Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why am i a liberal l.d.s?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
450 replies to this topic

#441 anatess

anatess

    Resident Alien

  • Members
  • 10943 posts

Posted 24 September 2009 - 09:38 PM

Yep. I agree. Far better to kill it all and start over: The simple truth is that bureaucracy begets more bureaucracy and it becomes more lumbering and behemoth the longer it goes on.

Medicare/Medicaid requires far too much middle management to work and it's based upon society as it was in the 1960s - 40 years of bloated bureaucracy making it slow, inefficient and expensive.

Kill it all, start from the ground up and include a bi-yearly review of the rules so that rules that no longer work can be eliminated. You would cut half the middle management positions involved, make it streamlined and less expensive and more efficient.

That would also require the bill itself be simple and without riders and clauses designed to buy votes on the senate floor. Kill two birds with one stone!

Tort reform, I think, belongs in a separate bill: Making the actual health care legislation complex enough to deal with legal doublespeak would just compound bureaucratic problems.


Funky, I see your point now on Tort Reform. I see that Tort Reform is not limited to healthcare issues even if it is the biggest contributor. I can agree with that, but I'm probably going to still want the caveat that Tort Reform bill needs to be passed before or in conjunction with a Healthcare Reform bill.

There is still one thing I can't agree with you though... that the current HR3200 bill is corruption free. These people are not idiots. Not addressing the simplest of reforms is not a careless mistake.

#442 rameumptom

rameumptom

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 7199 posts

Posted 25 September 2009 - 05:27 AM

Rame? I was merely pointing out that you saying it's a big giant conspiracy is untrue.

The bill simply doesn't deal with what you want it to deal with. Don't accuse this bill, which does not deal with what you think it should, of being a conspiracy when it is not a conspiracy. It is merely not designed to deal with issues in the medical community you think it is.



If you will look at the past posts, you will note that I NEVER used the term conspiracy. So, please stop setting up false strawmen for you to knock down. And stop putting words in my mouth.

I DID say that many of our Congressmen have their hands in the pockets of lobbyists, and so are not creating a quality health care plan, because they are ensuring their favorite groups are not affected negatively. That is not a conspiracy. It is, however, fact.

So, don't derail the discussion by creating a false image of what others are stating. It doesn't make you look good, and reduces our confidence in your statements.
:pope:

Rameumptom: A Holy Stand or Podium, where I can pontificate to my heart's delight.

rameumptom.weebly.com

#443 rameumptom

rameumptom

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 7199 posts

Posted 25 September 2009 - 05:34 AM

Hey, I'm fully on for addressing the basic issues of a bill. I love that people are passionate about politics.

I am not loving so much that people have decided that growling out slanderous untruths - Especially members of the church - Is considered the best way of dealing with their passion.

I have heard everything from "Obama's a Kenyan!" to "Obama's the Antichrist!".


You'll note I have not said any of these things, either. So quit directing attacks on me and others who are just involved in the discussion, okay?

Once again, I have no problem with a health care bill. But this bill reeks of Congressional pork. It does not fix basic problems, but grows the problems. Medicare is on life support, and they think they can take $400 billion dollars from it to pay for children's health care? They think they can lower costs without tort reform or increasing competition by allowing people to buy insurance across state lines?

Personally, I like Pres Obama, and pray he becomes a good and effective president. This will not happen as long as he allows people like Nancy Pelosi to create the bills he wants passed. He needs to get involved in the bill making, open up all doors of discussion, and seek a compromise that no one likes, but everyone can work with. He needs to direct the discussion towards things that will actually work, and not just allow the extreme liberals in Congress to grease their lobbyist's pockets at the expense of the American people.
:pope:

Rameumptom: A Holy Stand or Podium, where I can pontificate to my heart's delight.

rameumptom.weebly.com

#444 Palerider

Palerider

    I don\'t own a horse-Senior Member

  • Members
  • 18447 posts

Posted 25 September 2009 - 07:58 AM

The other side of this bill, that not many have talked about is this. The President stated he would not raise taxes on the Middle Class, just like another former President or two have stated. However, one of the President's Cabinet members stated, if the healthcare bill passed there will probally be a middle class tax increase in the bill itself to help pay for the health bill. Typical politics, talking out of both sides of their mouths. Nancy Pelosi will never pass legislation that will hurt her husbands buisness. :)
As Long As I Am Here......It Doesn't Matter Where Here Is.....

Governments tend not to solve problems, only to rearrange them....Ronald Reagan

The income tax has made more liars out of the American people than golf has.......Will Rogers





#445 MormonMema

MormonMema

    Member

  • Inactive with Posts
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 26 September 2009 - 01:29 AM

Another liberal Mormon? I thought I was the only one.


