money then they could spend and all their generations could spend that the rest could be used to help the rest of us? Not a hand out but jobs fixing the infrastructure.

I like Bernie because he is old, because he is only worth $520k, because he has a lifetime of being involved in causes. I don't think he is lining his pockets, or building his brand or gives a damn about his place in history. I think he is a grandfather who cares about their future has a shot at the title and instead of retiring like you and me he's going for it. God Bless him for trying.

The post immediately below your post asked two critical questions. I'm looking forward to your answers.

You then stated that "you weren't going to argue if any of this is real workable or not". I'm suggesting that it is not: how can adding another income-eating layer to an already unmanageable bureaucracy help anybody?

You then commented: "After all, who needs facts right?" -- What you suggested was not facts. It is merely a supposition. Show me facts that make sense and you might find an ally in me.

BTW, the hate I have, and there is a modicum of that, is the hate that I have for the destruction of our country. As for greed -- without a company that makes a profit or a salaried person who desires to accumulate some wealth as a measure of his efforts, both of whom pay taxes, where would the rest of the country be? The government makes nothing. Instead it takes from the producers in the form of taxes. Without us where would the funds come from that run ALL of government?

Looking forward to hearing back from you.

Respectfully,

tq

asdfadf

Concerning the 47%. the devil is in the details. Retired citizens, like for example us make up 1/5 of the 47%. There are plenty of articles on the 47%. Here is one.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...190_story.html

You have a graduated income tax. You can have a single payer health insurance plan with the premiums based upon your income. Companies are offering insurance to their employees now. The only difference will be that the premiums will be going to a government agency. If you want an existing health insurance to administer the plan, you can. However, the government will determine markup these insurance will receive. Single payer is workable. However, it will never happen.

Concerning part time employees, their income is probably low; therefore, they can fall under Medicaid.

You don't want corporations to increase your wages to pay for health insurance. That is putting money in my right pocket so the government can take it out of my left pocket. Besides, payroll taxes will be increased for both the employer, and the worker. Just treat health insurance to the corporations as it is now a deductible expense.

The total cost of health insurance will probably go down, because the profit health insurance carriers will be reduced. How many health insurance carriers have gone out of business?

Dear Guests:

Nothing is free even the air we breathe (think the EPA) because in one way another another the government is in your pockets.

Sanders told Brit Baier that health care is ever person's right. He asked why and Bernie said because they are human beings. The audience clapped and to my disappointment Brit stopped.

I yelled back at my television telling Brit to ask Bernie then with these rights what are human beings responsibilities? Does Bernie recognize that those seeking such rights will only abuse them?

The lie behind the passage of ACA was that people went uninsured but those without insurance are a larger number now and those who purchased insurance are paying larger premium and incurring higher deductibles and co-pays

In the beginning the states created the federal government they were careful to maintain a fine balance knowing the tyranny of central government but along the way politicians promised free stuff for votes and viola

A Kenyan in the White House was a disaster and a Canadian in the White House will be another because irrespective of the definition of a natural born citizen as a qualification neither of these men can relate to true American patriotism. So they are no better than the socialist or the un-indicted crook running.

It is indeed a mystery as to why this nation can no longer produce a person worthy to lead this nation The simple answer is corruption and cronyism

I had no intention of voting in this election but voting is a privilege and I would not violate that sacred gift. So I voted in the primary and the truth be told I voted the same as my wife for one simple reason I did not want to negate her sensible selection.

Can rationality retake this nation sadly I do not believe so because the electorate is too self centered, selfish and pampered. Our founders must be turning in their graves

Personal Best Regards:

I guess it does not bother you one bit that people in this country have it worse medically than most other countries. I just don't see why the richest country in the world can not provide world class medical coverage for its citizens.

How much more would you be willing to pay in taxes to provide "world class coverage " to all Americans? And, does that include those who are here illegally?

Oh, and most socialized countries provide "world class coverage" only until they reach the point where the cost of medical intervention is superseded by the cost benefit of further treatment.

You can't teach a liberal anything. If they would get off their protected rears and travel to those socialized medicine countries, they would learn a few things about how "great" their health care really is. They would also find out that even in Germany, where your income is taxed at about 55% (in total) you still require private insurance IF you want quality treatment. I have been to and lived in many countries and I have yet to see anything that compare to our great country. But, liberals will repeat talking points from the ignorant. Just like they don't believe that Hillary broke the law, even when you have former/retired State Dept employees that know better.

Really? You're a birther? He's not an American? I'll be reading your posts a little differently. He went looking for his father in Kenya.
Didn't you read his books?

your posting here has just showed everyone on this forum that you are not thinking correctly anymore. In other words, you have proved to the world that you are not relevant!

Your posts from now on will be looked at as though they are just rants and will not be taken seriously.

Best regards, my butt.

I would like to make a constructive comment in the hopes you may learn from it. When you suggest President Obama is a Kenyan, any reader with a high school education or greater will dismiss you as a total fool. Even if you make intelligent comments (which you didn't) in the remainder of your post people will not see you as credible. Stop embarrassing yourself.

Your simplistic incoherent ramblings were NEVER relevant!

This statement can not be backup up with hard facts. Obamacare stats hard to nail down - POLITICO

If your statement could be proved to be true, it would be all you would be hear from the Republicans presidential hopefuls. They hardly mention it.
If you google, number of insured before and after Obamacare, there is next to nothing there after 2014. Here is one that throws out some numbers. Before and After Obamacare: Has it Worked? - Bloomberg

The Republican controlled states in the South, Mid-West, and very sparsely populated fly over states, didn't accept Medicaid for their uninsured. They have the most uninsured in the entire country. They care more about political power than they do for the people that live in their states.

There is no doubt PBR'S posts have been more and more disconnected. And unfortunately it has demeaned his pontificating to blather at times.