Comments for: Thursday, Aug. 30, 2012: Affordable Care Act, Social Security and Waterfront Concerts

Posted Aug. 29, 2012, at 11:04 a.m.

Affordable care The Affordable Care Act included a readmissions provision that imposes financial penalties on hospitals for “excess” readmissions when compared to “expected” levels of readmissions. This penalty program will be imposed on hospitals beginning Oct. 1, 2012, based on discharges occurring during the three-year period of July 1, 2008, …

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    The Affordable Care Act is a great first step. If we see things aren’t working or could work better, we can improve on it. This mindless mantra of “repeal, repeal, repeal” is so lazy and irresponsible. Repealing would increase the deficit and care costs would just continue to explode with no one but the very wealthy and those without pre-existing conditions having access to healthcare. 

    • Anonymous

      The Republicans would punish all of us by repealing the Affordable Care Act.

  • Anonymous

    Rep. Peggy Rotundo
    D-Lewiston

    Cha-Ching!

     Your invoice for the $upport of the M$EIU ha$ been   paid in full.

    Until the next election, that is.

    • Anonymous

      So you support raises only for those in the good graces of a politician? That is called what?

      • Anonymous

        Of course, public employees don’t get raises because “a” politician says so.  But you’d be okay with the union picking who that politician is?

        • Anonymous

          Huh? Where did that come from? Your mind, not mine. And, yes LePage did approve a raise for some DHHS workers. 

  • Anonymous

      Mr. Schmidt, you don’t seem to understand privatization of Social Security as it has been consistently proposed.  It would convert a defined benefit plan that has worked beautifully into a 401(k) plan subject to high commissions and the whims of a very volatile stock market.  Necessarily removed from the benefits would be the disability insurance and survivors’ insurance.  A 25 year old rendered disabled by a car crash would have precious little saved towards his support in a privatized plan and would likely run out of his invested tax dollars in a few years.  He and his spouse and children would be destitute after those funds were exhausted.  Under the current system he would get disability benefits for the rest of his working life, and his  children would get dependent benefits until they turned 18.
      Similarly, a later retirement age penalizes those who have performed manual labor all of their lives.  Their jobs make early retirement more necessary and an early death more likely.
      Raising the earnings level at which social security taxes are assessed or placing that tax on capital gains would eliminate any funding shortfall.  That would let the program grow in sync with the growing wealth of the nation. 

  • Anonymous

    Peggy hates pay raises for state workers

  • pbmann

    “Privatization of SS” is better described as “profitization of SS”.  Wall Street is behind the so-called “privatization of SS” because they want the fees associated with running the accounts. 

    Hundreds of billions of dollars of fees and costs to be charged by them.

    • Anonymous

      I am all in favor of reforming and means testing SS, but privatizing it is not only wrong but wrong headed.  SS was–and should be again–the last resort for the limited number of people who don’t have a retirement.  And it needs to be there even if the economy collapses.  My brother Rs who were in favor of privatization used to argue that another Great Depression couldn’t happen again, so why not invest that money.  Have we learned nothing?

      • Anonymous

        “SS was–and should be again–the last resort for the limited number of people who don’t have a retirement.”

        No, social security is an government-managed insurance policy that ensures a minimum standard of living.

        • Anonymous

          That’s pretty much what I said.  I’m suggesting that, if you meet that minimum standard without SS,  you shouldn’t receive it.

  • Anonymous

    Paula and Laurie – Obamacare is unsustainable. It will eventually cost far too much, but the liberal politicians will keep raising taxes and penalizing the middle class in order to keep the bloated and failed system in place. But, have no fear, Romney and Ryan are here. And they will win this November and will repeal this unsustainable monstrosity, give the healthcare back to the private sector, lift state-to-state restrictions, and institute “loser pay” lawsuit reform. 

    Ed – Agnus King and Cynthia Dill are left leaning politicians that will say anything necessary to get elected, then they will go to DC and do whatever their handlers tell them. At least the Republican candidate is being honest when he says he’ll side with his party first.

