No.

With the exception of the first sentence of #1, and maybe #3, depending.

Period.

Well, at a minimum your ideas will definitely make the rich richer. How that will help the overall economy is a mystery though. The rich are getting richer now with no help to the rest of us.

Off Topic: HEY Mark - why don't you get out of there already? Take the Mrs. out for a nice dinner or something! ;o)

There will be plenty of red meat to chew on in the coming days!

Back on Topic: This is going to cost the Teapubicans DEARLY! Seniors are a consistant voting block, as are Hispanics & Gays!

At this point, the right has managed a real tri-fecta, when it comes to pi$$ing off anyone who's not a tea bagger!

NewMalthus: you really need to come up with some new ideas rather than the same old cut & paste.

I hope that Harry Reid keeps this around until primary time, next year. Then trot it onto the Senate Floor and have the Republican Senators vote for it. Like to see all those seniors in FL and AZ cheering their Senators who are cancelling their Medicare and Medicaid.

They won't have to worry about death panels under Ryan's plan. The plan is to have them all die, as soon as possible.

So I'm writing and reporting until I get the word she's ready to grab dinner.

That's why you're the BEST! ;o)

Bon Apetite!

I know the Republican strategy for 2012...Let the Dems win everything until the country collapses! I like it! The sooner we collapse, the sooner we can reform this @!$%#ed up system we have!

Among 20 of the world’s wealthiest countries, America now has:

* the highest poverty rate, both generally and for children;

* the greatest inequality of incomes;

* the smallest amount of government spending (as a percentage of GDP) on social programs for the disadvantaged;

* the lowest number of paid holidays, annual leave days and maternity leave days;

* the lowest score on the UN’s index of material well-being of children;

* the worst score on the UN’s gender inequality index;

* the lowest social mobility (i.e. in America, more members of the lower and middle class remain stuck in that class than ever before);

* the highest public and private expenditure on health care (as a portion of GDP), and yet accompanied by:

- the highest infant mortality rate

- the greatest prevalence of mental health problems

- the highest obesity rate

- the largest percentage of people going without health care due to cost

- the greatest number of low birth weight children per capita

- the greatest consumption of anti-depressants per capita

- the shortest life expectancy at birth (except for Portugal);

- the largest amount of carbon dioxide emissions and water consumption per capita;

- the lowest score on the World Economic Forums Environmental Performance Index and the largest Ecological Footprint per capita (except for Belgium);

- the highest rate of failing to ratify international agreements;

- the lowest amount of spending on international development and humanitarian assistance as a percentage of GDP;

- the largest amount of military spending as a portion of GDP;

- the largest amount of international arms sales;

- the largest negative balance of payments (except New Zealand, Spain and Portugal);

- the lowest scores for student performance in math (except for Portugal and Italy) (and far down from the top in both science and reading);

- the highest high school drop out rate (except for Spain).

The GOP plan is to roll that snowball to hell. Let's see, how much of a chance does that give us?

Newmalthus works for the Koch brothers and gets paid for spamming the forums with this nonsense.

Nice work RAF!

You need to be posting THAT daily!

Nothing drives the tea baggers crazier than FACTS!

you know maybe you ought to do some research be fore you open your mouth or write for that manner.I suggest you look at deficiets for the last fourty years and see who and why we are in this position at all. President Reagan got elected to offoice by saying that President Carter's 75 bIllion dollar deficiet was rediculous and was to much. now look at all the defciets since and nottice the only one under 200 billion was from Reagens first year in office other wise a budget submitted to congress By Jimmy Carter. And then again after Clinton was elected and got REBUBLICAN spending under control. Then there was a surplus untill Bush took office and gave the rich a tax reduction of 280 billon dollars which coincedently was about the deficeit for his first budget. I wonder why we had a defeciet that year. As soon as true Americans Quit listenning to the Big Lie told by the GOP and there pundit's this country will be alot better off

Total crap Malthus. You'd destroy society in order to save it.

This registered republican will donate to Ron and Rand Pauls' campaign and vote for Obama in 2012.

NewMalthus,

Most of your right-wing proposals are unfunded.

This registered republican will donate to Ron and Rand Pauls' campaign and vote for Obama in 2012.

Give me a HUG - will ya? ;o)

Most of your right-wing proposals are unfunded.

Once you hit #15 - it tells you what a zealot he/she is!

What's up with Ron Paul? I thought he championed all causes that turns everything over to industry pirates. 2012 is going to suck for the R's.. Also--what's up with the 19 point road map to failure?

Ah, the Koch Bros. want to be able to sue the NYTimes every time an article is published about them.

No "actual malice" required.

I did not read in this article that seniors would be affected. Is the "senior" group now those under 55. What does this article have to do with seniors and them losing benefits?

Multiple Party System--Do you actually think Ryan didn't weigh the potential political fallout if he made that choice? He's just another politician. "If" he really wanted to set himself apart, he would have proposed that Medicare be turned over to the private sector for everyone. He knew that the largest voting block, boomers, would throw him to the wolves. Note how Ron Paul voted. Why did he vote against Ryan's proposal.

If you're 25-45---sounds good. No one with touch that bloated sacred cow of a defense budget--there lies the biggest drain on the system.

This is kind of cool.

Want to see where your tax money goes?

The White House launched an easy-to-use calculator today that gives taxpayers a receipt for their 2010 federal taxes.

Just plug in your taxes paid.

NewMalthus

all great ideas but the libs will rebuke everything you say

I did this and am paying 26.3% for military spending and 4.3% for education! and where are all the cuts coming from? the GOP has zero credibility about wanting to decrease deficit when they go after social programs, NPR, planned parenthood, public education and health care and not a word about our HUGE military spending! why ANYONE believes anything the GOP says is puzzling!

I guess it is best said by Donald Trump today...America is surely on it's way to Hell. And by the way, in all your steps to bring this great country back from the brink of destruction, you forgot to mention...Tell the Oil companies who total fortune, profits and investments that dwarf our deficit by three times the amount, to re-invest in the people and the country that supports them, day in and day out and build refineries here domestically, and hire our people, and give back what they selflessly have taken, instead of giving it to wall street and the investors and special interest folks in this world. If they can man up to this request, watch the economy turn around over night, cause it is said, the poor are to poor to have cause all this mess, and only the greed of the filthy rich have done this to all.

where did you get this insane, right-wing garbage?? was it glen beck or Lush Rumball's website?

7. Reduce corporate tax rates by 50%. ??? they don't pay taxes as it is...and you want to lower it?

what a joke

"The rich get richer"...is that all the libs can say? Oh yes, that is the same saying they have always said because they are not intelligent enough to figure out how America became the greatest nation in the world. For the simple minds out there, let me try to explain it to you on your level...
1. People with money start a business.
2. The business makes money and hires PEOPLE to work and pay taxes.
3. The business gets bigger and hires more people that pay taxes.
3. The government gets more money from the taxes because people have jobs.
4. Businesses do not hire when they fear they are going to get taxed to death like the libs keep threatening.

By the way, I work 2 jobs to make ends meet...mostly because of my tax burden. Meanwhile, I know several people (liberals by the way) who are "disabled" and receive all kinds of handouts from the government. One just bought a new boat. I am glad I helped buy that for him.

I think it is time the goverment shuts down and starts over.

so if your simplistic little scenario is valid, where are the jobs? The gap between the rich and poor is wider than ever thanks to the continued reduction of the top tax rates, yet the jobs keep on leaving ... you're spouting canned R crap and trying to make it seem like intelligence, all the while ridiculing anyone who calls your bluff ... pathetic

actully kool aid, the rich are getting richer than any rich have ever been.

What we have now is a republican and democrat compromise. no one loves it but we can all live with it. At least they are keeping each other honest enough where the dems save women's health and the repubicans can make historic cuts. This is a brave new washington where both sides worked together.

Now lets hear about how they worked together to line their pockets and promote socalism. there are a lot of answers to a lot of questions, I'd like to see more of this kind of compromise. Save socalist programs democrats, make sure the rich don't pay taxes republicans.

Jeffromac23

you know maybe you ought to do some research be fore you open your mouth or write for that manner.I suggest you look at deficiets for the last fourty years and see who and why we are in this position at all. President Reagan got elected to offoice by saying that President Carter's 75 bIllion dollar deficiet was rediculous and was to much. now look at all the defciets since and nottice the only one under 200 billion was from Reagens first year in office other wise a budget submitted to congress By Jimmy Carter. And then again after Clinton was elected and got REBUBLICAN spending under control. Then there was a surplus untill Bush took office and gave the rich a tax reduction of 280 billon dollars which coincedently was about the deficeit for his first budget. I wonder why we had a defeciet that year. As soon as true Americans Quit listenning to the Big Lie told by the GOP and there pundit's this country will be alot better off

Before you go spouting of that someone needs to do some research why dont you heed your own advice? Start off with leaning how government really works. Then learn that the president cant spend jack. Then learn that the Clinton surplus is a bull @!$%# lie always has been always will be you cant have a surplus when your ruining a deficit sorry try again. Make sure you pay attention to who has the ability to spend money and who does not and look who ran that money spending entity. Then come back and attempt to school someone when you become educated.

JonMavrick, There were 4 years of surplus budgets during the Clinton years. For 4 years, revenues exceeded expenditures. That's a surplus. In fact some of that surplus was used to reduce the deficit. You should learn the difference between the debt and the deficit. And please, don't try to give the GOP credit for the Clinton surplus. Or I guess go ahead, since that would mean the GOP increased taxes on the wealthy to help balance the budget. Deficits have historically increased significantly under GOP presidents. They cut taxes for the wealthy and have built in so many incentives for corporations to take their business, jobs and profits overseas. Although we have one of the highest tax rates at 35%, the effective rate of corporations taxes is just 13.4%. Corporate taxes account for only 6% of federal tax revenue.

Aside from a lesson in civility, you could use a little education yourself. Try a source other than Fox News or Koch industries.

Kool Aid Drinkers Unite,

The only person with a simple mind may very well be YOU! First you state: 1. "People with money start a business". Exactly where do these "people with money" get their money to start a business, which will hire even 10 to 15 employees? I started a business and could barely feed myself for 3 years, let alone hire employees. Second, the vast majority of corporations DO NOT PAY ANY CORPORATE TAXES. I would be low if I said 5% pay corporate taxes. Why? Because you pay taxes on retained profits ONLY. Most owners pay all the money to THEMSELVES, or in the case of large corps. they pay dividends to shareholders, or they reinvest earned income in an array of tax shelters, or use multiple tax exemptions. The corp. does NOT pay taxes! You are VERY misinformed or actually ignorant of how corporate taxes work. As for hiring employees. The Corps are now off-shoring as many jobs as possible to SAVE MONEY and increase their bottom line profits. I will give you the benefit of a doubt and just assume you do not know what the he11 you are tallking about when it comes to corporations and how they work and what they want to achieve. I will tell you the ONLY THING which matters to them is PROFITS not people, not even their own employees. They can ALWAYS get new, and in most cases, cheaper employees to "tow the company line"! They are not benevolent entities! Finally, corporations will hire ONLY if they believe that they can make even one extra dollar. They could care less if their taxes are raised, IF they can only make more PROFIT! I would hope that you do some real "homework" and stop believing that these corporations are friends of this country. They are friends only to their BOTTOM LINES!

realamericafirst - interesting list, since we are mainly a two party system why didn't you include the democrats in your last line? Did they leave the country to hide?

jefromac - better not strain your brain two hard. No doubt US debt is skyrocketing out of control, but consider this. Congress controls the purse strings, so the surplus you claim for clinton really came from the republicans. The tax cuts bush gave were tax cuts made accross the board, not just for those earning $250000 +. Since the cuts were funded with a sunset clause, where were the democrats? Seems to me they were more than onboard with the cuts also.

