If your a republican....

[epicstruggle]

I have lately been accused of being a complete "flag-waiving" follower of Pres Bush. Never disagreeing with him, or his policies. This is quite untrue. I do feel that Ill support most of his decisions. But the following things are our differences:
-campaign finance. Im for very strict limits.
-taxes. Im for elimination of all federal taxes, and instead phasing in sales tax.
-Eliminating all corporate welfare. And restructuring welfare for the poor.
-Passing legislation allowing permanent residents to allow their spouces in.
-sending more troops into iraq. Im for it.
-Having a very strong line item veto. Current one has a limit of something like 200 million dollars. I would make it about a 1 billion limit and would use it quite liberally.
-try to pass a constitutional amendment requiring a balance budget (with some exceptions).

Ill add more later,
epic

 

[see colon]

i'm for free, univerasal heathcare coverage. but then again, i'm a communist.
c:

 

[epicstruggle]

oops, forgot to add, if you voted for bush or are a republican. Do you have any differences from bush's agenda.

later,
epic

 

[epicstruggle]

i'm for free, univerasal heathcare coverage. but then again, i'm a communist.
c:

Free for whom? Someone always pays.

later,
epic

 

[see colon]

"Free for whom? Someone always pays. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ok maybe i should rephrase that. get the money by taxing tobacco, alchohol, and cosmetic surgery
c:

 

[epicstruggle]

"Free for whom? Someone always pays. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ok maybe i should rephrase that. get the money by taxing tobacco, alchohol, and cosmetic surgery
c:

You can only tax those things for while until people buy them less causing you to tax it more, leading to less usage.... You will never raise enough.

Look Im all for universal health care. Heres how I would do it:
-no lawsuit on malpractice.
-different levels of care for amount you contribute:
==with no contribution, you get X amount of healthcare for free. After that your out of luck.
==the more you contribute the more you get from your health care provider.
==The remainder of the cost is carried by the govermnent.
-put a cap on how much drug companies can charge for their product. With a cap their product can have a longer patent date. If they would rather charge what they want on their product then make their patent shorter.
-Create an unhealthy tax. That is tax:high fatty foods, tobacco, alcohol.
-Encourage people to be healthier. The better in shape you are, the more health care youll get.

later,
epic

 

[Sxotty]

(btw I consider myself independent but of liberal bent)

-campaign finance. Im for very strict limits.
-Eliminating all corporate welfare. And restructuring welfare for the poor.
-Passing legislation allowing permanent residents to allow their spouces in.
-sending more troops into iraq. Im for it.

agreed

-taxes. Im for elimination of all federal taxes, and instead phasing in sales tax.

disagree b/c everyone only needs so many socks (thus a smaller portion of rich people income is taxed)

-Having a very strong line item veto. Current one has a limit of something like 200 million dollars. I would make it about a 1 billion limit and would use it quite liberally.
-try to pass a constitutional amendment requiring a balance budget (with some exceptions).

Agreed, now lets think I agree with almost everything he said, yet no politicians seem to... or at least not the ones we have voted for. I personally am sickened by the way pet projects are constantly tacked onto bills. And I also feel that we need a balanced budget amendment, most states have one and they seem to get by. BTW I thought that the line item veto was struck down as unconstitutional, if so they need an amendment that allows it, that way someone can be held accountable for all the crap that goes on, instead of saying "Well sure 20% was a waste, but I had to have that other 80%" Ugh.. government is so wasteful

edit:
Universal HC, yes I support it, and I agree with most of what you wrote. I think that mandatory drug tests should be part of coverage (if your doctor asks for one, then you would have to right then).

BTW Fatty food is not inherently bad for you, it is the amount, cigarettes are bad regardless of the amount.

 

[Humus]

"flag-waiving"

OT: Is it just me or are spelling errors getting more and more absurd these days?

 

[Sage]

-different levels of care for amount you contribute:
==with no contribution, you get X amount of healthcare for free. After that your out of luck.
==the more you contribute the more you get from your health care provider.

I really try not to use this sort of language, but FUCK no. That would be even worse than the way it is right now. The rich would swing it so that they could get everything they ever wanted for much less than they woud pay now, and deprive those who pay very little or nothing of practically everything. At least with the situation we have now you can be pretty much guaranteed that if you pay for it you will get it, especially noone else will get it.

 

[Fred]

I disagree with many things in the Bush administration

1) Abortion

2) Subsidies for Farms and Steel companies

3) Lack of communication with the American people, too much left for experts and a dumb downed approach to message conveying.

4) Size of the Homeland Security department (I feel its just another bureaucratic clout if it gets too large)

5) Use of Religion to convey messages. I feel this is a dangerous precedent sent to the rest of the world, that discredits our otherwise valid train of thought.

6) Rampant spending, not enough fiscal responsibility. Eg not enough cutting down pork like some Welfare programs.

7) Certain Environmental policies, though well reasoned, don't have enough checks and balances against abuse.

Having said that, I still would vote for him.

