Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Social Security and Medicare made a huge improvement in the way our seniors live.> They're also going to bankrupt this nation's future, if something isn't done to them. <Please tell me about the failed Democratic methods. I'm having a hard time finding one.> Take a good look at France, where liberal policies have been taken to a farther extent than here. Their economy is stagnant, their standard of living is worse, their unemployment rate is higher, and their social programs will soon bankrupt their country, if big changes aren't made soon.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<<In other words, you can't name one year in the last 100 that a Democrat-controlled Congress passed a balanced budget.>> <I can name four years. In the past 50 years there have been 8 years with a balanced budget. Democrats controlled Congress four of those years and Republicans also controlled Congress four of those years. Republicans are no better at passing balanced budgets than Democrats are.> Game, set, and match.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Take a good look at France, where liberal policies have been taken to a farther extent than here. Their economy is stagnant, their standard of living is worse, their unemployment rate is higher, and their social programs will soon bankrupt their country, if big changes aren't made soon.>> And a French liberal is very different form an American Democrat. I would like examples of how Democratic policies in THIS country have failed. We're not talking about France. France Sucks! (For my buddy Beaumandy)
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <And yes, Republicans are to blame for the current historic deficit and national debt. They've been far too willing to agree with Democrat spending plans. > That dog won't hunt. Newsflash: Republicans control both houses of Congress and COME UP WITH the spending plans.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>Take a good look at France, where liberal policies have been taken to a farther extent than here. << But those aren't Democratic methods, are they?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I would like examples of how Democratic policies in THIS country have failed.> I already gave two. And the only reason a French liberal is different than an American Democrat is because the French liberal doesn't have an American Republican opposing him.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Again with France. Aye yi yi. Hey, Douglas, how about acknowledging Roadtrip for meeting (and exceeding) your challenge before we begin decrying the runaway liberalism of France? France. LOL!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<They're also going to bankrupt this nation's future, if something isn't done to them.>> <<I already gave two.>> Social Security is a problem 40 years in the future which may or may not happen depending on the projections you use for economic growth etc. Whatever the case ends up being, minor tweaking will keep the plan solvent indefinitely. With Medicare the problem is not with the program itself, but with outrageous increases in medical costs. That is not only impacting Medicare, but has also has a huge impact on employer paid health benefits. Pretty soon we will be to the point where NO ONE, not the government, not employee benefit plans, not private individuals, can afford medical benefits. What will we do then? I don't have any idea what the solution will be, but my gut tells me it is a lot more likely that a Democratic policy will solve the problem than a Republican one. P.S. Republican solution: Rich people will still be able to afford it. Let the others get sick and die. ;-) ^^^ Before getting all cranky please note winky above.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Hey, Douglas, how about acknowledging Roadtrip for meeting (and exceeding) your challenge before we begin decrying the runaway liberalism of France?>> That's OK. He didn't post to the thread for three and a half hours after my post. His silence spoke volumes.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip ^^^ Oops... it was three and a half hours after HIS last post... three hours after my reply. I can't get too cocky about the 'win' though. I had no idea what I would find when I started searching, and in fact thought that Douglas was perhaps correct.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Game, set, and match.> <No fair, you brought in a ringer.> Yeah, Roadtrip's good, huh?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Social Security is a problem 40 years in the future which may or may not happen depending on the projections you use for economic growth etc.> Actually, it's about 10 years in the future that Social Security will start paying out more than it's bringing in. 40 years is when all of the "trust fund" money currently allocated to Social Security is used up. <P.S. Republican solution: Rich people will still be able to afford it. Let the others get sick and die.> The Republican solution to both problems is to increase people's choices and bring market forces to bear.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>The Republican solution to both problems is to increase people's choices and bring market forces to bear.<< i.e., Rich people will still be able to afford it. Let the others get sick and die
Originally Posted By Disneyman55 Well, what is the cause of the increase in medical costs? That should be the first question. The second question would then be can it be fixed by socialist reprogramming or market forces?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I can't get too cocky about the 'win' though. I had no idea what I would find when I started searching, and in fact thought that Douglas was perhaps correct.> Of course we could also look at the fact that in the last fifty years, the Republicans have controlled Congress about ten years, and the Democrats about 40. So the Republicans are 4 for 10, and the Democrats are 4 for 40.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<socialist reprogramming>> Any credibility you may have goes right out the window when you refer to a democratic plan as "socialist reprogramming". If you aren't smart enough to know the difference between the two, how can we even have a discussion?? Yes, that statement may get me admin’ed. It’s a chance I’ll take. I don’t think I’ve ever seen Republican policies referred to as fascist policies on these boards, so why do we have to put up with this â€socialist†garbage time after time?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Rich people will still be able to afford it. Let the others get sick and die> Hardly.
Originally Posted By Disneyman55 Heh, heh RoadTrip, just egging. It is an honest question. And if government control of or dictation to an industry (medical) is not a form of Socialism, what do you view as Socialism. Notice I didn't call it Communism (no where near). If the government were to pass laws to reign in the cost of providing medical care, it would require more than a simple "no monopolies" swat on the wrist, it would require a complete overhaul and control of all medical providers with targets, expectations, and goals set by the government. That is a form of Socialism. And if it was tweaked to the point where the government provided the medical care (a la some proponents) that would be pure Socialism. So then if you do not feel that capitalism is a system which can meet the needs of the masses you are forced to embrace a system which places greater government control on the given industry (in this case Medical care) which is Socialism. So even though I used the word to egg a little bit, it is what it is whether you like it or not.
