American Politics during the Obama Presidency

This thread diverges and converges however the one thing that I can say that is 100% correct:

[quote=Jackson's comment]Nevertheless, the Argentine system of both free public and paid private health care would never work in the USA for a very simple reason: Argentina cannot borrow money internationally, and thus the amount of money they spend on their free public health care system is limited to what they can pay for from their own internally generated tax revenues.

In other words, they are forced to balance their national budget.

However, if we had a system of free public hospitals in the USA, the gutless politicians in charge of our government, bowing to the inevitable political pressure, would borrow another trillion dollars from the Chinese every year (above our current borrowings, mind you), all in the name of "investing" in our medical care system. In addition, there would also be the inevitable creep in employment costs as the same gutless politicians buy the votes of the government employee union members with salary and pension increases, eventually driving the cost of the free public health care system higher than the private care system.[/quote]This is an accurate description of a couple of dynamics.- one; what the US has engaged in for the past 32 years, a lot of deficit spending that has radically accelerated our economy into a place that has massive bubbles, costs, debt and operating deficits and two; what is happening in Argentina where the gov cannot borrow (ex from Venezuela), lives within their (limited) means and "what you see is what you get and what was actually paid for (without any borrowing). Yes there's some manipulation by CFK and some theft by her friends etc... But the basic system is not operating at a deficit.

I firmly believe in American exceptional ism.- we have had it and we still have some of it today. The driving question is will it be there in the future and what do we need to do to insure that it will be there. Having players pick up all their chips from the table, push back and run away after 30+ years of large deficits with the predictable steep uptick in the economy, leading the debt to be shouldered by all seems a bit unfair, as is saying "I earned it". Yea, you earned it all right, while sailing along with a huge tailwind that pushed anyone forward with a profile larger than 1 mm. Those with a larger profile went farther...

Just as an aside.- what does Singapore look like with a rising tide? (I hope we don't have a bunch of climate change deniers here...

Everyone seems to forget that Argentina had universal health care long before the country unilaterally repudiated the foreign debt, and could no longer borrow overseas. I do not pretend to know, but speculate that part of that repudiated debt went to finance the health care system.

Obamacare is a two humped camel--a horse designed by a committee, but is it worse than we had before? I do not know, and only time will tell. Before Obamacare we had millions of working poor people, not just deadbeats, who had no insurance provided by their employers. Many of those employers cannot not afford to provide their employees with health insurance, but there are also many employers who are just plain greedy. I doubt that we will ever know which is which.

Tres3.

[QUOTE=HiLife;435083]
Just as an aside.- what does Singapore look like with a rising tide? (I hope we don't have a bunch of climate change deniers here...[/QUOTE]The government of Singapore is not a climate change denier either. For several years they have been investigating rising sea levels, including ringing the entire island with a sea wall that would keep the water out.

Tres3.

[QUOTE=Tres3;435092]The government of Singapore is not a climate change denier either. For several years they have been investigating rising sea levels, including ringing the entire island with a sea wall that would keep the water out.

Tres3.[/QUOTE]Sea levels are rising so slowly we have another 1000 years before we have to worry about it.

[QUOTE=HiLife;435083]
I firmly believe in American exceptional ism.- we have had it and we still have some of it today. The driving question is will it be there in the future and what do we need to do to insure that it will be there. Having players pick up all their chips from the table, push back and run away after 30+ years of large deficits with the predictable steep uptick in the economy, leading the debt to be shouldered by all seems a bit unfair, as is saying "I earned it". Yea, you earned it all right, while sailing along with a huge tailwind that pushed anyone forward with a profile larger than 1 mm. Those with a larger profile went farther...
[/QUOTE]Yes, of course, if you've got a business, you didn't build that. If you've done well it's government and deficit spending that's responsible for your success. You made some money in the past, created businesses and jobs, and now it's time for government to take that back. And with up to a 55.5% marginal income tax rate and a 40% estate tax that's achievable now. We need to get the money out of the private sector and put it in the government's pocket where it will do some good.

There are solutions for the problem, to prevent the industrious and talented and successful from taking their chips off the table. Exchange controls for example - make sure money doesn't leave the country, like what Argentina's doing right now. Or enforce the Reed Amendment, which makes it illegal for anyone who takes chips off the table to ever re-enter the United States. Actually, Jack Reed and Chuck Schumer are trying to do that right now with new legislation. They'll probably manage to slip it into a bill that will pass someday. So, HiLife, don't give up hope, success is just around the corner.

