Page 5 of 104

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:00 pm
by Tan_Binrui
SlickSlicer wrote:Anyways, apparently health care reform has become the issue being talked about a lot right now. I'm not sure what will happen, but I think more Americans are becoming opposed to it. The Clintons couldn't get the issue settled and I don't think Obama will either actually.


I don't know how factual it is, but I've been hearing more and more reports that the health care plan we have right now is simply more expensive than universal healthcare would be. I've also heard reports that companies (like Walmart) have been begging the unions to cut back on health care requirements because of the strain it puts on their checkbooks. One journalist even wrote about how large companies are going oversees not just because of taxes (if at all), but because paying for the American Worker's healthcare when they're in a union is simply too much of a strain for them.

I've always been a supporter of universal healthcare. Hell, we're the only industrialized nation that refuses to put it into action. The American public, as I've talked to them, are pretty neutral on the idea. Only those afraid of their own coverage (re: too selfish to give a crap about everyone else) have had the loudest complaints. Those and politicians screaming "Socialism" in fear.

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:51 am
by WeiWenDi
James wrote:I'm not sure anybody is taking the members of that board seriously. I think most anyone can see quite clearly that the average membership of that board is quite completely irrational, if not downright screwed up in the head. But on the other hand there are some strong percentages in the Obama camp which do somehow believe, without justification, that he is going to be able to remake America into something completely new—and that's pretty dangerous.


Well, after having visited that forum a couple of times since you posted the link, I get the feeling that a certain percentage of that board are parody trolls, and another greater percentage are too self-absorbed to realise that they are parody trolls.

But as to the last, I have been among large groups of Obama supporters (hell, I live in Rhode Island and it often seems like the entire freaking state is in the Dem camp), and the consensus seems to be not that Obama can make America into something completely new, but that he can regain for us things which were valuable to us, but which we had lost along the way. I've heard educated people say they had high hopes of America again becoming the nation which Alexis de Tocqueville observed back in 1831 (sans, of course, the slavery and racism), one which could organise and mobilise itself on grassroots levels to fix problems such that the government would be left to its proper function.

That, or it could just be the constituency I belong to (college-educated young people and professors).

Tan_Binrui wrote:I don't know how factual it is, but I've been hearing more and more reports that the health care plan we have right now is simply more expensive than universal healthcare would be. I've also heard reports that companies (like Walmart) have been begging the unions to cut back on health care requirements because of the strain it puts on their checkbooks. One journalist even wrote about how large companies are going oversees not just because of taxes (if at all), but because paying for the American Worker's healthcare when they're in a union is simply too much of a strain for them.

I've always been a supporter of universal healthcare. Hell, we're the only industrialized nation that refuses to put it into action. The American public, as I've talked to them, are pretty neutral on the idea. Only those afraid of their own coverage (re: too selfish to give a crap about everyone else) have had the loudest complaints. Those and politicians screaming "Socialism" in fear.


Well, I'm generally in favour of SPUHC, but I have my concerns, as I think I have made clear before. For one thing, I would like to see a system under which individual health care recipients are responsible, even in some small measure, for their own health-care insurance costs, since their health is not the government's responsibility but their own. Smokers, drug users, 'swingers' and reckless drivers (for example) should not be treated the same in a fair, universal system as people of healthier habits, but (IMHO) should pay something toward the costs they create for the rest of the society. That said, I would prefer to have a national insurance system along the lines of Britain's NHS.

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:14 am
by James
Tan_Binrui wrote:Strongarmed? How so? I'd like to know what you mean by that, because my definition of that slang doesn't apply to this situation.

You're right, I take it back. Perhaps 'ignored' or 'disregarded' would be a better word.
Although there is plenty of strongarming going on.

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:42 pm
by Jordan
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090309/ap_ ... stem_cells

Thoughts? This issue used to be a big deal, but people seemed to stop caring when the economy got bad. Still, I think it was a good thing to do. He is doing a surprising lot thus far.

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2009 7:08 pm
by James
The Obama lubbers I know are all well aware of that. :)

I am too. And I'm glad he's doing it!

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 12:02 am
by Tan_Binrui
Finally. Too much in the way of scientific research has been ignored for too long because of purely religious reasons, despite us claiming to be a secular government.

I remember hearing a commentator saying he thinks Obama is concentrating on too much in too little a time. My question about that is what the other options are. Pass the largest stimulus package ever, then sit behind the desk until something changes? Or take as many changes as you can get and see where they all take you?

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:19 am
by Patricoo
Tan_Binrui wrote:I remember hearing a commentator saying he thinks Obama is concentrating on too much in too little a time. My question about that is what the other options are. Pass the largest stimulus package ever, then sit behind the desk until something changes? Or take as many changes as you can get and see where they all take you?


Yes, well... the concept of "doing too much" holds merit when doing stuff costs money. Money which is coming out of a magical hat somewhere.

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:42 am
by James
Patricoo wrote:Yes, well... the concept of "doing too much" hold merit when doing stuff costs money. Money which is coming out of a magical hat somewhere.

Especially when dealing with such ridiculous amounts of said money...

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:06 am
by Tigger of Kai
How about these rich schnooks who voted for Obama. They keep telling him to "slow down" because he's hurting the market. As if a guy like that gets into politics in order to look after their stock portfolios.

Obama is remaking the sweet land of liberty into something very different. The plunge only serves his purposes. It's what allows him to talk in trillions instead of billions. He and Geithner keep talking the market down, and as things continue to get worse, people will demand more new projects, bigger entitlements, more state intervention. And once these programs are in place, they'll only get bigger, and the Democrat power base will be permanently entrenched.

Re: Barack Obama

Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:18 am
by Mistelten
The last twenty years had administrations that were socially to the left, and now we have one that is economically so (or at least, more openly so than the last). I'm interested in seeing how things go from here. I have my own hopes but I wonder how many there are who care about liberty any more.

Those who voted for Obama thinking that he was an anti-war politician were fools. The wars will escalate. If the US will collapse from this new ideologically based spending, the war will only speed the process along.