If you want to look at things in a historical context, Bloomberg tv did a study that showed when it came to spending, both parties spent freely.

bummerbob - you wanted a source, but didn't give one yourself. Rather lame isn't it?

scrambolo - post 1.35 ???

A story on NBC news tonight spotlighted the issue of insurance companies boosting their profits by denying heart stress tests.

I saw that Amy! It was beyond despicable, in terms of what they will do in the name of the mighty $$$!

Alan Greyson had it right when he said the Teapublican Health Care Plan is, if you get sick - DIE quickly!

PS:Bobby shills for obscene corporate profits...

Bob, the man in the story on the news tonight nearly died because his insurance company denied his doctor's test for his heart three times. His was just one of many cases where the insurance company denied in order to boost their profits. In fact they aimed to deny 20 per cent of these tests, this was their goal. Paul Ryan can afford any test he needs. Maybe they should test to see if he HAS a heart.

Sure, Bob, because we all know those caring insurance companies need protection from name-calling.:

Insurer targeted HIV patients to drop coverage

(Reuters) - In May, 2002, Jerome Mitchell, a 17-year old college freshman from rural South Carolina, learned he had contracted HIV. The news, of course, was devastating, but Mitchell believed that he had one thing going for him: On his own initiative, in anticipation of his first year in college, he had purchased his own health insurance.

Shortly after his diagnosis, however, his insurance company, Fortis, revoked his policy. Mitchell was told that without further treatment his HIV would become full-blown AIDS within a year or two and he would most likely die within two years after that.

So he hired an attorney -- not because he wanted to sue anyone; on the contrary, the shy African-American teenager expected his insurance was canceled by mistake and would be reinstated once he set the company straight.

But Fortis, now known as Assurant Health, ignored his attorney's letters, as they had earlier inquiries from a case worker at a local clinic who was helping him. So Mitchell sued.

In 2004, a jury in Florence County, South Carolina, ordered Assurant Health, part of Assurant Inc, to pay Mitchell $15 million for wrongly revoking his heath insurance policy. In September 2009, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the lower court's verdict, although the court reduced the amount to be paid him to $10 million.

By winning the verdict against Fortis, Mitchell not only obtained a measure of justice for himself; he also helped expose wrongdoing on the part of Fortis that could have repercussions for the entire health insurance industry.

Previously undisclosed records from Mitchell's case reveal that Fortis had a company policy of targeting policyholders with HIV. A computer program and algorithm targeted every policyholder recently diagnosed with HIV for an automatic fraud investigation, as the company searched for any pretext to revoke their policy. As was the case with Mitchell, their insurance policies often were canceled on erroneous information, the flimsiest of evidence, or for no good reason at all, according to the court documents and interviews with state and federal investigators.

raysview, no insurance company will offer an AFFORDABLE policy. Even now, all seniors can't afford a supplemental policy! When you only receive $700 a month in social security and your husband's pension died along with him, you don't have much left. THAT is what has happened to many women who farmed with their husbands or otherwise worked in the family business, or were stay at home moms, raising children and gardens to feed them. There are seniors now who don't even get $300 in Social Security. What are they to do?

"TRANSFORMING" Medicare and Social Security is a GOP code word for,: "PRIVATIZE."

And calling them ENTITLEMENTS" is a right-wing MISNOMER intended to mal-align all social safety nets as if its the cost of unpaid gifts. Medicare and Social Security are government INSURANCE plans created FOR the AMERICAN PEOPLE. You pay into them with every paycheck you earn throughout your life, and later in life, you expect to get something out of it when you need it.

That 114-year old man in Montana that passed away recently, Walter Breuning -- he's a Republican -- and he said that the creation of SOCIAL SECURITY was the best thing he had ever seen the U.S. government create and maintain. He told the reporter interviewing him (in so many words), for us not to worry about it because it was there years before, and it will still be here tomorrow. And when he was asked what were his favorite Presidents, he said all of them were good ...EXCEPT for the last one (Bush).

Amy is right. And we have death panels with insurance companies. Their fake denials for coverage come to mind when you have a devastating disease.

Bob, let's say for the sake of argument that the Obama Death Panels are real. As a senior citizen, I'd rather have the man I voted for President kill me off than some off the street schmuck! At least I'd know who to blame!

t.

Bob, have you ever actually lived in a country with nationalized health care?

Because if you had, you wouldn't post such nonsense.

Try reading this chart:

Public’s satisfaction with health care system, selected European and non-European countries, 1988-2007

"the 114 year old man thought Social Security was a good deal. He paid 1% of his income for a couple of years and lived off the system for another 50. Good deal for him, certainly, but not for the waitress that served him coffee who pays a fortune and will collect nada."

----------------------------------------

Actually, Social Security was created in 1935. Breuning worked for the railroads for 50 years before he retired. Do the math. He paid into SS for about 22 years of his life before he was eligible to collect on it. If the right-wing in this country get their way, that waitress that served him coffee won't be able to get the help of Social Security after she retires. I'm sure that over the course of Breuning's very long career, many waitresses have paid out a portion of their paychecks to SS, have retired and collected on SS by now.

The Tea Party said they want to do away with SS and Medicare as well as nearly all of the government -- save for the military in their idealistic panacea of the creation of a number of gun-toting police states of brown-shirted, private militias.

So young waitresses now, may not have anything to help them after they get old and retire, and again, if and only if the radical right-wing get their way with "transforming" SS and Medicare out of existence, by privatizing it in stages, (and as one blogger put it) to favor the corporate rich, lassez-faire capitalists on Wall Street.

Americans are more dissatisfied than citizens of other nations with their basic health care even while paying more of their own money for treatment, a five-nation survey released Thursday notes.

The study shows that people in the U.S. face longer wait times to see doctors and have more trouble getting care on evenings or weekends than do people in other industrialized countries.

One-third of Americans told pollsters that the U.S. health care system should be completely rebuilt, far more than residents of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, or the U.K. Just 16% of Americans said that the U.S. health care system needs only minor changes, the lowest number expressing approval among the countries surveyed.

I got ecoli in 2005, my insurance had no problem with that, until Memorial Hospital couldn't handle me and I had to be rushed to University of Utah. I nearly died and my insurance called my FOOD POISONING a PRE-EXISTING CONDITION and bankrupt me. They chose to let me die even though I had paid them $250 a month over a year. Since it was the onkly insurance my employer offered I had to continue to pay those scum sucking pigs $250 a month for myself and my wife.

In 2006 we both had our annual physical exams that are supposed to be covered. I received the notice that my Physical Exam was a PRE-EXISTING condition and they were refusing to pay. I called them and blew up, I told the woman on the phone that I was going to quit my job and dedicate my life to seeing her and the scum she worked for behind bars. Later that day they called and spoke to my wife telling her that it was a clerical error. A week later she received the very same letter claiming the HER physical exam was a PRE-EXISTING CONDITION.

Obviously these were just form letters that they automatically send out in hopes that the people are to stupid to know they are getting screwed.

Regarding fraud in Medicare--give them some hard time @ Chino. It will stop.

Bob,

I knew people like you when I worked as a contractor for the Navy.

Some middle-aged contractors in the Navy railed against socialized medicine. I recall how they pushed for people to vote only for Republicans or Libertarians on the Ballot whenever Election Day came around ...but later, as they became afflicted with a financially catastrophic medical illness (different kinds of cancer for example, of which is pretty prevalent in their vocations being exposed long-term, to chemicals, radiation and EM fields from big electronic machinery that surround them in their jobs). and so they stopped harping against "single payer" coverage.

One relocated to Canada before he retired, and the other, to Germany. The rest got Medicare or treatment by the VA after they retired if they served in the military. The ones that expatriated themselves to the EU got treated there, and I heard that their cancers are now in remission. Their private insurances plans back in the states had strict limits on what their plans would pay for and it was costing them dearly for treatment until they moved to the EU to take advantage of their socialized medicine that they used to hate the idea of when they lived and worked in the U.S.

All it will take is for you or for someone in your family to get really sick, for a long time. Then after your private insurance is soon depleted and your family is holding onto mounting bills that are cutting into your mortgage payments, let's see how long you will patriotically keep defending under-regulated, private medical insurers in the U.S.

I still remember seeing the idiots cheering down Health care reform with signs "Keep your hands off my Medicare". Well Republicans have yet again shown there rear-ends to the American public and what they think about us by just going with a Plan to do what the people thought Democrats were going to with the passage of Health care. What I can tell you is republicans care nothing for any American making less then 1 million a year and the more you make the more they care about you because they want your donations to stay in power and that's all that matters to them bedsides giving every scrap they can scrap from the middle class and poor and Hand deliver it to the Rich.

Where are all those same crazy people in those crowds caring those signs about Keeping there hands off my Medicare now? Guess they cashed there Koch checks and are living high on the hog. If we don't make Republicans pay by voting them out and the Tea party out we are Doomed to watch all we worked for bleed for and paid be tricked out from underneath us. We need to Recall Republicans with Democrat's and Independents and raise Taxes on the Rich for the first time since 2001 When We had a Huge Surplus from the Clinton years and use the revenue from the extra income directly to pay off the National Debt while also making sensible reductions in Spending to encourage the economy to keep producing jobs. As the National debt falls the Businesses and Banks can lend money more freely like back in Clinton's time in office and we will have Jobs all over again.

We have Tried the Republican/Bush way with the same same rate and more cuts for the rich the last 12 years and it doesn't Work never has. Trickle down is only the person who makes the most taking a leak on those below. Recall the Republicans Quit Blaming Middle Class and poor and replace those Republicans with Democrats and independents that will reduce the spending as the President stated without killing us in the Middle and poorer classes.

I would kill to know how much the insurance industry promised Ryan for this little gem. I hope it was worth it. He has just about sealed the fate of the GOP/TP in 2012. It would be really nice to see the GOP/TP become the GOP once again. They sold their souls to these idiots and it'll be time to pay the piper very soon for them.

Bob:

The libs claim the ObamaCare 'death panels' are myth and a scare tactic, yet Amy has no limits on smearing the private insurance companies. Amy shills for socialized medicine.

The only shill in the room is you, Bobby.

It's not the mythical Obama death panels you have to worry about. It's the ones that exist right now. Just ask Jan Brewer if you can have a heart transplant. Not bl@@dy likely.

But, boy, you sure do need one.

And private insurance companies deserve to be "smeared." Because private insurance companies ARE the problem.

@ Dennis: Ryan has bought himself one thing, and that's for sure. A real democratic challenger, for maybe the first time since he was elected. His own district drifted decidedly toward the blue in the recent Supreme Court election.

Anna

I would love to say we're gonna miss him but alas, I just can't. There are a great many of them that are on the endangered species list. It'll take a couple of election cycles to rid ourselves of them but if we get out the vote it will happen sooner, not later.

The GOP will rue the day they hitched their wagon to these TP folks.

Raysview:

A little more logic and way less emotion would help.

And a little more reality and a little less apology for greedy insurance companies wouldn't hurt, either. There's competition NOW, and prices keep going up because no one will stand up against it. Sometimes I think the only competition that exists is the race to see who can raise their prices more. Once we take away Medicare, the last impediment to unbridled greed, there will be nothing standing in their way. Where you get the idea that if we just leave it in their merciful hands, like we do now, things will be better for seniors is beyond me to figure out. It will just free them up to grab even more premiums, insure even less risk, and deny even more claims.

To think anything else is to completely ignore historical trends and is about as far from logic as you can get.

@ Dennis ~ From your lips to God's ears. Let's just hope it's my God who's in charge.

sickandtired:

mandating private insurance for EVERYONE, giving more money to that industry...

Some of us liberals oppose the mandate, too, as the mandate is, in fact, a creature of the insurance companies, and designed solely for their benefit to buy their cooperation in the plan. If you don't believe that, read the Florida decision, in which the judge chronicles the administration's admission in this regard. As if we needed that to know the truth.

