Originally posted by edsinger

Typical Liberal response, they have more I want some of it. Lets just 'stick it' to the rich. It doesn't work that way and it never will. I adhere to trickle down economics, low taxes for all, and growth. I am just stating fact, anytime the federal government has taken over something like this it gets more inefficient and the quality goes down. that is fact.


It is not the only option and you keep saying how well it works in these 24 countries, let some of the people in the UK for example give some feedback on how well they like this so called 'Great System', heck ask some Canadians.

For starters, lets get the damn anti-lawsuit legislation started and get the pricing and growth of medical care in general under control.

Trickle down economics, are you serious? That ws back in Reagan's day and now basically Bush is still going with the plan, it didn't work then and it is not working now. There is a reason why the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, it's trickle down economics.

Wages are being cut in just about every industry, why do you think Bush is wanting a large group of illegal workers to get amnesty in this country? It is to decrease the wages, forcing people to accept lower wages because there are those willing to do the work for less.

Why do you think we have a President who talks about closing the borders and security everytime he wants more funding for the war? But, does absolutely nothing to secure the borders, there is a reason for that. There is a video of Bush making a speech near the fence and in the background you can see the illegal immigrants coming across, too funny. LOL

No one in these countries with universal health care would ever give up their universal health care coverage in favor of what we have in this country, they might complain, but no one is willing to give it up. I've already proven to you that universal health care coverage in Canada costs less, their taxes are only 10% higher than ours, but they do not have to pay premiums on insurance, co-pay and deductibles, nor do they pay a huge amount for their meds. their not having to go without meds to be able to eat like many people in this country.

I've already showed you how our government gives huge tax breaks and money to corporations, which is basically is corporate welfare and all you can do is worry that we might over tax the rich. LOL

As for the anti-lawsuit legislation, that is just one more gift to the corporations, all of you heard about the coffee lawsuit and base your opinions on that, you never heard about the drugs being sold and promoted even after some drug companies were aware they were killing people, (redux, phen-fen and probably a lot of others) or unsafe products on the market even though the companies were aware they posed a danger, but taking them off would cost them money so they left them on the market at sometimes the risk of the consumers health and possibly lives.

So now you want to take away the right to sue, meaning that they can leave the products on the market without it costing them anything.

You really need to broaden your horizons and start watching something beside Fox news!

The people who have universal health care live longer than people in America. As for us liberals,

Day in the Life of Joe Conservative*
by Anonymous


Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance -- now Joe gets it, too.

He prepares his morning breakfast: bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some **** liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment checks because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the taxpayer funded roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved conservatives have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."

(edited to add - this has not always applied to the current Democrat-Liberal / Republican - Conservative debate. Through political history - so I have read - the conservative/liberal labels have been applied to either party at various times. I call myself a liberal more than a Democrat. In my personal political life, that has always coincided with Democrat, but I am willing to consider that the future is malleable. Bottom line... I am for protection for the poor and the working person... for providing basic rights to all people (health care included) and a safety net for all (NOT dependent upon the stock market!))

Originally posted by edsinger

yeah all that is good in the world is because of liberals

Finally you understand! LOL

Actually once again you misunderstand the point, which is most of the things listed above you would have never supported, for the same reasons you have given over & over in this thread, yet where would we be without these measures?

As for poor Ann Coulter, a woman who must issue one pathetic, politically baiting comment after another just to get attention really needs our sympathy, hopefully she will seek help soon.

The working poor are in the worst position of all, they actually contribute and gain very little back for it so they are stuck living amongst the scroungers and criminals with an army of social workers ready to plead clemency on their behalf because they didn't get their dole cheque on time.

The working poor are the real socially disadvantaged and screwed rotten by just about everyone else, liberals and conservatives included.

Originally posted by ubermuncheThe working poor are the real socially disadvantaged and screwed rotten by just about everyone else, liberals and conservatives included.

maybe you are right, lets just tax everyone at 90% rates and let Uncle Sam take care of it all.

Originally posted by edsinger
Lets pay $12 hour for someone to sweep the floors. Economies like that are not that good, did you know that starting wages a McDonald's in San Francisco is about 13.50 an hour? Living wage there? Who you kidding.

OK, let's look at this. I lived in the San Francisco for 30 years, up until 2 years ago. The cost of living is so high in S.F. that $13.50 is NOT even a living wage. A simple studio in S.F. starts at about $1,800 per month. And that was about 5 years ago, they're alot higher now, to be sure. Making $13.50 an hour, a person would make about $2,160. That's before taxes. Take home pay would be about $1,460 per month. How is anyone to afford housing when they take home less than their rent costs? Schoolteachers can't afford to live in their own district, unless they've lived there for 20 years or so, because they can't afford housing there. There are many, many school teachers who live up to 3 or 4 people per studio appartment.

And for minimum wage workers, it's worse because they work at least $40 per week, but it's still not enough to live on.
I worked for the county with welfare moms for 7 years. They took home about $400 per month on the average and had 2 kids. How is anyone able to live on that? Sure, there's food stamps but that's at most a couple hundred a month. Ever try to feed one adult and 2 kids on that? HUD might pay for half the rent, but when the rent is so high there, even with that they don't have enough money.
The myth of women on welfare having more kids to make more money is purely that, a myth, it doesn't happen that way. That's not why welfare women have children. At best, they would receive only $100 a month more for a child, which is not even enough to feed that child, much less pay for clothing, rent, etc.
These women had no job skills and most just weren't employable. We had a great program for them, and they were finishing school, going onto college and creating a good home for their children. They were very proud of themselves when they could get and hold a job and they were the envy of the other women on welfare. They hated being poor. But they had never been taught the fundamentals of the working world, such as punctuality, not handling constructive criticism, showing up everyday, things like that. It takes several years for women like this to learn working skills. Our program was helping women to change their lives around, and that of their children. It was working so what does the govt do? They cut the program down to 6 months, cut the individual therapy out altogether and limited their welfare down to 6 months as well. When they were forced to work part-time for their welfare, the money they made didn't even begin to cover their living expenses. Most of the women were bright women, who just wanted to get their lives on track, had no idea how to, and were in a program that gave them a helping hand by teaching them how to work and how to live in a healthy way, not being dysfunctional.

Here's something else: Something like 70% or more of the people on welfare are CHILDREN. Would you really want to take food and health care from an innocent child just because their parents were poor?
Poverty is a generational issue and is not easily fixed.
As for every American being able to afford their own house and car, are you joking?
Houses in California start at half a million and require 20% down payment. How can one afford that on minimum wage? Hell, I had a Master's degree and worked as a psychologist, and still had to live in a rented hovel basically.
The last 3 years I lived in No. Cal. I made $12 per hour and rent was $800 per month. Add to that the $250 utility bill (thanks to Enron's greed and criminal behavior), and a $40 a month water bill, and I had nothing left over.
And I'm college-educated. What happens to those who aren't?

Yeah you see the problems, so mandate wages and inflation will rule. San Fransisco is just a hell hole, period.

$13.50 is NOT a living wage there I agree, that is why 7-10 people share houses on the other side of the Altamont pass and commute...

That is why I left California....