The reality, American exceptionalism is coming to an end. We're going to be just like Western Europe, only without the fiscal discipline of a country like Germany. The only question is whether we'll become like France or Greece.

[B]Freedom in America[/B]

The video below is only about 4 minutes. Well worth watching!

[URL]http://www.youtube.com/embed/n_YQ8560E1w?autoplay=1[/URL]

[QUOTE=Gandolf50;435099]Sea levels are rising so slowly we have another 1000 years before we have to worry about it.[/QUOTE]If you really believe that we have 1000 years before we have to worry about the sea level, then I have a bridge in New York that I would like to sell you.

Tres3.

[QUOTE=Punter127;435111][B]Freedom in America[/B]

The video below is only about 4 minutes. Well worth watching!

[URL]http://www.youtube.com/embed/n_YQ8560E1w?autoplay=1[/URL][/QUOTE]There is not too much that I disagree with when it comes to personal responsibility & freedom. But those southern democrats prior to the 70's, like George Wallace, ain't they republicans these days?

[QUOTE=Tres3;435112]If you really believe that we have 1000 years before we have to worry about the sea level, then I have a bridge in New York that I would like to sell you.

Tres3.[/QUOTE]Show me hard data, not conjecture that says otherwise. I still own ocean front property in NY and the levels have NOT changed in the last 45 years!

[QUOTE=Tres3;435112]If you really believe that we have 1000 years before we have to worry about the sea level, then I have a bridge in New York that I would like to sell you.

Tres3.[/QUOTE]Check out the US satellite survey measurements on ocean levels. Levels have risen something like 1/10 of a inch in the last fifty year or so. More likely caused by garbage dumping in the ocean and pollution. Now if you want to worry about something, worry about that!

[QUOTE=Gandolf50;435115]Check out the US satellite survey measurements on ocean levels. Levels have risen something like 1/10 of a inch in the last fifty year or so. More likely caused by garbage dumping in the ocean and pollution. Now if you want to worry about something, worry about that![/QUOTE]The State of Florida and Miami-Dade County would disagree with you. Miami-Dade is considering moving a sewerage treatment plant rather than upgrade it because they expect the current site to be under water before the new bonds are paid off. I am not going to argue the point with you any more because global warming deniers have their minds firmly made up, just like the anti-abortion fanatics, and there no amount of arguing can change their point of view..

Tres3.

[QUOTE=Tres3;435117]The State of Florida and Miami-Dade County would disagree with you. Miami-Dade is considering moving a sewerage treatment plant rather than upgrade it because they expect the current site to be under water before the new bonds are paid off. I am not going to argue the point with you any more because global warming deniers have their minds firmly made up, just like the anti-abortion fanatics, and there no amount of arguing can change their point of view..

Tres3.[/QUOTE]Try reading "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. While it is fiction, it is based on fact. Filled with foot notes to support all points of views. Very interesting. The fact is, there is and has been "warming"and then "cooling" periods since day one. I'm not saying that mankind should not clean up its act. But the whole global warming campaign is a bit of a sham. Read the book and get back to me. The temperature for the 70 years (a period of accurate records) actually shows, if anything a very slight decline in average temperatures.

Maybe we should start a new thread? .

[QUOTE=Tres3;435117]. I am not going to argue the point with you any more because global warming deniers have their minds firmly made up, just like the anti-abortion fanatics, and there no amount of arguing can change their point of view..
[/QUOTE]In the short-to-medium term, on a global scale, the only economically viable way to do what you want to do is to generate more power from natural gas and nuclear instead of coal. A big impediment are environmental fanatics on the left, who are a lot like the anti-abortion fanatics on the right. They've gotten hydraulic fracturing banned in France and New York so far. And after the Fukushima plant disaster in Japan, they've got public opinion on their side on the nukes.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;435120]In the short-to-medium term, on a global scale, the only economically viable way to do what you want to do is to generate more power from natural gas and nuclear instead of coal. A big impediment are environmental fanatics on the left, who are a lot like the anti-abortion fanatics on the right. They've gotten hydraulic fracturing banned in France and New York so far. And after the Fukushima plant disaster in Japan, they've got public opinion on their side on the nukes.[/QUOTE]I agree with you. The environmental folks must face the reality that global population is growing, and that population will demand more power. Wind and other alternative sources cannot meet that demand, and Obama would like to ban all coal fired plants, even the clean ones where investment in clean emissions has totaled billions of dollars. The environmental folks have to wake up and realize that you cannot have a cleaner world over the short-to-medium term. They are just as bad as the global warming deniers.

Tres3.