The FDR legacy among the American right

Again and again, Melanerpes serves up a full toss for whodey to hit (on his favourite subject, no less) and again and again whodey declines to hit it. One wonders why.

Originally posted by whodey
The ball is rolling via such movements as the Tea parties. Granted, they have no one running for office but they now have a voice. In fact, I think it a mistake for them to begin a political party for candidates to run. Instead, I think they should stay on the side lines and bludgen political figures who go awry. I am happy with the success they have had ...[text shortened]... he Dems in office now. I just hope the heat is turned up when the Repuklicans come into office.

Well, some sort of ball is rolling. But it never gets anywhere because the Dem statists and the GOP statists and their respective minions just keep kicking it back and forth to each other.

My challenge is for you is to find a specific idea that you like (that has a chance of being passed within the next 10 years) for significantly changing the current "statist" approach to Social Security and Medicare system.

Then you can take that idea to the next Tea Party Rally and get everyone there behind it.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
Well, some sort of ball is rolling. But it never gets anywhere because the Dem statists and the GOP statists and their respective minions just keep kicking it back and forth to each other.

My challenge is for you is to find a specific idea that you like (that has a chance of being passed within the next 10 years) for significantly changing the current .

Then you can take that idea to the next Tea Party Rally and get everyone there behind it.

What can be done?

As I have said over and over and over and over on this site, what people really want are jobs. Jobs often mean you have health insurance that is not reliant on the government, which often equates into better overall care, and a retirement plan that is not dependent on social security and the government, which is often superior to what the government offers. I think Obama is mistaken in thinking that fewer jobs should equate more reliance on entitlements, thus more people should want the new NHC plan, when nothing could be further from the truth. People want control over their own lives, not a government hand out that always falls short of what they want for themselves.

So how is one to stimulate jobs and the economy? Upon first glance, the most glaring problem that I see is the current energy policy. All you hear is tax carbon emissions, tax carbon emissions, when what is needed is energy independence that is actually moving away from carbon emissions. Can this be done without a blind tax on the populice which would inflict the biggest regressive tax in US history at a time when unemployment is ballooning and the economy is sinking? Sure. What we need to do is start by converting our cars to run on natural gas. We should then begin to drill for natural gas in the US, which has recently been discovered to be in abundance and currently costs around $1.20 per gallon, and begin to reap the dividends, not only in reduced energy costs, but a cleaner carbon emitting fuel. This will bring jobs to the table as well as put money into the pockets of every man, woman, and child, and yes, evil businessmen. In the interim, we should then make plans to convert to nuclear fission and continued research on nuclear fusion technologies. But these are not all the benefits that energy dependents would bring, even though this is clearly enough to get started NOW!! It would also free us of the chains of OPEC. Mark my words, if and when the economy begins to recover OPEC will begin raising oil prices. In addition, it would free the US from their dependence in Messopotamia which has cost the lives of thousands and is costing the US a fortune.

In terms of our welfare state, we should begin giving the people to opt out of social security and have that money directly deposited into a private fund that those in government cannot rob as they are doing now. Steps should also be taken to assure that government officials cannot rob from the social security fund. In addition, a step by step reform of medicare should begin. Perhaps we could start by tort reform? Make a bill that is not thousands of pages long that the American people can read and understand. Heck, make it so the legislators can read and understand that is to so huge that endless pork and earmarks can't be hidden in the legislation. That should go over like a lead balloon!! And lastly, people often have the option now of depositing pre-tax dollars into a flexible medical plan which people can use for their medical expenses. This is a great idea!!!.......until you realize that you lose the money if you don't use it in a year. People should be able to have a permanent plan in which they can move from job to job and draw on if they lose their job. If most working American people had this option, they would have a reserve that would free them ever needed government assistance, thus leaving more money for those who have employment problems via medicare.

Originally posted by whodey
What can be done?

As I have said over and over and over and over on this site, what people really want are jobs. Jobs often mean you have health insurance that is not reliant on the government, which often equates into better overall care, and a retirement plan that is not dependent on social security and the government, which is often superior to what ...[text shortened]... nment assistance, thus leaving more money for those who have employment problems via medicare.

Low unemployment correlates with high taxes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_employment_rate

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Low unemployment correlates with high taxes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_employment_rate

Translated, a healthy economy brings in more government revenue. It is only common sense.

Originally posted by whodey
Translated, a healthy economy brings in more government revenue.

I think KN's "high taxes" means rates of tax as opposed to amounts of revenue.

Originally posted by FMF
I think KN's "high taxes" means rates of tax as opposed to amounts of revenue.

Indeed it does.

Originally posted by whodey
What can be done?

As I have said over and over and over and over on this site, what people really want are jobs. Jobs often mean you have health insurance that is not reliant on the government, which often equates into better overall care, and a retirement plan that is not dependent on social security and the government, which is often superior to what nment assistance, thus leaving more money for those who have employment problems via medicare.

You've brought up some good ideas that could become things that the Tea Party Movement could get behind. Could you get them to consider these things?

1. Set up an actual private social security fund for each person - with much of the money raised from social security taxes to go into these funds. We could then limit direct social security benefits to only those retirees who are extremely poor. This is sort of what Bush proposed a few years ago and it went nowhere. Is there a better way of doing this?