Nope, there are a lot of us out here! Last I heard, it's not against Church policy to be a Democrat. ;)

#446 Kenny

Kenny

    Senior Member

  • Inactive with Posts
  • 205 posts

Posted 26 September 2009 - 03:09 AM

The other side of this bill, that not many have talked about is this. The President stated he would not raise taxes on the Middle Class, just like another former President or two have stated. However, one of the President's Cabinet members stated, if the healthcare bill passed there will probally be a middle class tax increase in the bill itself to help pay for the health bill. Typical politics, talking out of both sides of their mouths.

Nancy Pelosi will never pass legislation that will hurt her husbands buisness. :)


I'm not an American so don't fully engage with your passion but the issues you talk about are really no different to issues we talk about when you peel away the rhetoric.

There are always going to those that feather their own nest, this is basic human nature, but there is always going to be more that don't benefit directly than those that do.

Seems to me you guys want your cake and eat it, just the same as we do.

We want charismatic leaders who can stand up and give as good as they take. Who are courageous and use their power for the good of all but only so long as it’s to our advantage.

We all want clear mobile phone signals or cheap renewable energy but don't put the mast or wind turbine anywhere near where I have to look at them.
We all want our governments to pass legislation to improve this or that but not at the expense of us having to give up part of something we already have plenty of.
When are we going to learn to count our blessings and serve the needs of others? Those cheap clothes are only possible if someone one goes hungry having to live on for a week what we might spend in an hour.
President Obama has a tough road ahead of him, as does any leader who is set on changing the norm, because changing a few minds is easy changing the attitudes, like selfishness, of the many is a much greater task and has been since Adam was a lad. Not an impossible task just one that requires long suffering, kindness and self-less-ness.

#447 rameumptom

rameumptom

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 7199 posts

Posted 26 September 2009 - 04:06 AM

I personally do not have a problem with tax increases or losing a few of my benefits for the good of the country. I do have a problem with the few getting perks or subsidies, while others must compete without such benefit. Everyone wants smaller government, except for their own entitlements. That is why Social Security and Medicare cannot be fixed, no one wants to sacrifice what they have for the betterment of the nation. FDR stated the only thing to fear is fear itself, then rationed everything on Americans as their patriotic duty to the War. JFK said, "ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." After 9/11, GWB told us to go out and shop. Clearly, our views are very different now than they were 50+ years ago.
:pope:

Rameumptom: A Holy Stand or Podium, where I can pontificate to my heart's delight.

rameumptom.weebly.com

#448 annewandering

annewandering

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4317 posts

Posted 26 September 2009 - 08:51 AM

You may well be right about medicare. It is scary to give up a sure thing for what might end up being nothing. We know the foibles of medicare but trying out a new program is scary when your health depends on it working properly. It might be that we need to change it for the people not on it yet and leave the ones on it alone unless they change voluntarily. Until greed is no longer a factor we are never going to have the best or maybe even a good plan for healthcare. (or anything else) Lobbyists and self interest are wrecking our country. We wouldn't even have to worry about National Health Care if people cared about other people. Since it is a fact of life we do have to deal with it and try to work around it. So what is pelousie's husbands job? Please do not tell me insurance.

#449 pam

pam

    Keep your hands off my gumdrops.

  • Administrators
  • 52464 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 26 September 2009 - 09:00 AM

Pelosi's husband is a real estate tycoon and the owner of the California Redwoods professional football team. They also own a vineyard. I've never heard of him owning or having anything to do with healthcare but I could be wrong.

#450 threepercent

threepercent

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 3+ Months
  • 189 posts

Posted 26 September 2009 - 10:08 AM

No true Latter-day Saint and no true American can be a socialist or a communist or support programs leading in that direction. These evil philosophies are incompatible with Mormonism, the true gospel of Jesus Christ. In the war in heaven the devil advocated absolute eternal security at the sacrifice of our freedom. Although there is nothing more desirable to a Latter-day Saint than eternal security in God’s presence, and although God knew, as did we, that some of us would not achieve this security if we were allowed our freedom–yet the very God of heaven, who has more mercy than us all, still decreed no guaranteed security except by a man’s own freedom of choice and individual initiative. Today the devil as a wolf in a supposedly new suit of sheep’s clothing is enticing some men, both in and out of the Church, to parrot his line by advocating planned government guaranteed security programs at the expense of our liberties. Latter-day Saints should be reminded how and why they voted as they did in heaven. If some have decided to change their vote they should repent–throw their support on the side of freedom–and cease promoting this subversion. Ezra Taft Benson General Conference, October 1961

#451 john doe

john doe

    Head Moderator

  • Head Moderators
  • 9693 posts

Posted 26 September 2009 - 10:19 AM

As this thread has strayed far from the OP it has been deemed to have run its course. Therefor I am closing it.
Pressure: It can turn a lump of coal into a flawless diamond, or an average person into a perfect basketcase.
-from despair.com


Except for ending slavery, fascism, nazism, & communism, WAR HAS NEVER SOLVED ANYTHING!
From protestwarrior.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq