PeakOil is You
The time .... has arrived.
Re: The time .... has arrived.
by Newfie » Thu 28 Feb 2019, 15:01:02
Was talking about views of the future. But cheap is good.
-
Newfie - Forum Moderator
- Posts: 18651
- Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
- Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Re: The time .... has arrived.
by Outcast_Searcher » Thu 28 Feb 2019, 15:37:31
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('derhundistlos', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', ' ')However I do see a serious flirtation with socialism ending in disaster for the USA. That is a sort of doom I suppose and a great deal of violence over that is not out of the question.
Social Security and Medicare are two popular and classic forms of socialism. Thank you Presidents Roosevelt and Johnson. The Republicons have tried for years to undermine both plans; however, Republicon pols. also know the consequences of their elimination would be catastrophic for society and their reelection.
The results of implementing these socialist policies provide an important safety net for our seniors and resulted in anything but "doom" for America.
America has been a mixed economy (both socialistic and capitalistic) elements for a long time, whether people like to admit it or not.
A timely question is whether taking the socialistic elements to an extreme would be a good thing economically -- re the small horde of lunatic fringe far left POTUS hopefuls wanting to buy lots of votes by massively increasing socialism.
It's easy to claim SS is "good" in a vacuum. However, a strong mandatory savings mandate, and/or a strong company pensions for employees mandate could well have worked out better, re what beneficiaries receive per dollar taken.
It's all about balance -- and trying to figure out what is necessary, IMO.
For example, I'm in favor of seriously looking at some kind of Medicare For All option. However, I am NOT at all in favor of the current "Medicare For All Act of 2019", which from what I've read in articles, eliminates copays, and says NOTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW IT WILL BE PAID FOR, OR WHAT IT WOULD COST.
If "socialism" equates to blatant vote buying without any content, and to hell with the economy, that's not a good thing. Whether the far left realizes it or not, at some point, things need to be paid for.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
-
Outcast_Searcher - COB
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
- Location: Central KY
Re: The time .... has arrived.
by yellowcanoe » Thu 28 Feb 2019, 16:45:38
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '
')
For example, I'm in favor of seriously looking at some kind of Medicare For All option. However, I am NOT at all in favor of the current "Medicare For All Act of 2019", which from what I've read in articles, eliminates copays, and says NOTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW IT WILL BE PAID FOR, OR WHAT IT WOULD COST.
')
For example, I'm in favor of seriously looking at some kind of Medicare For All option. However, I am NOT at all in favor of the current "Medicare For All Act of 2019", which from what I've read in articles, eliminates copays, and says NOTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW IT WILL BE PAID FOR, OR WHAT IT WOULD COST.
The existing Medicare system is expensive in part because politicians have made it so at the behest of the pharmaceutical and health care industry. For example the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is explicitly prohibited from negotiating directly with drug manufacturers on behalf of Medicare Part D enrollees. For a single payer system to work, politicians would need to realize that their role is to try to reduce medical costs.
"new housing construction" is spelled h-a-b-i-t-a-t d-e-s-t-r-u-c-t-i-o-n.
- yellowcanoe
- Tar Sands
- Posts: 965
- Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2013, 14:42:27
- Location: Ottawa, Canada
Re: The time .... has arrived.
by Outcast_Searcher » Thu 28 Feb 2019, 17:02:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '
')
For example, I'm in favor of seriously looking at some kind of Medicare For All option. However, I am NOT at all in favor of the current "Medicare For All Act of 2019", which from what I've read in articles, eliminates copays, and says NOTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW IT WILL BE PAID FOR, OR WHAT IT WOULD COST.
')
For example, I'm in favor of seriously looking at some kind of Medicare For All option. However, I am NOT at all in favor of the current "Medicare For All Act of 2019", which from what I've read in articles, eliminates copays, and says NOTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW IT WILL BE PAID FOR, OR WHAT IT WOULD COST.
The existing Medicare system is expensive in part because politicians have made it so at the behest of the pharmaceutical and health care industry. For example the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is explicitly prohibited from negotiating directly with drug manufacturers on behalf of Medicare Part D enrollees. For a single payer system to work, politicians would need to realize that their role is to try to reduce medical costs.
Absolutely right. But in the US, politicians put trying to get elected / re-elected first, so doing the right thing for their constituents comes in a very distant second.
Which is one reason that while in theory, government programs might be fantastic -- in practice, most of the time, the value proposition just isn't there, given that in the real world, someone has to PAY for them.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
-
Outcast_Searcher - COB
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
- Location: Central KY