    Peggy – Of course the Democrats weren’t questioning pay raises. They will support anything that involves spending the people’s money.

    • Anonymous

      Have no fear Romney and Ryan are here?  Wrong EJ.  Take off the blinders.  The Affordable Care Act was practically modeled after Romneycare in Mass.  Now it is a bad idea?  And it is going to save billions as you may be able to read about if you care to.  Finally you mention penalizing the middle class.  Have you not been paying any attention to reality , perhaps turn off Fox News and pay attention.  Romney has in the past and has indicated in the future no regard for the middle class.  He will not raise taxes on the richest to help balance the budget as the Democrats usually repair after Republican administrations.  His history with Bain Capital proves his disregard for the middle class.  Why suddenly does he become a hero to the middle class?  Are you ignoring a few dozen facts here?

      • Anonymous

        Let me see if I can put this in terms you’ll understand. Romneycare = 140 pages. Obamacare = 2,700 pages and growing. Yeah, they’re identical. 

        According to the latest CBO calculations, Obamacare is going to cost 3 times what it was originally slated to cost. Save billions? Right.

        Raising taxes on the wealthy always hurts the middle class and the poor. The wealthy just pass the taxes hikes on to the consumers. It’s Economics 101. 

        And Romney’s history at Bain Capital has been rewritten by the libs to make things look bad. Bain saved AND created more jobs than Obama has. Bain kept more jobs in the US than Obama has. And companies like Bain contribute to the Obama campaign. Explain that.

        I’m ignoring no facts. And I get my information from many sources, not just MSNBC and the mainstream where you got your skewed information. 

        • Anonymous

           EJ your facts, are just that your facts.

        • Anonymous

          If you’re citing the CBO then don’t leave out the fact that they said that repealing Obamacare would INCREASE the deficit, while keeping it in place will lower it.

          Your “3 times” claim is a lie. The CBO calculated a new set of years. You’re comparing two different sets of years and that’s dishonest. 

          • Anonymous

             I guess you do not think it was dishonest when the CBO was told to base the cost of Obamacare on 10 years of taxes and 5 years of benefits.

          • Anonymous

            that was because the benefits unfold over a number of years…. you are trying to malign the numbers and the program with misinformation….. 
            either a little knowledge is a dangerous thing or you are being deliberately dishonest..

          • Anonymous

             So the most accurate number would be to look at the cost when it is fully implemented.  10 years of benefits and 10 years of expenses.  Seems like these new figures are closer to that real number than the original ones were. 

          • Anonymous

            Read this: 
            http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43471-hr6079.pdf

            I just went through the entire letter. In order to calculate the difference between keeping the ACA and repealing it, the CBO depends on ALL of the taxes and penalties that are contained in the ACA. And it does not include any of the other additional actions that would be taken by a Republican lead Congress that would lead to additional revenue coming into the treasury. One last thing that is interesting in this letter is that near the end, there is a paragraph or two that figure in the overspending that has already occurred in the ACA. The CBO appears to be using the overspending figures as a deficit against repealing the ACA. Fancy math, at best.

            No matter, I am still for repealing this bankrupting and unsustainable mess.

          • Anonymous

            So you affirm what I’m saying: pick and choose the numbers you like, then magically deny and denounce the ones you don’t. 

          • Anonymous

            You’re right. My “3-times” claim is my mistake. There are figures all over the place, some less and some more, some concerning the entire bill and others focusing on particular portions of the bill. No one really knows what the end cost will be. The CBO has to work on figures that are provided and have to rely on ALL of the taxes and penalties being implemented in order to estimate a total cost. But, I’d be willing to bet that even if Obama gets a second term, that some of the taxes and penalties will be removed based on the discontent of the majority of Americans over these taxes and penalties. Besides, enforcing these taxes and penalties will cost billions that aren’t even included in the bill.

