|
||
Los Angeles Times:
When Congress decides how to pay for President Obama's signature healthcare initiative, some of his strongest political bastions may be footing a heavy bill.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Blue states always pay for red states. It's just how the country functions. Alaska takes in 3 times as much in support as it pays in federal taxes, and they still can't pave their roads. Red states would collapse without the handouts, which is why so many of us find them adorably ignorant when it comes to taxes.
Didn't everyone hear, "There are NO blue states, there are NO red states, there's only the United States of America." Oh how the times have changed, like you can believe in it, ha!
lol, republican welfare queens.
Irony, blue states pay and red states squeal like porkers.
That's good, you libs want this garbage---you people can pay the tab!!!
Affordable, accessible health care is GARBAGE? And you cons wonder why we loathe you...
This plan will not deliver "affordable" health care by any stretch of the imagination.
We spend double what other countries spend, and under a public option, that amount will continue to RISE, at a rate that is almost negligibly slower than the under the status quo.
I'm more than willing to pay it you wor.thless, ung.odly, piec.e of human excrem.ent.
It's not about money, people argued that we couldn't afford to integrate the schools either.
In my view, the fight for universal and comprehensive health care is the civil rights battle of our time. Like the other great struggles in our history that have made us a more democratic and just society, victory will require a strong and united grassroots movement that is prepared to take on the very powerful and wealthy special interests that benefit from this failing health care system.
So what else is new? It's been a myth for some time that red state folk hate footing the bills for policies they don't agree with. Truth is, we in the blue states and cities end up footing the bill largely for them.
Why spend hundreds of billions or every trillions of dollars for "reform" that won't bring down health care costs?
The best analysis I have seen of a Public Option was done by a liberal leaning health care policy group, and concluded that it would NOT bring costs down at all. In fact, it would hardly even slow the growth of health care spending, by less than 1.5%.
What's the point if costs will still go UP?
Link please....
Interesting how the discussion about paying more taxes for war profiteering - by Republicans - never comes up. Yet, when the discussion is about healthcare for ALL taxpaying Americans - all of a sudden it is framed as the sole consideration.
Money for wars...over decades...but, no money for OUR citizens to have quality healthcare.
The blue states give, the red states take. This is how it has been and nothing is new.
Correct. Red states take...and STILL whine about having to pay ANY taxes.
As a New Yorker, I would rather pay taxes for universal healthcare - than neverending war profiteering by Republicans, voted on by...you betcha...the red states.
Ridiculous.
Good old divide and conquer. I realy thought the psyops guys would come up with it sooner though.
Brilliant article. The rich states are not for the plan because they already have health insurance? That is what is wrong about America and Americans. All they care about is themselves. Hooray for me, F.U.C.K. Y.O.U.!
as an american who has health care...I want ALL to have health care.......in order to have a just/free & healthy society
The question is are you willing to pay for it?
The people that have health care are starting to catch on, their costs are not going to be going down . . . thus the question, if people wanted to hand out their hard earned money to others for health care, they are free to do so and why aren't they?
I have insurance. I'm willing to pay more. I've caught on. And I don't buy the assumption that I'll have to pay more, as we'll actual have market priced premiums, not those determined by monopolies. You and others who argue the "I'm not going to pay of the other guy" point ignore the record profits and rate increases by insurance companies, who are afraid of real competition.
We already pay MORE per capita for GOVERNMENT health care than any other country on the planet.
Don't blame the taxpayers that bureaucrats choose to squander it all on less than 20% of the population.
http://media.economist.com/images/20090627/CBB677.gif
Yes, we repeal the Bush tax cuts. $1.8 trillion. Easy, Viking.
They already pay for it in the form of emergency rooms and healthcare debt.
Just like you pay higher prices for shoes when you decide not to pay a little LESS extra for security systems.
Get educated.
Let's get rid of the burdensome and ineffective No Child Left Behind and use the money for health care.
Children would get a lot more out of being healthy than out of being traded around from one school to another because nobody wants them to mess up their average.
On what planet do you think that money is enough to even start to cover the cost of health care?
The cost of NCLB is staggering. The states pay a huge portion because the feds do not cover the law they mandated. It is in the hundreds of millions per state.
Private companies make most of this money. Private companies who develop the tests, administer them and score them. I know because I have worked in this industry. It's sickening how much is wasted and how little it helps. Find a teacher who liked NCLB, or a parent. It isn't easy.
REPEAL THE BUSH TAX CUTS. $1.8 Trillion.
So how is this news? Not all states are equal. Some places have higher costs of living and will pay higher taxes because of the amount of people they are trying to service. Take sales tax for instance. California (at least when I was there last) had somewhere around 10% sales tax where as here in VA it's around 7%. Not that that is a huge difference but it's an uneven system.
NY, specifically the NYC area has millions and millions of people living in a small patch of land. The island of Manhattan has over 6 million people and barely the space to accommodate that. So things will have to be done to make sure something as important as health care can be taken care of correctly.
This seems to be "controversy" for "controversy's" sake. If we want things done, we have to be willing to pay for them. If we want to have safe reliable roads, someone has to pay to have them laid. If we want more infrastructure, someone has to pay for it. If you want to have a decent health care system and live like a civilized country, someone has to pay for it.
So you know what? Do what you have to do. Stop the fraking tax cuts that don't work. Because while I am sure everyone is happy when they have money come back to them every year its a useless thing because you wind up spending more money on crappier services
Convert your Department Of Defense into a department for defense and you will save hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
That plus the Bush tax cuts, and we're in business, Brett.
what else is new? we already know that per capita, most blue states pay more than they receive in federal services. just give us our health care already.
Indeed.
The blue states pay the most in federal taxes. The red states RECEIVE the most of taxes spent. (Wailing all the time about how unfairly they are treated.)
It's pretty obvious that the blue states and going to be subsidizing red state health care. (In effect we already do in many ways.) So just get on with it. It's not like we're expecting them to thank us. They never do.
NO, the stupidity/robbery has to end somewhere. I'm sick to death of subsidizing red AmeriKa - They take our money and give us nothing but grief in return, and it's not like everybody in Chicago has "Cadillac" health insurance.
I'm going to pressure my congressional representative(s) to make sure that the money gathered our tax increases stays in OUR community, providing health coverage for OUR people, not Sarah Palin supporters out in Po Dunk Alaska, Iowa or Montana.
Amen folks. look at the gnp of the blue states versus the takers.
Lincoln was great, but he may have miscalculated..
That is an excellent argument.
When the government decides it doesn't need more of my money in taxes, I give that money to my LOCAL food bank, to my LOCAL church, to LOCAL high school Spanish club students planning a trip to Costa Rica, to the LOCAL X-ski team to send their top athletes to Nationals, to the LOCAL high school grad as a scholarship to the LOCAL community college.
NOT to the sinkhole that is the Federal Government.
You call people in Alaska, Iowa and Montana Po Dunk.
But, your Avatar is two kitties sleeping in hand sewn wittle kittlie sleeping bags.
That is seriously Po Dunk
|
||
Loading comments…
First Posted: 07- 5-09 09:42 PM | Updated: 07- 5-09 09:49 PM