2. The rest of the money for Social Security should be put into a special bank account that invests in something safe (such as 10-yr treasuries). Instead of robbing from this account, the government can instead borrow money from China etal until some way is found to balance the budget.

3. Tort reform -- although someone needs to come up with a detailed proposal. There still needs to be a way to protect patients from incompetent doctors.

4. Incentives to get Congress to produce bills that are no longer than, say, 400 pages. Maybe there could be a rule reducing or eliminating filibusters for any bill that's shorter than this.

5. Set up some kind of medical savings accounts that will encourage people to cover their own routine healthcare expenses. I agree they shouldn't have to spend the money within a year - but (except for healthcare expenses) they should have to keep the money in the fund until they reach say, age 65.

6. Permanent health insurance plans that you keep even if you lose your job.(although I think this is one of the few things everyone in Congress already agrees about).

7. Some sort of plan to promote the development of alternative energies - details are needed as to how to do this. It's going to be an uphill battle as long as the existing energies are as cheap as they are now.

Originally posted by FMF
I think KN's "high taxes" means rates of tax as opposed to amounts of revenue.

Of cousre. It is because they know that they can't squeeze blood out of a turnip. To enjoy a thanksgiving feast, you must first feed the turkey.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
[b]You've brought up some good ideas that could become things that the Tea Party Movement could get behind. Could you get them to consider these things?

1. Set up an actual private social security fund for each person - with much of the money raised from social security taxes to go into these funds. We could then limit direct social security benefits to ...[text shortened]... government can instead borrow money from China etal until some way is found to balance the budget.

"W" was tarred and feathered for his attempt at reform by the Dems. Social Security is, as all entitlements seem to become, a sacred cow that is set in stone. That is what is so scary about them. All that is needed is for the Dems to cry that those evil Republicans are trying to rob from the poor and give to the rich as they attempt to reform the system. It matters little as to the truth of the matter, as we see from Washington time and again from both sides. In fact, could you imagine what Obama would do and say to those Congressional members at the State of the Union for even thinking about reforming the system? It would make what he said and did to the Supremes a walk in the park.

Of course, I'm not even sure that the Republicans would like such reform. It seems to me that they like access to all that money just as much as the Dems. Of course, they can't publically take this position even if they are thinking it. Really, I am at a loss at how to change the system other than trying to eeeducate the public and create voter carnage from both parties untill something is done.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
[b]You've brought up some good ideas that could become things that the Tea Party 3. Tort reform -- although someone needs to come up with a detailed proposal. There still needs to be a way to protect patients from incompetent doctors.

Tort reform is needed to keep health care costs down. There is no way around it. Unfortunatly, what you are asking is for lawyers to reform themselves. It is akin to asking a fox to gaurd a hen house. To drive home the point, the new NHC bill is void of such reform. Not one drop of it.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
4. Incentives to get Congress to produce bills that are no longer than, say, 400 pages. Maybe there could be a rule reducing or eliminating filibusters for any bill that's shorter than this.

Unfortunatly, the lenght of the legislation that comes out of Washington is benificial to politicians. For example, if you want every man, woman, and child to have Medicaid paid for by all other 49 states or you want a cool $300 million bought and payed for by the tax payers, how would you go about it in a peice of legislation that is only 400 pages? It seems to me that it would be far more difficult in hiding such corruption in legislation that the masses can read and understand. You have to realize, this would deminish greatly the power that these Congressional members have. As for eliminating filibusters based on the length of a bill, I don't agree with this. Length has nothing to do with it being "good". It just means that it is easier to understand.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
[5. Set up some kind of medical savings accounts that will encourage people to cover their own routine healthcare expenses. I agree they shouldn't have to spend the money within a year - but (except for healthcare expenses) they should have to keep the money in the fund until they reach say, age 65.

6. Permanent health insurance plans that you keep even i ...[text shortened]... our job.(although I think this is one of the few things everyone in Congress already agrees about).

But if you give people a flexible health care fund that they contribute towards every day they work in their lives, so long as they work for any decent time at all having health insurance is not as big of a deal. In fact, the majority of Americans have jobs and would have money stashed away in these funds when they are in between jobs for whatever reason. In fact, could you imagine the money that a person could have after working some 30 years at any one job? When they die it could be put back into the system again for the less fortunate who can't work.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
[7. Some sort of plan to promote the development of alternative energies - details are needed as to how to do this. It's going to be an uphill battle as long as the existing energies are as cheap as they are now.[/b]

If the issue is cost, then the US would start converting cars to natural gas because it is far cheaper than oil. If the issue is carbon emission then they would convert to natural gas, because it is cleaner burning than what we use now. So you tell me, what is the real issue?

Originally posted by Melanerpes
You've brought up some good ideas that could become things that the Tea Party Movement could get behind. Could you get them to consider these things?

1. Set up an actual private social security fund for each person - with much of the money raised from social security taxes to go into these funds. We could then limit direct social security benefits to ...[text shortened]... going to be an uphill battle as long as the existing energies are as cheap as they are now.

3. Tort reform -- although someone needs to come up with a detailed proposal. There still needs to be a way to protect patients from incompetent doctors.

I'm genuinely wondering: has anyone ever established the effect of punitive damages?