          • Anonymous

            And if no one called you out on your “mistake” you would have kept on spreading the misinformation. Don’t you ever pause before you post what you do? You know, stop and consider: is what I’m writing true? Is what I’m claiming true? The sheer volume of non-truths and half-truths in your posts suggests no. 

          • Anonymous

            Good advice. Take it.

          • Anonymous

            I gave it to you because you need it most. Why resort to the childish Pee-Wee Herman style “I know you are, but what am I?” kind of remark? 

        • Anonymous

          Perhaps you should ask some of the thousands of people that lost their career and those whose pensions disappeared as result of Bain’s financial games. Not only did they get huge consulting fees they closed businesses after draining them of assets. Some may have been weak but I think you will find many were doing fine. How many of those jobs ended up overseas if there was Any thing left to salvage. I hope you don’t try to deny Those facts. And wouldn’t it be a shame if everyone could receive proper healthcare and the insurance companies were not allowed to drop those most in need. You want to go back to that scenario. Seems unChristianlike to me.

          • Anonymous

            Bain did close some businesses. Bain did send some jobs overseas. But, overall, they saved many more than they closed down, and the kept many more jobs in the states than they sent overseas. 

            Obama, on the other hand, panders to Bain-like groups for donations and support. At the same time, Obama’s policies have resulted in more companies going out of business, and more jobs being sent overseas. Those are the facts.

            As for proper healthcare, if ACA is so great, then why have our elected officials refused to go under the law? Why have there been so many waivers approved for unions and special groups throughout the country? It’s a socialized system that is doomed to fail.

        • Anonymous

          Come on EJ, I am not crazy about Obamacare,  but the page count argument is hollow.
          If you single space, and remove blank pages and reference pages, the ACA is just over 400 pages. About the same as a Harry Potter novel. My 12 year old has read all of the Harry Potter novels without difficulty.
          Not that our Senators & Congressmen (D & R) are as smart as a 12 year old, they certainly don’t act it.

          • Anonymous

             some of them an infant, could out do.

          • Anonymous

            There are over 1.1 million words in the ACA and growing. At a single space page count of 500 words per page, that’s over 2,200 pages just for the first million words. 

          • Anonymous

            Actually the bill is not single spaced and is no longer that a Harry Potter book.  Too much for you to read I guess.

          • Anonymous

            I stand corrected. After Gov. Romney vetoed parts of RomneyCare, it ended up being 70 pages. ObamaCare is 2,074 pages. It really doesn’t matter how much actual page space either one takes up.  ObamaCare may have smatters of RomneyCare in it, and it may have smatters of Republican ideas, but it is an overreaching and unsustainable attempt to completely socialize healthcare in this country. It must be repealed or dismantled piece by piece. And it will.

        • Anonymous

          Oh my god EJ A vote for R&R will do nothing but hurt you and the rest of us (unless you are amongst the 1%) and you can’t see it. I can’t blame you because the corporately owned media doesn’t tell it like it is. They just smile and nod at the lies told by a bishop in the mormon church (disgraceful) without challenging him. The tea party has hijacked the Republicans who are lying through their collective teeth and have done nothing but obstruct the black cat at all costs and at every turn. Romney has done more to hurt the middle class and to create unemployment than anyone that has ever run for the presidency. Are you really going to vote for one of the people who created this economic crisis, who robbed us blind, who made billions at Bain off the backs of sick companies and who knows how many workers.
          Please listen to Amy Goodman tonight on WERU. You will get an earful but you need to listen with an open mind which I am afraid is not the case.

          • Anonymous

            You’re a hard line leftie. But, you have the right to believe whatever you wish, even though you are completely and unfortunately wrong. 

            Instead of dissing the right, why not make a list of reasons for giving Obama 4 more years. Tell me what he’s done for America.

          • If the GOP was actually willing to write an honest and fair budget, then I would listen.  If the GOP was not trying to stop American citizens from voting, then I would listen.  If the GOP was not trying to take away the rights of my mother, girlfriend, and daughter, then I would listen.  I will never support a candidate or political party that tries to invade the privacy and strip the rights away from the women of this country.  I will never support a political party that wishes to do great harm to us and particularly our children by stripping away our rights to clean water and air.  I will never support a political party that attacks public education.  I will never support a political party that wants to take away my money and give it to the top 1%.

          • Anonymous

            At least the GOP has presented budgets. The Dems have not. And the one that Obama presented got zero votes.

            You have listed the usual list of liberal lies about the GOP. Educate yourself.

          • Actually, EJ I am very educated about this particular topic.  Trust me, I have a B.A. in Political Science and I teach this stuff for a living.  I’m one of the most educated people on the comment board.  Plus, none of it is a lie.  I stated 100% truth.  A piece of advice, never build up a crap “budget” like the GOP has presented.  It’s a farce, you know it, I know it, the American people know it.

            Second, I’m not a liberal.  I’m a moderate.  I’m a fan of Snowe and Collins.  I’m a fan of Angus King.  I voted for Eliot Cutler.  I base my opinions on reality.  Progressive policy from the center moves this country forward.

          • Anonymous

            If you are a moderate why do you use the language of “Progressives”?

             Do you really believe that there is someone down at the bank taking money from (presumably) your account and moving it to some rich person’s? Is that the belief of a moderate?

            ….  a political party that wants to take away my money and give it to the top 1%.

          • Anonymous

             I feel sorry for your students.  Indoctrinating  your progressive bias into little heads full of mush.

            The fact that you teach, have a B.A. in Political Science, and think FDR was one of the greatest presidents in history says it all. 

            I learned a long time ago that anyone who tells you that their opinion is “right” because of how “highly educated” they are is usually full of cr@p. 

          • Anonymous

            Well, I only have an AAS in Information Systems. I do have a hundred or so credits that cover everything from electronic communication switching systems to business management, plumbing to architectural design, creative writing to computer programming. I couldn’t really make up my mind, don’t you know.

            I also have years of experience in the real world through military service and the construction and insurance industries. I’ll put that experience up against any degree, any day.

            As for your claim to be one of the most educated people on the comment board, that may be. But, you seem to forget that all the education and intelligence in the world is useless if you haven’t the wisdom to use it. Just ask the President.

            You say that the GOP budget was crap? I guess you thought the zero vote President’s budget was just right. You need to rethink. The Ryan budget is what we need to get out of the hole that Obama and the Dems have dug.

            And you call yourself a moderate? It all depends on the definition of moderate. Snowe and Collins are moderates. You come across as a Progressive.

        • Anonymous

          Are you reall going to vote for someone who wants to line the pockets of the insurance companies even more than they already have been by killing the ban on pre existing conditions as a reason for denying insurance? Are you really willing ti allow them to rescind insurance for 30 million people some of whom will die because they can’t afford to see a Dr? Yes and many of them will be children.
          Are you going to vote for someone who wants to make Medicare a voucher system that will increase costs to seniors by $6000 per year and who will kill SSI completely? I don’t know you but I have a feeling you are middle class. Are you one of those who listen to Mitt Romney and now Paul Ryan stand up in front of a group just like us and poorer tell them how he is going to screw  and they  applaud him? Ludicrous!

          • Anonymous

            I will not vote for a verifiable Socialist that blames the US for the oppression around the globe. I will not vote for a Progressive that actually believes that the rich are the evil ones and that he has the right to rob from them and give to the poor in order to redistribute the wealth. I will not vote for a person that backs infanticide, magically changed his mind on SSM, promotes amnesty for illegals, pushes socialized medicine, has doubled welfare recipients, add over a trillion dollars to the debt each year, killed NASA, took a back seat in the Libyan conflict, promoted the takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, sets back and lets the Syrians slaughter their own people, apologizes for American Exceptionalism, allows his Senate Majority Leader to hold up spending and jobs bills so the Republicans will look bad, and is about to enact the biggest tax increase ever on the middle class.