The mandate is also unlikely to work. Single payer is MUCH better.

bob:

Does a federal judge ruling it is unconstitutional bother anyone?

Frankly, no. The district court vote is split. Besides, it doesn't matter until the Supreme Court rules. As the outcome is pretty much a foregone conclusion, I can say with some confidence that THEN it will bother me. It wasn't much to begin with, and it was designed around appeasing private insurance companies, but it's all we've got left to curb their unbridled greed, at least a little.

p.s. Cameron is a conservative, isn't he? What else would you expect?

Hello Everyone,

I was just thinking about our current insurance problem and wanted to give some opinions on what I believe to be relatively fair insurance rates / plans. I do not want to get into the same old partisan this and that and want to give a listing of what I think would be fair and I am wondering your opinions on this program structure. Are these fair in your opinion and also what current line of thinking is the closest to this ideology, Obamacare of Ryan’s plan?

Below are independent insurance rates for those that currently do not have insurance, cannot get insurance, or would like an alternative to any current individual and group policies.

*Please note that these are not group policy plans but the same rules could be used for those large policies with discounts and deductible reductions for the size of plans. (Like X% reduction for groups over 25 and X% for over 1000, etc).

This template is based on single person coverage. Couple and family coverage percentages will be broken down in the "caveats" section.

Under 55 Plans:

$150 a month - $2,500 deductible - 30 / 60 / 200 co-pays (PCP / Specialist / Emergency Room)

$250 a month - $1,500 deductible - 30 / 60 / 150 co-pays

$350 a month - $500 deductible - 20 / 40 / 100 co-pays

*All plans include prescription plans - generic meds at a $5, $10, $25 scales, non-generic at a $10, $20, $50 scale (no deductibles)

Over 55 plans (Medicare):

Would be sliding scale based on your income - (Three Tiers) - Tiers relate to your monthly rates and deductibles only, co-pays remain constant.

Over $250,000 a year the plans would be the same as above

$150,000 - $249,999 would be the above rates at a 75%

%50,000 - $149,999 would be the above rates at a 50%

Below $49,000 would be the above rates at 25%

*All plans include prescription plans - all meds (generic / non -generic) at a $5, $10, $25 scales (no deductibles)

A couple of caveats:

1. Absolutely no denial on pre-existing conditions

2. All claim disputes / denials / issues would be regulated and policed by a third-party entity to ensure they meet the standard and fair insurance coverage set forth within the terms of each plans. All the coverage terms would be reviewed periodically for plan adjustments to include new procedures and medical advances and "preventive care" by this entity. This entity would also serve as the authority for all claim disputes for denials. It does not matter whether this is a governmental or private entity (watch dog group) that performs this crucial auditing component.

3. In-network / Out-of-Network rates. All hospitals are required by law to take this insurance plan (no out of network hospitals). Doctors that are out of network, the plans cover 80% of all costs

4. No Coinsurance, only monthly premiums, deductibles & co-pays.

4. Couples rates would not be doubled but be at 1.75 rates

5. Family rates would be based on number of children (meaning if you have have 8 kids you pay more than if you have 4 kids) - The rate would be a rate of 1 if single parent and 1.75 for 2 parents and a rate of adding .25 percent hike per child. So if you had a two parent and 3 children household and you picked the second tier ($250 / month - $1,500 deductible) the rates would increase by 1.75 (couple rate) + .25 + .25 + .25 for a total family adjustment of 2.5. Making tier two insurance selection cost $650/monthly with a $3,750 yearly deductible.

6. All preventive care would only be subject to co-pays (no deductibles involved)

7. For chronic conditions - Lifetime Maximums (deductibles only) would be reached once you hit x3 your yearly deductible. Then your deductible would be reduced by 50% and once you hit x3 of the new deductible total out of pocket would be zero. Example, you have a family with a 3750 yearly deductible, once you hit $11,250 (3750 x 3) your new deductible would be $1875. Once you hit $5625 (1875 x 3) you would no longer have any more deductibles. In a sense your lifetime out of pocket would be $16,875.

8. All rates would be locked in for a predetermined length of time, say 10 years. At which time an adjustment would take affect a 2% - 10% increase across the board on rates, excluding co-pays and prescriptions plans for another say, 10 years depending on economics factors (inflation, energy costs, dollar valuation, etc). Rate adjustments would be capped at 10% increase each period.

I understand that this is completely theoretical in nature and the rate figures are a generalist figure (not sure if this even economically feasible, but seems fair from a plan participant perspective) on what I pay and have paid for insurance and others I know have and are paying. Also, I do not care whether the insurance provided is from a private insurance company (Ryan's Plan) or is socialized by the government (Obamacare) but that it is provided for any and all person's that want it. We are the United States of America and health costs are getting out of control and there has to be a fair line where it is affordable to those that want it, that does burden (i.e. bankrupt) the overall health care system and does not allow for total capitalistic “raping” of the American people.

Please let me know you nonpartisan thoughts and adjustments on this completely theoretical and hopefully thought-provoking system. The system could also include sliding insurance rates on income for those under 55 as well as possibly adding a 4th tier for those that make, say under $20,000 or $25,000 a year as well.

Thanks for your time and thoughts on this very important subject.

Pa Dude

No matter how you feel about the issue, the fact is placing a nation's health care into the hands of "insurance" is completely foolhardy to being with. The aim of health care is to keep people healthy, not CEOs and investors wealthy. Moore was right - insurance IS the problem, not the solution. Single Payer, unlike for profit insurance strives to keep the people from becoming ill in the first place, resulting in cutting waste, fraud and abuse. More care and less profitability should be the goal of any true health care system. When insurance stands between the people and their health care providers, the opposite is true.

Pa Dude,

That's looks very familiar. Nice sales pitch, however, you forgot to include in your very brief pitch all the exclusions of that policy. The deductible is also not straight forward as the annual deductible is separate from other care that is exclusionary and is billed above and beyond the deductibles. When asked to sell that policy, after reading all the fine print, I quit.

Hey Anna,

So more Brits, by a margin of almost 10%, think their system needs fundamental changes than Americans think their system needs fundamental changes. Doesn't bother you, huh. Liberals always know what is best for everybody, even people in other countries. Yea, Cameron is conservative. I heard he was elected by a majority - I know ....... you are smarter and know what is best for England, for the majority of Brits.

So we are going broke due to entitlement programs. You want to add another, "mother" of all entitlements. That's smart.

We are stuck at 9.0%+ unemployment for years and you are good with losing at least another 800,000. That makes liberal sense.

The world is getting ready to rebuke the dollar because of our spending and debt and you want to put on another $2.3 trillion. Genius ..... pure genius.

The economy is still in the ditch and you're happy with adding $500 billion in new taxes (all the while gas prices and food prices are skyrocketing.) Brillant.

The vast majority of Americans like their system - they just want better cost control. So we throw it away for a system that doesn't work as well and doesn't address costs at all in a realistic way - that relies soley on smoke, mirrors and accounting tricks.

All for a system that has been tried for over 60 years and is now being chucked because it fundamentally doesn't work and is unsustainable - as Cameron says "second rate."

We can go on and on....... but it doesn't matter .......you are simply a child that believes in liberal fairy tales. You believe what you want, reason has nothing to do with it.

Just an observation, as I don't really care one way or the other, but another poster above claimed that "Obamacare" was based on the UK's healthcare system, and then Bob above claims that it is the opposite of "Obamacare". The reason I mention this is because you both seem to be conservatives railing against "Obamacare", but you seem to be on different pages. It kind of gives the appearance of a non-unified front. Like I said, it is just an observation.

Boy I Really Have a Hard Time With a Person Calling themselve Real American First and not revealing thier god given name - am I the only fool on these blogs that say who I am - sorry I am proud of my name and when I post I post as Barbara Adams Jackson - this is who I am I don't hide behind the ridiculous names - come out whoever you are and stop this ridiculous jerkoff names - to answer the so called Real American I have read your posts and in my book you are not an American I would ever want to meet, you don't give a dam about your neighbor, nor do you give a dam about anything except about your sorry ass - go with god you jerk!

Barbara, the reason we don't divulge our names is that text from popular sites like these are parsed by search engines. Google your name and see what happens. Now imagine employers, co-workers, friends, enemies, family, and complete strangers doing the same. I say this just in case you weren't already aware.

Amazing, isn't it Beverly? I don't know how to explain it either, except that people simply aren't paying attention to what Ryan is trying to do. There is no question that his plan will quickly leave seniors vulnerable to having no health insurance at a time when their health needs require that they have it. There is also no question that this is a HUGE giveaway to the insurance companies both in dollars, and in having carte blanche to raise rates and rip off consumers. But, by golly, as long as Ryan lowers the tax rate AGAIN on the richest, he has paid back his corporate masters, and will be allowed to continue on in Congress. When people wake up to this, they will be very unhappy. But, if it doesn't happen soon, they will have sealed their fate, and the selling of America to Corporate monsters (Jefferson's worst nightmare come true) will have come to pass.

I am sure that Ryan will sit in church on Sunday, secure in the knowledge that by being in that pew, he is more Christian than Jesus. I think that Jesus, just like he drove the money lenders out of the temple, would tell Ryan to get out too.

bob:

you are simply a child that believes in liberal fairy tales. You believe what you want, reason has nothing to do with it.

Honestly, bob? Coming from you is a good reason for me to take that as a compliment.

Let her dream, for she's a child, let the rain fall down upon her ....

There is a component Ryan left out of his plan-

Back in the 1990's, the FASB board declared that payments for retirees could no longer be deducted from a company's profits. This, of course, had the effect of having most, if not all, companies dropping insurance coverage for their retirees.

How about congress passing a law that allows that deduction?

The Medicare deficit outlines why simply raising the income cap will not help Social Security. Bill Clinton lifted the income cap for Medicare- the result? Medicare is still going broke.

The only way to fix it is to let those who want to opt out of the system. You do that with a combination of vouchers, (we all paid in- we deserve to get back out what we have paid in), and allowing businesses to cover their retirees.

I found this interesting 'morsel' this morning on Govenor Christie that's most definetly share 'worthy'!

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is often mentioned as a presidential contender, but fewer than one in four voters in his home state would back him as a candidate, a poll released on Thursday said.

Two-thirds of registered voters "oppose Chris Christie for president in 2012," according to the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll.

Fewer than half of Republicans and a quarter of independents support Christie as a candidate, the poll found.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/14/chris-christie-poll_n_849095.html

The higher the climb, the harder the fall...

Oh, and then there's this:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) begged reporters Wednesday to "take the bat" to a 76-year-old lawmaker for collecting a pension and a paycheck.

Democratic state Sen. Loretta Weinberg, a widow, said she was forced to begin collecting her pension after her financial advisor invested all her savings in Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme.

"After a major financial setback resulting from my so-called 'Financial Advisor' investing all my money (including my IRA) with a man I never heard of (read: Bernie Madoff) a colleague suggested that I would most likely qualify for my pension," Weinberg wrote in a blog post.

"Though I never went in to public service to make money, I am grateful for this income at this time of my life, because of the situation Bernie Madoff created for me," she said.

Christie became livid at Weinberg when she was quoted by The Star-Ledger as saying he was guilty of double standards. At the time, Christie had not yet spoken out against Essex County Executive Executive Joseph N. DiVincenzo Jr. for receiving a pension from the same job where he was also receiving a paycheck.

"That's just gamesmanship," Christie said at a press conference. "As you can see from folks like Loretta Weinberg, who by the way, if you guys don't give Loretta Weinberg the hypocrisy award..."

"I mean can you guys please take the bat out on her for once?" he asked reporters. "The hypocrisy meter has got to tilt on her."

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDkQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fvideocafe.crooksandliars.com%2Fdavid%2Fchris-christie-urges-reporters-take-bat-76-y&ei=j6ipTZOaCITniALYj53vDA&usg=AFQjCNH9iR0I-CYkxQdf7c5mB4-iuFdwgg

Now there's a THUG you can swoon over!

You BETCHA!

Feisty, I have a feeling that Christie, just like his biggest groupie no jo, will quickly wear badly with the public. Be interesting to see how fast his voters want to recall HIM!

It's pretty apparent that those on here (almost everyone posting) are from the far right or left. Independents like me are sick of the partisan B.S. that is dragging this country down, and it's starting from the highest office in the country. I voted for this president, and will not do so again. He has been the most divisive force I've seen in this country for years. The right isn't any better. As long as this continues this country will continue to go downhill. How are we going to provide NEEDED services to those in this country while reducing our defecit? We need to do both, we just can't sustain this level of spending. Do you realize that our debt is nearly equal to the sum of everything we produce as a country? We need real change, but neither party is willing to look outside the box on ways to fund essential programs while cutting government waste.

Tax reforms are an essential part of the equation, as is corporations paying their fair share. Reducing government and reform of entitlement programs is also essential. Reduce the military budget. Reform, not elimination, of SS and Medicare is an essential component. Seriously, some of the remarks on here are very ignorant, and show why this country is in the situation we're in with very little hope of getting out. BTW, I said I will not vote for Obama and will not, however there is not currently anyone out there who really reflects the middle of the road, bipartisan point of view, as usual. Until there is truely more than the choice of right or left, ignorant comments like many of those above will be the norm not the exception. Should change the name of this blog to Romper Room.

Bob1805084====I couldn't help but notice that a lot of your comments have been collapsed by the community. I personally think every thing you say should be collapsed. I see where your hero Boss Hogg(Barbour) won a straw poll. Must have been some real winners voting. Not Yours Truly, A Moonbat

So to summarize the story, the Republicans are trying to solve a major financial problem facing Americans, and the Democrats response is to demonize them and play the most partisan politics possible, and keep that bus headed for that cliff that everyone sees ahead.

Shameful.

Norm903 - good point on the 114 year old liking SS so much, one of the perks I guess.

My parents regieved a snall inheritance in 1980. A financial advisor recommended that they put the money into an annuity with a monthly payout. Well the plan didn't benefit my dad much but my mom has received far more than what they originally invested.

loveit or leave it - Thank you for your analysis on an insurance company never providing an "affordable" plan. Obamacare promotes "affordable" healthcare thru private insurers as well. Now it looks like he lied to us again on the virtues of obamacare.

What are the elderly to do? I would hope that they get on a soapbox and tell the younger ones the importance of planning for their future by not thinking that the government will support them.

rradiko - why do the democratics refer to them as entitlements also? Nice try to redefine words that the politicians already know the meaning of. Tell us, are you naturally stupid or do you practice at it? Neither ryan or obama has put SS on the budget table, but both have agreed it has future funding problems.

Btw, got that interview link?

Judging from the way the Republicans have acted from Regan on and most especially during the Bush years, I could see this elite Gestapo attitude progressing. The Republicans have already walked onto extremely thin and cracked ice. No Republican or Tea Party member will receive even one vote from our family as long as they continue to support only the wealthy elite, whose primary concern is to preserve and increase their status quo of power, control, and greedy wealth at the expense of the middle class, poor, elderly, Vets, and disabled. It's time for the Republicans to receive their big whiplash for their self-centered actions!!!

Roy wilson - pretty much as I see it also, they like the status quo and they definitely like playing to the elderly, poor and disabled as being the "victims" of choice by the republicans.

Guess the liberals think that the poor, elderly and disabled are so incompetent that they will believe this. Isn't that the liberals plan, keep on repeating the lie until people start to believe it?

Seattle Sue,

I personally think every thing you say should be collapsed.

Really? Why is that?

In #2.3 I simply pointed out that the poor guy lived with this system, pointed out that he probably wouldn't have lived under the UK system and asked what system do you think he would prefer?

What is your problem with that?

In #2.28 I responded to RA and pointed out a important stat that he/she left out. I pointed out the USA had the lowest percentage of citizens who felt their system needed fundamental changes.

What is your problem with that?

I cited Cameron's speech, relaying what he stated and how it differed from the direction we are going. I gave quotes. I asked if those quotes sound like what Obama is describing?

I quoted Dr. Berwick. I asked aquestion about his redisribution statement. I refered to a IBD column about the CBO director, the job cost, the debt, the new taxes. I mentioned the actuaries predictions about losing providers.

I quoted their opinion on what an alternative would be and pointed out factual results so far.

Funny - there was no real opinion on my part, just facts and well referenced expert opinion, quotes, etc. No ad hominem stuff, didn't even mention the word liberal, Democrat .....

And you can't handle it?

No one gets an opinion, no one gets to say anything - they should be collapsed if anything they say does not mock ridicule or insult the conservatives ...... is not homage and worship of Obama?

Funny the only ones collapsed are conservatives, huh. I thought liberals were for free speech, working together.....I thought liberals were supposed to be open minded.

So Sue, what is your problem ....... just not smart enough to articulate an argument, to refute anything, or give me an adult reason why my comments should be collapsed?

Have you noticed that there has been extremely little to no cuts or burdens made on the wealthy? And why is that? Is it possibly because you didn't vote or naively voted them into office??? You get what you voted for!! Right now the Republicans are cutting Medicare and Medicaid, and then wait a few years for them to cut SS. By doing that will provide more for the greedy right wing pockets, or to spend on their pet project ear marks and lobbyists. And you think they deserve a salary raise for their important work that is so far superior to the rest of the people in our country?!?! Go figure!!!

It's quite a quandary that we're in.

I know seniors on social security and medicare, and I would not want to see them lose any of it.

I'm already afraid that SS won't be there when I retire after paying in my entire career.

The debt level is so massive already, we're getting dangerously close to the point that the Dollar will become a worthless piece of paper backed by nothing, and now Obama wants to raise the debt ceiling...geez.

Even if we confiscated all the money from the country's wealthy, it would only pay for government operations for a few months of 1 year, and then what?

1. We MUST force out all of the illegal aliens in this country. That will save us hundreds of billions per year in education, health care, assistance programs and policing and incarceration, and will open jobs to taxpaying Americans who will feed the money back into our economy instead of sending it out of the country.

2. We must reduce the size of government and the number of government agencies in non essential areas (there are literally hundreds of these). This will save hundreds of billions per year and enable us to continue funding important programs like SS and Medicare that we want to keep.

3. Drastically reduce foreign aid, especially to countries that hate us. This will save at least tens of billions per year.

4. Implement a fair tax system that will generate more economic growth, allow people to keep more of what they earn, keep businesses and jobs in America AND increase revenues to the government.

5. Get RID of the Federal Reserve (a private group of international bankers manipulating economics for their profit), and return the production and control of the money supply to the U.S. treasury.

I don't see anyone on the horizon poised to get these things done. Ron Paul comes close on a couple, but there are too few Republicans willing to do these things and virtually NO Democrats.

This article states:

"(Note: Ryan maintains that his plan wouldn't give seniors a voucher, but would instead give them a subsidy to help them purchase a private-insurance health plan.)"

When Ryan first mentioned this plan, he said that a voucher would be given according to one’s income level and contributions. So do the rich get more for their treatments and the poor less receive for their medical treatments?? So much for the typical Republican "All For Me, Myself, and I Attitude" among the wealthy elite !!!!

newdayDAWNING10

Amazing, isn't it Beverly? I don't know how to explain it either, except that people simply aren't paying attention to what Ryan is trying to do. T

I am sure that Ryan will sit in church on Sunday, secure in the knowledge that by being in that pew, he is more Christian than Jesus. I think that Jesus, just like he drove the money lenders out of the temple, would tell Ryan to get out too.

Paul Ryan does even need to sit the pew as long as the republi-clown/t-baggers volley accolades to him.

These people and Paul Ryan should be ashamed of themselves for living with those LIES. But, tax havens are heaven for corporations and the wealthy who use offshore banks to avoid paying taxes and other governmental regulations. These crooks and liars Paul Ryan is fronting for do NOTHING to the GDP of America. They send jobs away, they put their obscene profits in the banks thereby not creating any jobs. Still they will call us liberals commies, un-American, lazy, irreligious etc., etc., etc.?

They are betting these lies will have members of the liberal movement question of whether who are so quick to look for a mic to reflexively whine about what little we got in the era of President Obama. The opposition and yielding to it from myopic Obama supporters is so typical of right wing play book's "Divide and Conquer"; and gives republi-clown/t-baggers some credence.

I have to agree with President Obama's comments were heard during the Chicago Fundraiser because the microphone in the room was left on. They do think we are stupid

"Eliminating the health care bill would cost us $1 trillion dollars," the president said. "It would add $1 trillion to the deficit. Paul Ryan is the same guy that voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as the President's health care bill -- but wasn't paid for. Like President Obama said we’ve got to shining a light on that. how can you blame seniors, and you can’t tell homeless veterans to pay for wars that we didn’t pay for?

President Barack Obama wants to protect ordinary Americans, and Paul Ryan wants to protect the small section of the richest he represents.

The AARP is even against Ryan's plan.

AARP Addresses GOP Budget Plan

"AARP believes the proposal lacks balance and would reduce the security of millions of Americans, especially health security in retirement.'

http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/news-04-2011/aarp_writes_to_congress.html

You go Mr. President and Thank you. You do what a genuine community organizer for the oppressed does.

Seattle Sue

Bob1805084====I couldn't help but notice that a lot of your comments have been collapsed by the community. I personally think every thing you say should be collapsed. I see where your hero Boss Hogg(Barbour) won a straw poll. Must have been some real winners voting. Not Yours Truly, A Moonbat

Bob is worthy of being taken with a grain of salt. He lives in Glenn Beck's head.

American,

At the top of the page I read a few blogs about how stupid you were .

I really did not pay much attention,But as I have read on it is a fact you are an idiot.

If people new your real name you would not be able to live with yourself.

Ok, I need to point something out here. Bob said this.

OK. You want to play with polls and statistics. Your reference cited that in 2007, 57% felt fundamental changes were needed in the UK compared to 48% in the USA

Now, I havent been able to find this "statistic" anywhere. In fact I found just the opposite on a reputable site. ( ) I have lived in the UK and really enjoyed the health care system there. In fact most people there would fight tooth and nail to keep their system. So I dont really know where he is coming from.

Secondly, the plan that was drawn up above is ludicrous. Here's why. The average Bachelors degree, costs nearly 100k at a four year university. That is about 1k per month that you must pay on a student loan. The average pay for a bachelors degree was around 50k ( ) after taxes that number is actually 38k. Now factor in Rent at 1k per month, electric a 200 per month, loan payment 1k per month, cell phone 100 per month, car insurance 100 per month and food at 200 if you eat cheap at home. That equals 2600 per month. Keep in mind these are essentials, and this assumes you own your car. So you take home around 3100 per month. That leaves $500 at the end of the month. So you could afford to buy the cheap plan at 250 per month. And the extra 250 could go to savings or investments. But as we all know this is a rediculously low amount of money. And 250 per month in a 401k will not be enough to support you in retirement if you live to be 100. Also this doesn't take into account repairs, maint. and other essentials that cost money. So as you can see buying for profit insurance is absurd.

See, I went to a university and so did most of my friends and we all say that we dont get paid nearly enough. Not only do we have a bleak outlook on our retirement prospects. We work insane hours that I know my grandparents and parents never had to work. I work 12-16 hours a day, sometimes 6 days a week. This is because my company, despite posting huge profits has scaled back its employees and now most of us do the work of 2 people. And this is not unusual.

This is also why we must tax the wealthy. They are wealthy because they dont spend what they make. They make more than they spend. So we the people need to take what should be ours back from their greedy pockets.

