ANd what's your point? Is there something in the article you take issue with?
Do you know what a single payer national health plan entails? No knee jerk reaction or label, as the author utilized to call it socialized medicine. Evidently, what we have now is grossly inefficent and priced out of reach for far too many Americans.
The economic plan initiated by the White House ( trickle down economics) has not worked in it's two years of application, nor has it served as a stimulus.
The bull about a 4% growth: if you are let's say at -10% on a graph and apply +4% to your position, it's true, you have 4% growth.....but you're still -6% in the hole!!!!
You DON'T think there are Republican mouth pieces in the media!?! The Wall Street Journal, All of the Fox news stations, MSNBC except for the Donahue show and CNN ( hell, I was watching C-Span today and almost all of the CNN talking Heads were in attendance for the presentation of the American Patriot Award to Bush Sr.....with Paula Zahn as the MC, for Christ's sake!!!)

I'am not sure how healthcare is out of reach.I have never had a hard time getting a health plan.It comes with having a job.With some jobs it cost me nothing,just go to the hospital when you need to,others would take a little out of my check every week.I can't speak for other states,but in CA if you are broke with no income you can still go to the hospital and get treated.No one is refused.

As far as the economy goes,toss the pie chart out the window.I have more money to spend now then I did under Clinton. Maybe I'am an oddball.

What I find to be very funny is the whining about the media.When Clinton was in office,the news had a democratic slant.And I don't rember the republicans whining about.Its just the way it was.I think the news is better today than it was a few years ago,IMO.

uh, side note - wasn't Paula looking good!

I think, nyeff, you may indeed be something of the exception rather than the rule. If you look at the details of Davis's speech on Friday or the NY Times to-day on the financial disaster facing California: - "As many as 200,000 people could lose their health coverage under the state Medi-Cal program" is an example - and your having more money in your pocket is not an experience 100% of your fellow-Americans would claim: nor is "your pocket" the only place to concern yourself about -look at the values of property, stocks, pensions and so forth.
I would also advise people to consider carefully whether there is more money in their pocket because it's theirs or because it's even easier to borrow at absurdly low rates that are going to rebound at great personal cost to millions.
Have you seen the trends in mortgage foreclosures of late?
I'm not convinced that this can be pinned on either Party -both seem to serve much the same group of wealthy interests - and it's very hard to say: Bush 1 caused this, Clinton caused that, Bush-2 caused the other -these are issues that develop over many years, surfacing long after the economic factors took hold; and -given the unique position of the non-partisan Fed- America remains a very special case politically.

I maybe the exception.I was thinking about this last night.I think there are other factors involed,I'm older,smarter,have a bigger family than I did under Clinton.So I'am not pissing money away,like I did in my early 20's.The same can be said of most of my friends too.

Davis has overspent every year he has been in office.He has thrown this state into chaos.Right now CA is so broke that if they fired every state worker,the state would still be 6 billion in the hole.The only reason he is still govenor,is because the best the republican could do was Bill Simon.And Davis just squeaked by him.

While we've debated what caused it, the most important question is what's being done to stop it.....the answer is nothing. And, nothing is on the horizon for being done.
A parallel occurred to me recently between economic theory and government models. Supply-side Economics is to Socialism what Trickle Down Economics is to Communism. Like socialism, nothing is wrong with supply side in theory, but like communism became a system of 'more equal than others' so does trickle down lose it's traction for failing to account for greed and the 'human condition'. Or more plainly, it only trickles down if those at the top don't put out rain barrels.
A Mr.Snow, another by-no-talent-but-only-connections CEO has been appointed Treasury Secretary with the sole marketed benefit, as announced by Emperor Bush himself and parroted by all the corporate media, of having connections to where he can SELL Bush's tax cut only economic philosophy. Nothing about changing a plan that has proven to already not work....just having someone who can SELL it better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yet, the partisans that are pro-Bush fail to look at the fact that there is not ONE Economist on Bush's Economic team, only the literal foxes ( CEO's, Corp. Exec's and Lobbyists) in the hen house laying out how they want the nests configured. That no Doctor of Economics would lose their credibility by signing on to a BIG LIE, is lost on them.