          • Anonymous

             1st EJ it was Bush that underfunded NASA, also Obama as for 850 million for NASA, congress gave then about, 400 million.  There have been more deportation, under Obama, than any other President for years. The reason welfare has double is because, people are out of work, or just plain underemployed, we have had 29 months of job growth, all be it small it’s still growth. I guess you forget we lost jobs at a rate of + 500,000 a month, when Bush left office. We didn’t take a backseat in Libya, we were part of a team, we did our part and let other countries do theirs, in the end things got done and the out was right.
            He has Not Apologizes for American Exceptionalism. Much of the world hated us after Bush II, he has been mending fences. You can get much more with an open hand then you can with a closed fist, and it the open hand that made us Exceptional in the 1st place.

          • Anonymous

            Obama ended the Space Shuttle program and put several other NASA programs on the rocks, putting nearly 23,000 people out of work, including over 8,000 in Florida alone.

            Deportations peaked under President Bush at nearly350,000 in 2006. Deportations dropped to just under 120,000 the year Obama took office, and he did, indeed, increase them, but only to about 195,000, far less than Bush deported in 2006.

            As for welfare increases, don’t you suppose that Obama’s anti-business policies have lead to nearly 4 years of 8+ percent unemployment? And when you subtract the number of jobs lost from the number of jobs created under Obama, there is a net loss of nearly a million jobs.

            Obama didn’t have time to mess with the conflict in Libya. And he didn’t want to make his Muslim Brotherhood buddies mad.

            Your last paragraph shows that you are completely out of touch. Obama apologized from Berlin to Cairo and back. America is weak in the eyes of much of the world. Bush was feared by our enemies; those same enemies that laugh at us now. 

            Sorry, but you really need to wake up to the reality that Obama has weakened America, and it’s all a part of his plan to bring us down to the same level as the rest of the world. Go see 2016, and you’ll understand.

          • Anonymous

             2016 is nothing but a Mormon paid political ad. I did a lot of reading and looking around before I answered you.  I’m sorry you are so paranoid.

          • Anonymous

             I’m going to see the movie tonight.  Liberals really hate it that the truth about their Messiah is finally coming out.

          • Anonymous

            I’m not paranoid. Not at all. I see quite clearly what this progressive president is doing and am quite aware of his upbringing and the way he thinks. You’re just afraid to hear the truth. Granted, it is a right wing look at him, but there are no lies exaggerations in the documentary. 

            And why do you think the left hates it so much? Because it’s the truth, and the left hates the truth. 

          • EJ,

            Taxes are very low right now.  So that’s not the issue.  Obama is not a liberal, he’s a moderate.  His policies are not outrageous.  If you want to see a liberal president, look to Eisenhower, a Republican.

            After the Bush disaster, this country will need at least another 5 years to dig ourselves out of this hole.  A reason for the debt is not politics, but population.  The Baby Boomers are the largest generation in our history to retire.  Entitlements and defense are the biggest parts of the Federal Budget.  If we wish to continue to be the world’s largest military/police force, then we have to pay for it.  If our seniors (regardless of their political parties) are to receive the benefits that they worked for and deserve, then we must pay for it.  I am a member of Gen X, the burden on Social Security and Medicare will actually lower in time.  We are a smaller population.  I am not saying that to insult my parents or any retiree, it’s simply a numbers game.  The arguments about what to cut is actually a small part of the budget if you are not discussing entitlements or defense. 

            What do you want to cut?  Why?

            -Sean

          • Anonymous

            Reagan inherited a worse economy from Carter than Obama did from Bush. That’s a fact. Reagan got us out of the hole in less than one term, and that’s why he won a second term by a landslide. Obama is repeating the same mistakes that FDR made that extended the problems. Romney will get thing right.

          • First, no Reagan did not inherit a worse economy.  Everyone across the political spectrum has agreed the economy that Bush left us is the worst since the Great Depression.  Second, Reagan had Tip O’Neill to work with across the aisle. Obama has had no one.  You’re not making a good case for yourself when you go after FDR; one of the greatest presidents in American history.