Apparently my two links didn't take.

One is to gallup titled "Healthcare System Ratings: U.S., Great Britain, Canada"

The other is to worksource at quality info .com titled "

The Value of a Bachelor's Degree

Beverly in Chicago Comment collapsed by the community

How much time and energy will it take for you t-baggers to figure out Paul Ryan is a monster? It has nothing to do with the part in his hair or his big pointy ears either; really. Paul Ryan wants to inflict bodily harm or death to seniors, the disabled and little children. He wants safety net programs like Medicare and SS in privatization for the greedy wolves on Wall Street to devour.

Paul Ryan who thinks he is America's accountant is skimming off the bottom. He wants the middle class and the poor, according to his spreadsheet, to subsidize Big Oil companies and give tax breaks for the ultra rich.

Also, the more you zombie wing nuts ride on that birther camel the more ridiculous you become and the closer you get to the nut house.

Proof: Not since the birth of Jesus has so much attention been made of where a child was born!!!

Go At It

You're all stupid!

I am just speechlees at your stupidity. How can you allow these frauds to be perpetrated on you?

• 9

• !

#2.38 - Sat Apr 16, 2011 5:01 AM EDT

Flying,

The statistic mentioned was from the reference Real American used to challenge my comment. You can find it in his post and argue his source if you want with him, or whoever. My comments also referenced Cameron, feel free to argue your opinion with the British Prime Minister, I'm sure you know more than he does about the British NHS.

Regarding the blather about taxing the rich. How about GE, Obama's best corp. bud and the second largest company in the world that paid no US taxes.

Ryan wants to reform the tax code to eliminate this. Obama says nothing serious about reform, just raise taxes. So, as in GE's case - what is 10%, 50%, 75% more of 0.00?

Same applies to individuals.

You're a college guy - what raises more revenue?

bob-1805084

Ryan wants to reform the tax code to eliminate this. Obama says nothing serious about reform, just raise taxes. So, as in GE's case - what is 10%, 50%, 75% more of 0.00?

“GE Responds to Public Outcry – Will Donate Entire $3.2 Billion Tax Refund to Help Offset Cuts and Save American Jobs

Fairfield, CT, 13th April, 2011– GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt has informed the Obama administration that the company will be gifting its entire 2010 tax refund, worth $3.2 Billion, to the US Treasury on April 18, Tax Day, and will furthermore adopt a host of new policies that secure its position as a leader in corporate social responsibility.

“We want the public to know that we’ve heard them, and that we know many Americans are going through tough times,” said GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt. “GE will therefore give our 2010 tax refund back to the public and allow the public to decide how to spend it.”
http://www.genewscenters.com/Press-Releases/GE-Responds-to-Public-Outcry.htm

Do you think the Koch Brothers will money they siphoned from the Americans are going through tough times?

I doubt it. The Koch Brothers are greedy, a moral un-American fiends.

I'm curious, what kind of defense the tea baggers will mount, to claim innocence in this blatenty racist e-mail?

Marilyn Davenport, a Tea Party activist and member of the Orange County Republican Party's central committee, is drawing fire from people in her own party after circulating a racist email depicting President Barack Obama and his parents as chimpanzees. In the email: "Now you know why — No birth certificate!"

CBS interviewed former chairman of the California Republican Party Michael Schroeder, who says that this email is Davenport's third strike. He is calling for her resignation, citing two previous incidents in which Davenport defended the racist actions of two fellow Orange County conservatives.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/16/marilyn-davenports-racist_n_850063.html

Sure seems like the wheels are coming off the Klan's wagon!

Bev,

gifting its entire 2010 tax refund, worth $3.2 Billion, to the US Treasury

The $3.2 billion is a REFUND. Isn't that kinda funny - the tax payers were writing a check for $3.2 billion to the world's 2nd largest company! So where does that leave it Bev. How much taxes did GE pay?

And why you are at it, why did Obama give one of the world's richest companies $25 million in bailout money? Look up how much money they made that year. Save jobs? Nope - they dumped 18,000 Americans that year.

I know, this is waaaay over your head......that's why I addressed the comments to Flying. The point is, why do we have a tax system that lets the world largest, richest organizations and richest individuals pay little or nothing.

Ryan wants to change this - Obama doesn't.

Why is that Bev?

Hint: Why are the American tax payers going to pay GE $871 million to buy GM Volts?

Feisty,

So the right has bigots like you and Bev - what's your point?

For Feisty and Bev:

Bigot - Somebody with strong opinions who refuses to accept or allow different views.

BTW - Thanks to all the liberals for proving who the true bigots are by collapsing so many code appropriate comments by conservatives on this thread.

Thank you again and feel free to collapse this too.

Bob I appreciate the considered responses.

GE did pay taxes last year. They had to pay 1 billion in payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, 2.7billion in cash taxes. The reason it appeared that they didn't was the bailout for GE capitol, originally enacted under Bush, gave them a "tax holiday" or as professionals call it a NOL carry-forward to lessen their tax burden in future years. After the misrepresentation in the facts from the New York times, GE decided to give back. Mainly for publicity. Yes, companies do care what people think. But to get back to the main point. People have been blaming Obama for them "not" paying taxes when this whole bailout was started under bush. And GE pays off Republican senators at the same clip as democratic ones. So I must call that B.S. And Ryan's plan from what I have read does nothing to stop this sort of tax break from happening.

And to answer your question. You are right. It is unfair that a company that makes so much in profits, 14.2 billion last year, should not have to pay. I agree entirely on that point. But you need to blame the responsible party. It is the Bush era tax cuts that have allowed these sorts of corporate tax breaks. Because it is the investors and high paid executives that take home the lions share of profits. These profits are not fairly taxed and that is why payroll taxes were so low for GE.

bob-1805084

Bev,

gifting its entire 2010 tax refund, worth $3.2 Billion, to the US Treasury

The $3.2 billion is a REFUND. Isn't that kinda funny - the tax payers were writing a check for $3.2 billion to the world's 2nd largest company! So where does that leave it Bev. How much taxes did GE pay?

And why you are at it, why did Obama give one of the world's richest companies $25 million in bailout money? Look up how much money they made that year. Save jobs? Nope - they dumped 18,000 Americans that year.

Bob, you bigot the bailout for GE was because of the American Jobs Creation Act signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2004.

It contained more than $13 billion a year in tax breaks for corporations one provision allowed companies to defer taxes on overseas profits.

Learn something; Bob.

The republi-clown/t-babber party have"played(ing)" you. You got some serious issues you need to work on don'tchya think?

Now what about that auto-industry bailout?

GM affectionaly called Government Motors has paid back its government bailout loan "in full, with interest, years ahead of schedule.

GM to recall 2,000 laid-off workers

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110324/AUTO01/103240394/

Detroit 3 to boost Michigan job levels by 34%
http://www.freep.com/article/20110412/BUSINESS01/110412062/1048/SPORTS/Forecast-Detroit-3-boost-Michigan-job-levels-by-34-?odyssey=nav%7Chead

BTW: 100 DAYS OF GOP RULE =0 JOBS BILLS= 0 JOBS

No matter what negativity you have President Barack Obama is Americans' Most Admired Leader and Man of 2010, substantially ahead of the former presidents, iconic religious leaders, and others who fill out the top 10 list

Friday, March 25, 2011

UK: Opinion: US most admired country since President Obama took office

The Guardian
http://politico-junkie.blogspot.com/2011/03/uk-opinion-us-most-admired-country.html

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145394/barack-obama-hillary-clinton-2010-admired.aspx

That's right; President Obama is as good as it gets.

Flying,

First, payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes aren't not what anyone is talking about. I pay property taxes and sales taxes and they have nothing to do with the April 15th/18th check. Nice deflection though.

Second, GE's tax returns to the IRS are the largest each year coming in at unbelievable equivelent of 24,000 pages if actually printed. (From Forbes)

Something is wrong with the system when 1 company's return is 24,000 pages.

Regarding the refund, my understanding is that it has to do with GE Capital's reported loss of $6.5 billion in their 2009 US filing relating to the crash of the financial/credit markets.

Please note that I mentioned "US" filing. Their other overseas operations reported income of over $10 billion. Thisis the crux of the whole matter. The multinationals, big boys like GE simply put costs in "high-tax" countries and profits in "low-tax" countries. (Put your losses where you get the biggest write off and put your profits where they are taxed the least. Win-Win.) "Low tax" countries are any countries that are not the United States. Hence all the tax games. (Skipping over other issues such as depreciation schedules which are big in GE Capital's equipment leasing busines)

The marginal US corporate rate is 35%. Yet GE's effective rate in 2008 was 5.3% and you know the number for 2009. In a big year, 2007 before the crash when everything was rocking and rolling - GE paid a whopping 15%. All because of the above games. BTW - All companies that can - do it. More everyday.

How can people not understand that the code needs to be reformed. The other thing Ryan mentions is reducing the marginal rates. This addresses the problem as well by eliminating the incentive for companies to put operations overseas - to find the "low tax" countries. American companies have trillions overseas that are benefitting those countries not the US. Consequently, you have "tax holiday" games that don't work - business and Wall Street are always 3 steps in front of the government dolts (repub or dem).

But we play the games - tax the rich - villify corporations - and in the mean time cut our own economic throat. This is insanity.

Please note that I did not argue dems vs. repubs, Obama vs. Bush etc. They are both big government, the difference is a matter of degree. I did mention that Ryan's plan tries to address the issue.

Whether you like it not, it is the only serious plan out of either party in a long time that tries to correct the problem. That's all I was saying.

That is the tax issue. With regard to Obama and GE ........cronyism - that's a whole other deal.

Sorry I couldn't get back sooner. Thanks for your comments FlyingEnergy. Enjoyed it.

Bev,

No offense, but your lack of even a semblance of common sense continues to amaze me.

Why would GE get a $3.2 billion refund "because of the American Jobs Creation Act" when they shucked 18,000 American jobs in 2009. (BTW - The real reason is mentioned in the post before.)

With regard to The GM pay back....... in full, with interest, years ahead of schedule........

Wasn't that "loan" something like .... $49.5 billion? Doesn't it strike you as pecular that a company that had the value of the the raffle prize at a church spaghetti dinner, that was completely broke and bankrupt ....... all of a sudden made $49.5 billion in less than a year? Probably not, huh.

Anyway, the real story is that they got money several different ways and at different times due to the huge amount of the loan. They only got $6.7 billion as a "pure" loan. The vast bulk of the money was transferred through the purchase of 60.8% equity stake.

GM paid the $6.7% billion back, not the $49.5 billion, not the equity stake.

And the funniest part is how they did that. Obama had put $13.4 billion of the $49.5 billion in an escrow "working capital" account. GM paid the $6.7 out of that $13.4.

Another cool thing is that since they have paid back the "pure" loan, they can now apply for and receive a Department of Energy loan for $10 billion (at a lower interest rate - down from 7% to 5%) to retool its plants to meet the tougher CAFE standards.

In short, GM used government money to pay back government money to get more government money. And at a 2 percent lower interest rate. Not only that - they now owe an EXTRA NET $3.3 billion to the tax payers!

Obama is a maestro at playing you dummies.

BTW - This isn't the answer to the GM Volt hint. But thanks for bringing up another example of of Obama's cronyism, deceit and duplicity.

Thanks Bob good debate,

I agree entirely that the tax code needs to be changed. If your an American company you need to pay American taxes. And Sen. Ryan's tax plan does address that. But I do believe that the tax cuts for the wealthy should be eliminated.

Consider this plan. If we accept Ryan's plan and eliminate the Bush era tax cuts we would eliminate 80 billion + from the U.S. deficit per year. That sounds like a good plan. That would get us out of trouble and quickly pay off the national debt restoring the economy and the American dollar.

american-2051576 "Roy wilson - pretty much as I see it also, they like the status quo and they definitely like playing to the elderly, poor and disabled as being the "victims" of choice by the republicans. Guess the liberals think that the poor, elderly and disabled are so incompetent that they will believe this. Isn't that the liberals plan, keep on repeating the lie until people start to believe it?"

Here is the liberal 'Plan', which also explains why they keep pushing for 'Amnesty' for illegal immigrants;

Liberal Game Plan - If they can get enough voters dependent on government 'handouts', they will vote for the Party that promises to continue those 'handouts' while calling anyone that tries to cut those programs "heartless and giving money to the 'rich' at the expense of the poor, elderly and disabled". They already have arranged for almost half (47%) of voters to pay no federal income taxes, despite the wealth of government services available to them.

They know that, once people get things for 'free' that someone else pays for, they will fight like he!! to keep them, and loudly complain against anyone that tries to take anything away.

Roy wilson - quite right. the libs want to continually increase taxes on the wealthy and business. Not a big fan of the increasing disparity in $$$ earned, but I see little value in redistribution of wealth as an effective means of closing the gap. I think that the soviets, chinese and cuba (among other countries) from their inception and into the 80's has shown this to work. They still had the elite (ruling class) vs the workers (lower class).

It may not suit the demands of the cryers but historically in the US from the mid 1800's to the present, many of the wealthy have returned $$$ back to the populace as a whole and with greater efficiency than any government program. initial names that come to mind are Carnegie, Edison and the Gates foundation. I know for a fact that many local charities, hospitals, etc benefit greatly from sponsership and funding by the wealthy. Sad that for the libs this isn't enough.

I often wonder if the wealthy look at the governments wasteful spending as a reason to fight higher taxes and to keep on contributing privately

rradko - so why didn't obamacare want to nationalize our health care or make it the same as his?

All it will take is for you or for someone in your family to get really sick, for a long time. Then after your private insurance is soon depleted and your family is holding onto mounting bills that are cutting into your mortgage payments, let's see how long you will patriotically keep defending under-regulated, private medical insurers in the U.S.

Lying repub - So how does obamas $500 billion cut in medicare suit you?

Anna - when a states medicaid funding runs out, who pays for the multitude requiring minimal assistance to maintain their quality of life when the state spent it all on one or two individuals? If you legally represented those not getting assistance because a few took all the funds from them, what would your argument be?

Interesting that you say this...

And a little more reality and a little less apology for greedy insurance companies wouldn't hurt, either

Is this the same costs that obama wants to cap as he mentioned this past week in his campaign speech?

Independent thinker - You do realize that the top 10% of wage earners pay 70% of the personal taxes collected in America, right? What cuts do you propose?

For years we have heard that SS is facing funding problems and that medicaid and medicare have issues as well. just what is obama and company doing to correct the problems? Medicaid??? Medicare - cut funding by $500 billion (obamacare and recent budget speech)?? SS - both he and ryan want to address it seperately. If obama wants to minimize the discussion and resolution on these issues, who really wants these issues to die other than obama and company?

Beverly (post 2.56) you sure do like to cherry pick, why didn't you mention this...

Today's budget proposal appropriately acknowledges that health care costs must be addressed if the federal budget is to be balanced.

Yes I also cherry picked, those interested should read it in its entirety. The bottom line is...Are the taxpayers are willing to expend the $$$ each and every year to adequotley fund medicaid and medicare without caps?

FlyingEnergy - Wasn't the bush tax cuts only for individual income taxes? How did it become a corporate tax cut.that you blame on bush?

Citing a profit of $14.2 billion is hardly telling on how good or bad a company does. Citing net profit as a percentage of cost is far more telling on the viability of a company. If a companies cost of doing business is $100 billion then I would expect investors to be dancing in the streets! 14.2 percent is quite good. If costs were $300 billion then I would say $14.2 billion in profits were more likely average.

Roy Wilson-

pretty much as I see it also, they like the status quo and they definitely like playing to the elderly, poor and disabled as being the "victims" of choice by the republicans. Guess the liberals think that the poor, elderly and disabled are so incompetent that they will believe this. Isn't that the liberals plan, keep on repeating the lie until people start to believe it?"

Your first line is bad grammar. Secondly we don't play to the elderly. The elderly should be smart enough to figure it out on there own. And many do, I know many elderly individuals who break rank with their fellow senior citizens to say that the blind voting for Republican non-sense needs to stop. I have heard people say that they are afraid to speak up and tell their Republican friends that they are wrong because they would get angry or not want to speak to them. This is common for me too. It is hard to speak to most Republicans about politics because they tend to dismiss facts in favor of party lines, or the fear of "communism".

But the facts are this. Paying insurance to a for profit private company is always going to get you managed and cheap health service. But that doesn't mean better. A government agency has a 4% administrative cost on average. Compared to a 12% administrative cost on average with a private company. That means 8% of the money you pay to a private company must be budgeted out of services, or the price for becoming insured needs to be raised. It is a non-sense argument to say that a private company can offer better service than a government run company.

And America,

You are talking about communism. We are talking about forcing the wealthy to pay the same tax rate the rest of us do. They use or create in some cases write off rules that allow them to pay little or nothing. No democrat really wants to raise taxes. The wealthy already have a high tax rate, 35%. They just don't pay near that. In fact most pay 9% and many pay nothing at all. During and after WWII the wealthy paid nearly a 90% tax rate, America flourished, building many of the tunnels, bridges and dams we see today. The bottom 95% of us should be paying only 45% of the tax burden. Yet this year it is estimated that the bottom 95% will cover 75% of the nations income. Since tax breaks and write offs have allowed the wealthy to get by with paying very little. This is why our national debt has skyrocketed. Not because of wasteful spending, in fact this is why we look at Republicans and wonder if they are either crazy or stupid. It was the war in Iraq that we lowered taxes for and borrowed money to pay for, combined with reckless deregulation and rampant speculation on the continued borrowed money bubble that caused the collapse. Not wasteful spending. In fact I would argue that all the things that the Republicans are calling wasteful, which for the most part happen to be social programs for the poor and sick, are the only good things Americans are doing for their people at this time in our history. And by removing them we putting our last foot into a puddle of evil and greed.

And to your comment on the tax situation at GE. If you had read my comment I was showing that they did pay taxes. The profits they claimed were after their expenses. On which they should have been taxed 35% or almost $5b.. They were not taxed near that due to the maneuvering they performed using rules they lobbied to create.

FlyingEnergy - I am not talking communism, I am talking wealth redistribution. I used the soviets, chinese and cuba as an example of wealth redistribution in light of everyone having the same sharing of wealth and no one supposedly having more than another. Of course those that manage the system have more than the workers because they...???

Wealth redistribution carry's the premise that the innovators, or that the one being more productive shouldn't be rewarded. Kind of goes against the old saying of "if you don't work, you don't eat" and yes we all know the caveat to this.

Human individualism and exceptionalism will never allow any system of wealth redistribution to work over a long term. Sports dictates that someone wins and someone loses. Business dictates that the business with the best marketing plan and best perceived value at the lowest cost point gets the most revenue.

With regards to comparing published tax rates of the fifties with those of today, you seem to have left out a small matter of what tax codes allows for deductions. Deductions I might add that apply to all tax payers. Naturally some won't qualify for all available deductions.

As to you blaming republicans, were not the democrats mainly in control of congress from the 50's into the 80's? You surely don't think that the republicans consistantly and relentlessly passed laws that the democrats were unaware of. Or are you?

Not being a corporate income tax lawyer (but have had to fill out IRS schedule C, business expenses), I am reasonably sure that all allowable deductions are taken off of the gross reported revenue and this becomes the revenue being taxed at the rate shown by the IRS tax tables. Maybe it will be 35% maybe it will be less, regardless a media reported effective tax rate is basically a comparison between what one would have paid with no deductions/credits and that which takes them into account. If you want a mathematical example consult your accountant and IRS tax codes.

If I haven't lost you yet, you should be beginning to see why many favor a flat tax or a value added tax (VAT) in lew of our current graduated system.

BTW - in future discussions concerning corporate profits please keep in mind to distinguish between before and after tax profits. If you can't report numbers directly from a companies P & L statements, I would assume that $ profits stated by the media refer to being after tax. I am not even going to go into charge offs, writes offs or any other accounting tricks allowable under current IRS tax codes. Suffice it to say that the politicians (democrat and republican alike) have endorsed all of our current tax codes thru majority vote.

I have no doubt that spending has to be reigned in followed by increased revenue growth to bring our debt to a more sustainable level. the following link was just published today. Use your own math skills to show to yourself that even trying to tax the 400 wealthiest individuals 100% every year won't reduce our ongoing debt to a greta extent. Even IRS data says that 70 % of personal taxes collected are paid for by the top 10% of earners. Both ryan and obama have said that they want to reduce the number of allowable deductions, I wonder who has the political will to do it before the 2012 elections or who just wants to give lip service?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42633769/ns/business-your_retirement

Wow, not only are you completely wrong on most of that you seem delirious. Too much cool-aid I guess. I don't really thinks sitting here and picking through every inaccuracy i see in you last post will change anything. Maybe somebody else here has the patients for this. If not I will dismantle this when I feel like I need an easy booster.

flyingenergy - with thousands of pages of tax code you expected a simple, really simple explanation?

Ever do your own taxes? Fill out IRS form schedule C? Listen to mainstream media on taxes, preparartions and new tax codes that comes out every year?

How about how Americas political system works? Do you know what the two main political parties are? If asked, would you say tax laws are passed by republicans and that what politicians refer to as entitlements are passed by democrats?

Do you understand the fundamental premise of Marxism?

BTW - If you are old enough to be employed, why not ask the owner to see the companies profit & loss statement (P&L)

I may miss my youth on occasion, but not the stupidity and ignorance that went with it. Thanks for reminding me on the foibles of youth.

First off I'm thirty not thirteen. I am a network engineer not a moron. I understand much more about taxes than you may think. Last year I paid very little and I did my own taxes. I did a better job than my high paid tax adviser. I am sure you might think tax code is excessively complicated but it's not. A Google search can find you most of the write-off's you need to cheat the system. Most people don't do their own taxes because they think it's too hard or too complicated. I only "cheat the system" because I can and would be stupid not too. I am arguing against my best interests here, mainly because I believe a society is judged by how it treats it's poor and most frail individuals. I am not out for myself like the people you defend as a tax lawyer. I am speaking up because I think we could do better.

I must also add. 1000 pages isn't that much considering I read almost 140,000 pages of text in 4 years of school. And it didn't take all that much work as I recall.

why the dogma?

What if I said those anti-wealth creation, baby killing, slave mentality, neo-socialists democrats

Oh but they love tree huggers.........

You would think I was an idiot, hence.......

The Tea Party owes part of their radical dogma to writers like Ayn Rand.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Tea Party Favorite AYN RAND (she was the author of, "The Fountainhead," and "Atlas Shrugged") took government assistance while decrying others who did the same

An interview with Evva Pryror, a social worker and consultant to Miss Rand's law firm of Ernst, Cane, Gitlin and Winick verified that on Miss Rand's behalf she secured Rand's Social Security and Medicare payments which Ayn received under the name of Ann O'Connor (husband Frank O'Connor).

As Pryor said, "Doctors cost a lot more money than books earn and she could be totally wiped out" without the aid of these two government programs. Ayn took the bail out even though Ayn "despised government interference and felt that people should and could live independently... She didn't feel that an individual should take help."

www.boingboing.net/2011/01/28/ayn-rand-took-govern.html

The Ayn Rand economic philosophy is, "What's good for me is good - screw you."