          • Anonymous

            Actually, Reagan inherited double digit inflation, double digit interest rates, and double digit unemployment. So, it was statistically worse than what Obama inherited.

            As for Tip O’Neill, yes, he and Reagan battled a lot and got a lot done. But, Obama refuses to reach across the aisle because he hasn’t had to. Obama is the most partisan president in our history.

            FDR did some great things, but his policies were not the best. History has proven that time and again.

    • Anonymous

      The way we were going before was what was unsustainable. Repealing costs more than Obamacare — the CBO agrees. 

      • Anonymous

         The CBO is only scoring on the data it was provided. Who provided the data and what may have been added or left out?

        • Anonymous

          Right, my bad, shouldn’t have used facts on a Republican.

    • Anonymous

      Give health care back to the private sector? Isn’t profiteering by the private sector the reason health care is un-affordable now? How are we going to institute “loser pays” when Washington, where the laws are made, is full of lawyers? Loser pays would cut down on frivolous law suits and put lawyers out of work. Not likely to happen. 

    • EJ,

      You and I have had a few great conversations on here.  My problem is not your politics, it’s that you believe that these no talent assclowns know something about economics.  Paul Ryan supported Bush and voted to start two wars without funding them, he supported an unfunded Medicare overhaul, and he claims he’s conservative about money?  I wouldn’t let this guy balance my checkbook.  We gave them the Bush tax cuts for over 10 years.  They claim lower taxes will create jobs.  Really?  Then where the hell are the jobs?  If their economics policies are so great, then why isn’t John McCain the president?  Romney’s policies are Bush’s policies.  Ryan supported Bush’s policies.  Bush wrecked the country. Romney is Bush’s third term.  If they were serious about helping people like you and me, then they would not be trying to take our money and give it to the top 1%.  I like you, but dude, wake the hell up.

      -Sean

      • Anonymous

        I’m awake. Both eyes and ears wide open. I get my information for all sides. It’s apparent from your comments that you only get your information from one side. Educate yourself.

        By the way, calling people vulgar names won’t help your cause.

        • I get my information from mainstream sources, not “Faux News”.  Second, the no talent assclown comment is from the movie “Office Space”.  My apologizes if you didn’t understand the reference.

          • Anonymous

            Never saw “Office Space”. And it would behoove you to get some of your news from Fox. Granted, they have a right slant, but they do broadcast the truth and they allow both sides to speak.

      • Anonymous

         How much acid did you put in that KoolAid?

  • Anonymous

    I am not a medical person but my understanding is that the readmission requirement for the ACA punishes the high end hospitals like Mass. General, Johns Hopkins and the Mayo clinic. Those sorts of hospitals take riskier patients with more complicated medical issues than hospitals like Pen Bay Medical or even EMMC.  The one size fits all solution demanded by the ACA may have repercussions that haven’t been taken into account.

    • Anonymous

      “It’s so long, there is so much in it! We don’t know what’s in the bill! …….. it’s too simple! One size doesn’t fit all!”

      • Anonymous

        Yep, With every passing day we discover a new tax or some new requirement like this one that will place a burden on our countries very finest hospitals.

        • Anonymous

          It really is too bad that we could not have passed the ACA as it was initially proposed. What we got is a chopped up and complicated mess after big pharm and the insurance industry got done throwing billions lobbying the  “problem”.  

          • Anonymous

             Two things come to mind. First if the ACA had gone to a vote as initially proposed the healthcare law would have lost a minimum of 50 Democratic House votes. Nothing would have happened at all.
            Second, the reason for this is to save money make healthcare less costly. Of course the kind of problem this makes has its roots in the weakness of central planning and the same thing would have been likely to happened even if it had passed the way you desire.

          • Anonymous

            The only real solution is to make health care non profit. Now that we have both had a good laugh, I mostly agree with your last observation.

          • Anonymous

            Sorry that you find single payer healthcare so funny .  