Actually boys did you not know Alan Greenspan knelt at Ayn Rands feet - I read Ayn Rand as a twenty year old then grew up = decided - I would never live up to their expecpectations and this was a fantasy world - like Alice in Wonderland - plus Ayn Rand eventually lived on Social Security and Medicare - so much for government

Barbara,

Ayn Rand was also an atheist and pro-abortion rights for women, but today's conservatives prefer not to acknowledge those facts.

Amy B. Portland, ME

Barbara,

Ayn Rand was also an atheist and pro-abortion rights for women, but today's conservatives prefer not to acknowledge those facts.

Today's conservatives do a dishonest hatchet job the party of Wall Street in regards to facts.

Sen. Kyl Falsely Claims 90 % Of Planned Parenthood’s Services Are For Abortion

In fact, just three % of its work is related to abortion. It's truly a lie and this chart proofs it.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/plannedparenthood.jpg

Then Senator Kyl turned around and said his remark was not intended to be a factual statement.

How true in RIGHT WING WORLD nothing is meant to be true!!! Up means down, the sun rises in the west, tax cuts =jobs, and it's the end of the world as we know it. HA HA

Recall this bit of news that came out just a few years ago?

--------------------------------------------------------

Buffett blasts system that lets him pay less tax than secretary

Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world, has criticised the US tax system for allowing him to pay a lower rate than his secretary and his cleaner.

Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York for Senator Hillary Clinton, Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.

Lloyd Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, acknowledged in an interview yesterday that there were justified concerns about the huge profits generated by private equity firms and that he worried that income inequality was “poisoning democracy”. He also said that he would be voting for the Democrat candidate at the next election. Mr Blankfein is the highest-paid executive on Wall Street, earning $54 million last year.

Mr Buffett, who runs the investment group Berkshire Hathaway and is widely regarded as the world’s most successful investor, said that he was a Democrat because Republicans are more likely to think: “I’m making $80 million a year – God must have intended me to have a lower tax rate.”

Mr Buffett said that a Republican proposal to eliminate elements of inheritance tax, which raises about $30 billion a year from the assets of about 12,000 rich families, would broaden the disparity between rich and poor. He added that the Republicans would seek to recover lost revenue by increasing taxes for the less prosperous.

He said: “You could take that $30 billion and give $1,000 to 30 million poor families. Or should you favour the 12,000 estates and make 30 million families pay an extra $1,000?”

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/tax/article1996735.ece

---------------------------------------------------------

"If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich." -- John F. Kennedy

Warren Buffet is a smart man- why does he not know that the Treasury would gladly accept any extra amount Buffet sent as a voluntary contribution?

Buffet was, after all, smart enough to create a tax exempt foundation to shelter most of his vast wealth- and teach the Gates family to do the same- so why is he not smart enough to pay the Treasury what he believes he "should"?

You do not think that, perhaps, just maybe, he is a hypocrite, do you?

I sure do.

No joe,

Warren Buffet doesn't do his taxes. He has a team of experts that pile through the thousands of investments and payments he receives. Then they do there job and use rules in the tax code to get Warren the biggest return on his investments possible. He then signs off on it. It is a problem with the system not with Warren Buffet.

Plus we can't rely on the wealthy to pay for us. We need to do things on our own. You Republicans sound like kindergarten drop-outs when you suggest that wealthy people will just out of the goodness of their hearts drop us some money.

I find it hilarious when I hear my wealthier friends talk about their job as wealth management strategists. Its not a job. When you have money it's easy to make more by just investing and using the tax code to not pay taxes. Even I know how to pay very little on my taxes, I could potentially pay nothing despite earning over 120k this year. I didn't need an adviser to tell me this. You need to understand that the systems current design is bleeding the middle class and stuffing the pockets of the wealthy. And they aren't even trying.

anti-elderly - Rise in the presence of the aged, show respect for the elderly
anti-minority - love your neighbor as you love yourself
anti-poor people - Blessed are the meek
anti-american party- Usually a person who was never in the USA, so leave US citizens out of this group
love rich people........... but it is easier for an SUV to go thru the eye of a needle than to enter heaven anti-wealth creation.... Give Caesar what is Caesar's

babies - see that you do not despise these little ones
slavery - a moral wrong in any form
neo-socialism - from 1920 France ? doubt anyone wants that one in US

love of tree huggers........ When you see a tree, remember you are looking at an Ancestor

Unfortunately it is spending billions beyond what is collected in taxation to fund the continued entitlement. Of course the populace likes that part. How do you propose we control the cost curve?

Corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP are at their lowest levels in history - 12% of GDP. I vote we start there.

Yes, that is indeed the case. And individuals pay a far greater percentage of the overall taxes collected. Well beyond historical norms.

Here's a good chart that illustrates the relative percentages of each tax source over time:

The Numbers: What are the federal government's sources of revenue?

Notice that working people are getting killed on payroll taxes.

A revenue source that now makes up 36% of federal tax revenues, but which is conveniently "forgotten" by those who want to harp on how only the rich supposedly pay "income" taxes.

the united sates corporate taxes are the highest in the world what we need to do is make them even higher so more corporations take more of their businesses to other countries..hey that way we won't have any evil rich left and we can all be poor and everyone will be happy!!!!!

Sick and Tired Where do you get your info from , yes corporate taxes are cited at 35% but having worked at Pfizer in the Tax Division their Corporate Taxes were at 6% tell me you know more and every other pharmaceutical company was paying the same amount why? because they all talked to each other

didn't obama say that everyone has to sacrafice? what about medicaid ? also why does it have to be 'either " "or"? why can't they also work on the huge problem of fraud in the medicaid system? that would no doubt be several billion right there.

The Independent-2245816

Unfortunately it is spending billions beyond what is collected in taxation to fund the continued entitlement. Of course the populace likes that part. How do you propose we control the cost curve?

Ya know, when the HCR bill was passed, I never felt it was the perfect solution but what I did believe was that it was the perfect starting point and that maybe through bi-partisanships, it could be ironed out and perfected. The problem being that some people's idea of a starting point was to scrap everything and just start back exactly where they were 50 years ago.

IF you raise corporate taxes you just raise prices for the products you buy or force corporations to move offshore to compete with non-us corporations. Why can't people see that businesses don't pay tax, they just collect it from their customers and pass it on. No matter how badly you want to, you can't shift the tax burden away from the middle class. It's a pretty simple equation, spend more, pay more. The solution is to spend less.

Randy...You must be referring to that Exxon-Valdez Oil Spill where in 2007 Bush let Exxon off the hook and put the rest of this country's taxpayers ON the hook. Exxon added in the cost of the Valdez Spill but has yet to pay a dime to the feds. Exxon was hoping that Texas Big Oil Boy Bush would just tear up that bill.

So...anyone who says corporations have to earn more because they are "forced" to pay their fair share of the federal taxes doesn't take into account that R&D federal grants, the number of reprieves from oil spills including the latest in the Delaware River that Shell got off "innocent" and now taxpayers will end up paying for that one too. Does that mean you can demand more from your employer when HE demands more for the products and services you pay for?

That old BS about how corporations HAVE to raise consumer prices when they are taxed more in just that....BS. In 2009, Exxon claimed it recorded a history profit in the hundred billions. Yet, continued to increase gasoline prices, did they? In 2009, out of hundreds of billions in profit, they paid a lousy $14 billion.

When Big Oil creates a devastating spill, how fault is that? Yours? Mine? Or theirs? So why MUST we contribute to their stupidity by paying the bills for them? If you can't run a business and afford the expenses, get the hell out of business. Sorry, my attitude toward these greedheads is "Take NO Prisoners". Not when my paycheck is being eroded by THEIR bills.

David---I agree that there is a weapon involved and the Republicans just put it to their own heads. I'm thinking we should let them pull the trigger, metaphorically speaking of course.

How true. Actually publishing a plan with real cuts in a popular program is sure to be political fodder. Especially to those that don't know, don't care or are otherwise too foolish to realize the benefit will crumble under it's own weight in the not to distant future. (I for one hope the Democrats get their way with this one.) Do nothing, appoint another commission, ignore the subsequent recommendations and let it go bankrupt, the sooner the better. And keep those seniors happy at all costs, they vote where other constituent groups do not. They have a vast appreciation for the entitlement and want only to keep those dollars flowing. To heck with those that follow, I got mine before it went under.

Is 55 years old the new elderly?

Zach, Ryan's plan would apply to people at retirement who are under 55 years old today. In other words, it wouldn't kick in immediately, since middle aged people would need time now to plan for paying three quarters of their healthcare when they retire. Today's seniors would still get Medicare. Ryan is talking about dismantling it for future seniors.

The problem with this country is that everybody who has been elected to office is in it for themselves. All the laws that are being passed concerning social security and medicare do not apply to them. The are exempt, so why should they care about the reprocussions of their votes? We as a country need to quit voting on party loyalties and start looking at the issues and who will give Americans what they need. I think our founding fathers have rolled over in their graves from the acts of our governing bodies.

Ryan had better hang on to that money. He's going to be needing it soon. It's too bad he couldn't serve his constituents but that doesn't surprise me a bit. At least he knows what side his bread is buttered on and who's doing the buttering. Unfortunately it's not the people who elected him.

We'll have to do him a favor by constantly reminding his voter base.

Amy, so say I am 54 years old, I have been working since say I was 23 (enough time to finish school). You are saying that it is ok for my over 30 years of contributions to be essentially tossed away? Sorry, Ryan's plan hurts america and doesn't save one penny. (moving costs from one entity to another is NOT saving society money in any way whatsoever)

Yes to all 4 of your questions. There is a reason I only post here in the evenings. And as for running out of other peoples money, congratulations, the middle class (the only class that actually produces anything) is just about tapped out.

Yes, it's so funny how the right believes they're the only ones who have ever been in business.

Although the only "business" a lot of them have ever been in is the financial industry. Which produces....what exactly?

Hate to break it to you Real American, but Wall Street and all those financial companies you seem to have a problem with are almost entirely Democratic, and donate to Democrats and their causes with regularity. It's New York after all. As blue a state as one can get with an specialized financial services industry that employs millions.

That's okay - we aren't as loyal to payola as the GOP.

Take 'em down and fund the middle class.

Zach,

I am of the opinion, issues of life and death are not well handled by for-profit systems.

The Independent-2245816

"Hate to break it to you Real American, but Wall Street and all those financial companies you seem to have a problem with are almost entirely Democratic, and donate to Democrats and their causes with regularity. It's New York after all. As blue a state as one can get with an specialized financial services industry that employs millions."

Just where did you get those limited and twisted facts from beside the Republican propaganda mantra? I hate to break it to you, but it is the small businesses that hire a little more than 2/3 of the workers in all 50 States. Do your research more carefully and with accuracy!

DO ANY OF YOU flubadublicans wan't to know why medicare costs are rising ?????It's because the CON-servatives are investing in every thing people 65 and up will need to live ,and the investors must be paid kind of like double dipping .One check from the insurer and part of what we pay .They are just the best patriotic American Capitalists ,Always looking out for America ,and lots of money.G.B.A.

To what country is this?

Do check on your fictional facts again with more accuracy and reporting!!! Most of us are well aware of your twisted mantra.

They are alienating there own moderated base. All of us who are republicans because we like the general base of the party are wondering where it is going. I don't think taking care of our senior citizens is entitlement. People who have worked hard and followed the rules should not be left to the whims of private ins with their ever increasing premiums. Trim the abuse but use some common sense. At this rate they are not going to have the older vote, they are not going to have the non-white vote, who are they going to have?

To Sheila-846240:

And please don't forget the Independents as well !!!

Live in Arizona...Our state legislature are a bunch of crooks. Unfortunately, Arizona has always been run by people that by all rights should be in jail. Sad fact, but true. When I moved here in the 90's I couldn't believe that a whole state of people could consistently vote for sociapaths, but they do. Every year. Thank you God for relocation.

Anne Webber

Live in Arizona...Our state legislature are a bunch of crooks. Unfortunately, Arizona has always been run by people that by all rights should be in jail. Sad fact, but true. When I moved here in the 90's I couldn't believe that a whole state of people could consistently vote for sociapaths, but they do. Every year. Thank you God for relocation.

That mummified witch Arizona hasfor a governor should be in the prison population for the criminally insane they show on MSNBC'S "LOCK UP".

Who knows maybe in time she will be.

This is one thing that makes you go hummmm...

Was The Arizona “Birther Bill” Created Specifically To Undermine President Obama??

Republican Carl Seel of Phoenix, the author of the bill, said the bill wasn't about opposition to President Obama but about the integrity of the elections???

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42602561/ns/politics-more_politics/

Duh... It's strange, after GW Bush stole the presidency, SUDDENLY, these nut case birthers want to talk about the integrity of our elections!!!

To all the hatin’ birthers-- IT’S TOO LATE! We have a Black President and there’s nothing you can do about it!

Unfortunately bigotry still exist, especially among the birthers.

"The problem really is neither party truly gives a damn about the people they're supposed to represent, so, in the end, whether it works or not doesn't matter at all."

Unfortunately... your right. We are all pawns on the big game board.

One of the best tools of corporate propaganda is to get the citizenry disconnected from the political process.

Quit being a tool.

Not disconnected... just truthfull.

If you are broke you don't have jobs. America is broke and not just concerning money.

America has been broke for more than half a century. No money in the bank account and credit owed to other countries nonstop.

Oh I forgot how could the GOP undermine him, he had a dem. congress and still has a Dem. senate. Gee maybe he is just stupid.

Anti Socialism,

What about the Socialist republicans and their welfare for the well-off? The only thing that's changed is who benefits from the largess.

Yes, like that GOP-written corporate tax code that allowed both Exxon/Mobil and GE to pay NO tax last year. (Exxon even got some of OUR money as a refund.)

Did they really get NO benefit from taxpayer-funded services?

No water and sewer service?
No fire protection?
No police protection?
No use of our roads?
No federally-funded access to wilderness areas for oil drilling?
No FAA or air traffic controllers?
No access to U.S. Embassies overseas?
No economic development funding?
No production credits?
No public funds to store and secure nuclear waste?
No funds spent to protect their facilities from terrorists?
No public-educated workforce?

Suggest you study / improve your sources for taxes paid et al....you don't seem to let facts get in the way of your posts. Personally, I'm glad to see the debate that fiscal responsiblity is being sought by a few in Congress. Obviously, it brings out people's passions and opinions. Let's hope real facts get presented for Real Americans looking for viable solutions--through good debate. I believe the people will support individuals who care more about this country than they do about self/power. We just need to keep electing such individuals whatever their political persuasion. Both Reps/Dem spending the past 40 years on debt year after debt year will lead to more troubles--I suggest one read the U.K.'s The Economist, WSJ articles the past year or so. It's a global problem.

Anti-Socialisim, you do realize you misspelled the word socialism, right? Kind of interesting to mention that you are anti socialism, but do you realize how much of our society is actually socialized or actually social programs? Maybe some food for thought for ya.

The extreme left wing socialist Donkeys are out in force... "57 states" Odumba is like Stalin. We need to get rid of this socialist. I know the leech class of the Donkey party will want to keep him. They depend on their government hand outs at the expense of the middle class andthe working people FUNDING their welfare.

The people fired 2500+ socialist Donkeys last November, and we CLEARLY need to FIRE another 2500 in November 2012, starting with the Donkey-in-Theif...

You cannot TAX, INFLATE, BORROW or SPEND your way to prosperity, no matter what Odumba says...

Anti-Socialisim, I wonder if some of us actually paid attention to what was really going on from 2008 til now or found it more convenient to tune into Fox to have our viewpoints and talking points recited to us. Did some of us take notes and outlines from Glenn Beck's chalkboard? You do realize that it is not much more difficult to pay attention to the world around you and form your own opinion. Even those of us that are slow thinkers will figure it out eventually with a little effort.

Repeatedly turning to the canned political views of Rupert Murdoch to interpret our political climate is much like running to Mickey Dee's every time you want a hamburger. All of the grocers sell fresh hamburger. It's so much healthier and satisfying to make your own.

Ron Paul was bought and paid for by big corporations. That's how he got elected. Now that he shows his true colors - all things big business and support the wealthy - why is everyone surprised? Fox News is 70% owned by Saudia Arabia and they have given millions plus untold airtime to the far right. Any questions who wants to own the US and who the Republicans and Tea Party are bowing to? This is absurd. I honestly thought people were smarter but no. They all are like Ken - above - who can only call names instead of thinking for themselves.

As an independent, there is no way i will vote for any of these GOP congress members for voting on this bill. Sarah Palin talked about death panels. this bill will create death panels. Not just my opinion, read up on the bill and see how much they want to take away for grandma and grandpa and the disabled. I did. It makes me sick.

Hey Rick from Texas:

Here's the source of my info:

What the Top 20 U.S. Companies Pay in Taxes
Forbes

You know, I just LOVE it when the facts I post reduce the righties on here to sputtering incoherent profanities and invoking the wrath of God!

Paul Ryan why do you want to get rid of SS?SOCIAL SECURITY has never cost this country a dime . so I ask you again why do you want to get rid of Social security ? I have never got a straight answer to this why does the GOP want to get rid of Social security ? if there is someone out there that noes the answer then tell me why does the GOP want to get rid of Social Security? when it does not and has never cost this country a dime . SS has its own account and its money and its payments it has to payout . the budget has its own money and its payouts and SS has its own money and its own payouts .they are seperate accounts .

Sure, it would just totally screw over anyone age 54 or younger and jack costs through the roof for those 55 and older.

What's not to like?

I'm sure everybody who's 55 or younger just isn't gonna grow a day older. We'll all just be preserved in amber at our current age. Maybe elderly people don't want to pull the ladder up behind them and realize that we're all entitled to the great deal they've gotten; especially since we're paying for their great deal right now.

Actually, Tyler, it forces all Americans under the age of 55 to buy private insurance. Private insurance administration costs are 20-25%, while Medicare admin costs are 6-8%. I would much rather have the option to buy into a plan with low admin costs which results in a lower premium. I abhor the idea of paying into the private plans where the CEOs earn muti-million dollar salaries, where the have a known history of dropping patients for no reason, and make it their top priority to deny coverage.

Just 7 of the top-paid health insurance executives skimmed over $67 million from your health premiums in 2008:

Ins. Co. & CEO With 2008 Total CEO Compensation

• Aetna, Ronald A. Williams: $24,300,112
• Cigna, H. Edward Hanway: $12,236,740
• Coventry, Dale Wolf: $9,047,469
• Health Net, Jay Gellert: $4,425,355
• Humana, Michael McCallister: $4,764,309
• U. Health Group, Stephen J. Hemsley: $3,241,042
• Wellpoint, Angela Braly: $9,844,212

Again. Nice work RAF. I wonder how much of this will end up in republican campaign coffers?

That's an interesting question. When I have time, I will use some of the donor identification sites to try to come up with an estimate.

Not that that will turn up all the lobbying and golf junkets and hookers in Vegas.

Well, at least all that money spent on ads about death panels and the awful cuts being made to Medicare will actually have a legitimate good purpose now.

Thanks, GOP p.r. machine!

And if you have any unused footage left over, just forward it on over to DNC.

wivesfan...Ryan is the typical little rich boy twerp. He makes Rove look like Saint George of the Cross by comparison. Ryan hasn't known a day of hardship in his all too young life. You have to remember who is funding the Tea Party...two very very very rich John Bircher billionaires. Study John Birch's ideology and you see not only the insanity but the destructiveness that caused several very innocent people he slandered by calling them communists when they weren't. McCarthy and Cohn did the same. Now, we are right back to square one. Only this time it's attempting to overthrow a president elected by Constitutional majority by the simply act of starving programs Americans pay for.

Ryan fools no one. He's live in his little white breaded world so long he just assumes one size fits all. And, if it doesn't? Well, he'll make sure you end up on bread lines.

You think for a minute you would ever get to do the same to the Koch brothers? To former Senator Dick Armey? Or for that matter Ryan? Just go in and take all of their payroll deductions they are paying for programs they will need for the future?

These jackasses don't want YOU to have equal financial security. That takes away too much of their power freakage. They want the great unwashed masses to be under their control. And what better way to do that than to create greater sickness, unemployment and higher taxes on those who earn 5000 times less than a Koch does.

Ha, they've never listened to him before, I see no reason that will ever change.

Ron Paul's ideas might be a little to advanced for normal Americans to see. Which is a shame. Sarah Palin wont beat Obama. She is to odd for middle America to trust. Trump is too much of a joke....Americans tend to go with the Devil we know(it why incumbents are so hard to beat)..So unless Ron Paul starts dumbing down some of his statements(dont change them, just dumb them down) I am afraid Obama with all his flaws will get reelected...Had great hopes for Obama to make America great again, but instead he has made Americans more angry, and divisive, and I dont see any real improvements from Bushs(jr.) era.

AW,

And he's spent even more than Bush. I heard today the budget deficit estimate for this year has been pushed up to 1.6 Trillion.

Ryan "is a little too advanced for most Americans"? What is so advanced about giving seniors vouchers and telling them to shop on the open market for health insurance? How much will a dollar buy a senior with health problems with insurance companies whose goal is to say no as often as they can? The Republicans tried to bring up 'DEATH PANELS' and if ever there would be this is the scenario that it would happen.

The Rebpublicans have told us who they are.

Jessie, you might want to reread his statement. He was talking about Ron Paul, not Paul Ryan. Not that I'm a fan of either, just trying to make sure you got his statement right. Just FYI.

How much time and energy will it take for you t-baggers to figure out Paul Ryan is a monster? It has nothing to do with the part in his hair or how big and pointy his ears are either; really. Paul Ryan wants to inflict bodily harm or death to seniors, the disabled and little children. He wants safety net programs like Medicare and SS in privatization for the greedy wolves on Wall Street to devour.

Paul Ryan who thinks he is America's accountant is skimming off the bottom. He wants the middle class and the poor, according to his spreadsheet, to subsidize Big Oil companies and give tax breaks for the ultra rich.

Also, the more you zombie wing nuts ride on that birther camel the more ridiculous you become and the closer you get to the nut house.

Proof: Not since the birth of Jesus has so much attention been made of where a child was born!!!

Go At It

You're all stupid!

I am just speechlees at your stupidity. How can you allow these frauds to be perpetrated on you?

Bob LaCivita

Wow - you people are so stupid. I still can't understand why the Jewish people in this country follow these Israel hating politcos - makes NO sense. Read through the b.s. retoric of the democrats - they were the ones who didn't want slavery abolished!

FYI:Liberals don't hate

Bob LaCivita

Wow - you people are so stupid. You just love your punk-ass president and his destructive ways - he makes that idiot Bush look like a genius. He's nothing but a punk. You NBC (General Electric) "reporters" with you tingles down your legs and weird crap like that coming out of your mouths are Pravda revisited. I still can't understand why the Jewish people in this country follow these Israel hating politcos - makes NO sense. Read through the b.s. retoric of the democrats - they were the ones who didn't want slavery abolished!

That is a Glenn Beck fabrication. But, you do need to admit Israel does have membership in the NPT. In fact, President Barack Obama said Friday that he 'strongly' opposed efforts to single out Israel on the issue of nuclear non-proliferation and would oppose actions that jeopardize Israel's national security.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/obama-strongly-opposes-singling-out-of-israel-at-nuclear-conference-1.292804

Are you aware there are Jewish groups who oppose Israel's actions in Gaza?

You'r not very bright Abraham lincoln would turn over in his grave if he could see how the republicans want to re-instate slavery.

The dems you cite are dixiecrats