          • Anonymous

            I was making light of the fact that greed has ruined health care in this country and the chance of it ever being non profit is remote, at best. I am all for affordable health care for every American. But, as long as greed is in the driver’s seat, it will never happen.

          • Anonymous

            Oh, I do not know about it never happening.  I do know that it will never happen if Republicans are elected.
            I watched just about all of the healthcare deliberations on c-span.  I can tell you that there are many reasons that the ACA was watered down.  The main reason was that the Republican leaders, just before the President was sworn in , were meeting to plot his destruction.  In this meeting they all swore to oppose and deny any proposal from the President to insure that his would be a failed presidency. This is factual and has been reported by both sides.
            It is amazing that the ACA passed at all and the Democrats with the President deserve credit.

            This is a bill that will be improved if the President is reelected.  If the Republicans win this election then the rich will get richer, the gap will continue to expand and the middle class will continue to evaporate.   A dreadful thought.

            Of course I agree with you about greed.  The huge amounts of money in our political system spell nothing less than disaster for all but a very small percentage of our nation, who will by then be living behind iron gates.

          • Anonymous

            We are still a nation that is ruled by the majority. When the majority are poor and a small minority have all the money, things will change. We just haven’t reached the tipping point yet. But we will.

          • Anonymous

            let us hope..

          • Anonymous

             You WANT the US to be like Greece?  Most of Africa?  Most of the middle east?

          • Anonymous

            No, I want us to be like Americans. I am merely making a prediction about where we will end up, should we maintain our present course. I do not need a crystal ball to predict the future, just a history book. History always repeats itself. Every single time in recorded history when a few end up with everything, the many revolt and there is bloodshed. To deny this shows a complete lack of knowledge about history.

          • Anonymous

             You are right about the history.  But you are wrong about which path results in that violent end.   History shows that the path that leads to the greatest disparity is socialism and all it’s variants.  The only system that provides real wealth to the majority of citizens is capitalism.    I guess you have not noticed that the increase in wealth disparity has paralleled  the increase in welfare and other socialist programs.  The problem is not that the wealthy are stealing from the poor but that progressive policies are increasing poverty and prevent the poor from accumulating wealth themselves.

          • Anonymous

            Wrong again, but I will not be wasting anymore of my time, or yours.  

          • Anonymous

            We have 5,000 years of recorded history. 236 years of capitalism is barely a blip on that timeline. To imply that it is the final solution to economic parity is naive, at best. We still have a long, long ways to go to catch the Romans who reigned for 700 years. They probably thought they had all the answers too.

          • Anonymous

            We are nothing like Greece or Africa for that matter.  Again you simply do not know what you are talking about.

          • Anonymous

             The greed you dislike so much is responsible for developing the majority of the lifesaving drugs and modern procedures and treatments that extend our lives.

          • Anonymous

            To imply that all those hard working scientists and researchers are motivated purely by money is an insult to them. Not all are driven by greed. I like to think that most of them are compelled to do it for the sake of mankind.

          • Anonymous

             Don’t pay those hard working scientists and researchers for a month or so and see how many continue their work “for the sake of mankind”.

            The money to do the work has to come from somewhere and Profit, that dirty word to liberals, is where the money originally comes from.

          • Anonymous

            I can only assume that you understand the difference between profit and greed. No one that I know has a problem with a business making a profit. Everyone I know has a problem with greed. Big difference between the two. Please feel free to defend a business’s right to make a profit, it is the American way. Defending greed is much more slippery sledding.

          • Anonymous

            Agree.

          • Anonymous

            UConn got a nice new medical center, just to get Chris Dodd to vote for it.  It was such a good thing…I’m surprised a loyal D would need a sweetener.

          • Anonymous

            You can thank Saint Snowe for watering it down and then voting against it.

  • Anonymous

    If the Republicans would have gotten away with privatizing Social Security during the Bush era  millions of homeless, elderly and disabled people, would be littering our streets after  Wall Street collapsed. Any time the Republicans say,”We want to put that responsibility back in your hands,not the governments” watch out. That’s just their way of saying your on your own because they don’t want to help you.

    • Anonymous

      I wouldn’t let Wall Street near my grandson’s piggy bank, let alone SSI. Those greedy dimwits would have us all eating dog food and living in refrigerator boxes if they thought they could turn a buck off from it.

  • Anonymous

    The dishonesty on here is astounding. It makes me think of a child, the mom says, I’m going to visit grandma tonight, you can have pizza for dinner, but you have to be in bed by 8. The child waits for the mom to leave and runs to tell dad that pizza is for dinner, but conveniently leaves out the part about an early bedtime. 

    You know, no attention is paid to being honest or doing the right thing, it’s all just personal desires, everything else be damned. 

    For example, people on here cite the CBO in order to bash the President, but they pick and choose which facts they want to use. Then the rest of the facts that go against their narrative? Just pretend those don’t exist or deny that they’re real! 

    It’s just not right. 

    • Anonymous

       I don’t think I used the CBO to bash the President. My observation is that those numbers are used for political purposes thus you need to pay attention to the source of the data that goes into them.

      Is the President getting the answer he wants contingent on the data he provides (or the Democratic Senate)? Is the Republican Congress doing the same?  Are we so naive as to believe that these are clean unbiased numbers?

      • Anonymous

        That’s what congress uses. They all use those numbers. Posters on here use the CBO numbers they like and ignore the ones they don’t. Posters on here use CBO numbers and then compare them against a new set of unrelated numbers and then act as though that’s honest. It’s not. 

        The dishonesty is sickening to me. Have your political opinions all you want, but don’t change the facts and don’t deny reality. You haven’t provide real evidence to conclude the the numbers are biased and incorrect, just that they could be. I could be 6’5, but I’m not.  But if you have a problem with the CBO numbers being used, then be consistent. Don’t question their authenticity only when it’s convenient for you. 

        • Anonymous

          The CBO is to be respected.   Of course when people pick and chose then their ‘statements’ are to be questioned.

          • Anonymous

             Hold that thought and remember that statement when a Republican Congress presents its data to the CBO and you look at the subsequent report.

        • Anonymous

           I have no problem with the CBO. They present a finding consistent with the data they are given. Every time.

          If the Congress presented a statistic to the CBO that said you were 6’5″ on odd Tuesdays, they would return a report consistent with that.

          Sort of like saying that the $760 billion dollar medicare cut  is both a savings and an expenditure yet both appear in the same CBO report.

          As I said. In my opinion consider the source of the data.

        • Anonymous

          And the CBO tells us that the ACA in fact extends medicare funds.

          • Anonymous

             And it came to that conclusion by using totally unrealistic numbers and projections.  There is no way that the proposed cuts in payments to providers is actually going to happen.  Providers are already losing money at present reimbursement levels and many doctors are going to refuse to take Medicare patients.  The resulting outrage will cause these cuts to be eliminated.  The politicians knew this would be the end result from the beginning so the entire projected savings has been nothing but a lie, smoke and mirrors, from the very beginning.  Pretended savings to get the bill passed at all cost.

          • Anonymous

            No, you are wrong.  
            The cuts for the most part are going to hospitals who are fine with them because with the ACA there will be payment for ALL patients…. no more freeloaders.  It is a win for the bottom line of the hospitals. They saw that clearly and were happy to sign on.
             Other cuts are from the Medicare Advantage plans, these are private plans begun to see if the private sector could do better than traditional medicare and they could not.  These plans while delivering the same care cost at least 14% more than existing medicare plans.  Another blight on the private insurance companies.
            And a further chunk will come from fees or taxes imposed on drug makers, device makers and insurers — fees that they can surely afford since expanded coverage for the uninsured will increase their markets and their revenues.
            There is no pretend here.  What there is on your end is misinformation that supports your own already held prejudices.  
            Frankly this is getting tiresome.

Similar Articles