 

[Sariden]

More troops in Iraq.

1. No. More efficient use of the troops in Iraq and less restrictions on commanders to root out resistance.

-campaign finance. Im for very strict limits.
-taxes. Im for elimination of all federal taxes, and instead phasing in sales tax.
-Eliminating all corporate welfare. And restructuring welfare for the poor.

1. Yes
2. No. But I'd like to see less frivolis allocating of tax payer money.
3. a) Yes b) No rewards for welfare babies & the unproductive / lazy.

-Passing legislation allowing permanent residents to allow their spouces in.

1. No, immigration through skillsets. Stop letting in people who do nothing for the country.

i'm for free, univerasal heathcare coverage.

1. No thanks, there are plenty of ways to aquire health care while supporting the economy. Clamp down on the free for all lawsuits against the healthcare industry and put limits on the cost of insurance plans. Let competition do the rest.

 

[Simon F]

"flag-waiving"

OT: Is it just me or are spelling errors getting more and more absurd these days?

Hee Hee. Both!


After seeing

If your a republican...

I was wondering if there was an option to choose "...should you take spelling lessons?"

 

[arjan de lumens]

A couple of arguments from emotion:

-different levels of care for amount you contribute:
==with no contribution, you get X amount of healthcare for free. After that your out of luck.
==the more you contribute the more you get from your health care provider.
==The remainder of the cost is carried by the govermnent.

Strikes me as horribly unfair, as it is very limited how much you can control how much healthcare you need and the need for healthcare will vary greatly from one individual to another. Take for example someone with breast cancer (which is AFAIK rather unaffected by lifestyle choices) - are you going to treat them X amount, then refuse further treatment?

No rewards for welfare babies & the unproductive / lazy.

Unproductive != lazy. Are you going to refuse welfare to someone incapacitated by conditions such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, muscular dystrophy etc? IMO, laziness as a problem is overrated anyway - and what is more important: helping the ones who need it, or refuse help to freeloaders?

 

[epicstruggle]

-taxes. Im for elimination of all federal taxes, and instead phasing in sales tax.

disagree b/c everyone only needs so many socks (thus a smaller portion of rich people income is taxed)

I doubt that they would buy the same socks we buy. If the buy a 50$ pair of socks they would pay more taxes than the 2$ pair of socks i buy.

 

[epicstruggle]

"flag-waiving"

OT: Is it just me or are spelling errors getting more and more absurd these days?

Thats how they put it in their post. Hence the quotes.

later,
epic

 

[epicstruggle]

I really try not to use this sort of language, but FUCK no. That would be even worse than the way it is right now. The rich would swing it so that they could get everything they ever wanted for much less than they woud pay now, and deprive those who pay very little or nothing of practically everything. At least with the situation we have now you can be pretty much guaranteed that if you pay for it you will get it, especially noone else will get it.

Hey if you make them pay enough to cover the cost, then whats the problem?

later,
epic

 

[epicstruggle]

A couple of arguments from emotion:

-different levels of care for amount you contribute:
==with no contribution, you get X amount of healthcare for free. After that your out of luck.
==the more you contribute the more you get from your health care provider.
==The remainder of the cost is carried by the govermnent.

Strikes me as horribly unfair, as it is very limited how much you can control how much healthcare you need and the need for healthcare will vary greatly from one individual to another. Take for example someone with breast cancer (which is AFAIK rather unaffected by lifestyle choices) - are you going to treat them X amount, then refuse further treatment?

Alot better than not having any health insurance. No offence but some limits have to be made. I see on tv from time to time, charities that try to raise money for some kid or other. Raising thousands of dollars (sometimes even more) to save one person. Take that same amount of money and i can asure you that you could save many more lives.

later,
epic

 

[Sabastian]

While I am not a US citizen however:

- I don't like his protectionist agenda.
- I do like the anti partial birth abortion legislation.
- I like his tax policies.
- I don't like the spending, but I think that this is circumstantial. The homeland security program will be paired back in the not too distant future after the bureaucracy is streamlined, I believe.
- I approve of his foreign policy in general, particularly with regards to Iraq et al.

EDIT.... moved to more appropriate thread.

 

[Tim Murray]

-taxes. Im for elimination of all federal taxes, and instead phasing in sales tax.

Sales tax is inherently unfair because it taxes the poorest citizens exactly the same as the billionaires. Alabama, where I lived most of my life, had a 9% sales tax even on food. I can safely say that it is not conducive to any sort of class mobility. Property taxes still are the way to go, at least at a state/local level. Federal level, I don't really know. But sales tax is definitely not a good idea.

 

[epicstruggle]

-taxes. Im for elimination of all federal taxes, and instead phasing in sales tax.

Sales tax is inherently unfair because it taxes the poorest citizens exactly the same as the billionaires. Alabama, where I lived most of my life, had a 9% sales tax even on food. I can safely say that it is not conducive to any sort of class mobility. Property taxes still are the way to go, at least at a state/local level. Federal level, I don't really know. But sales tax is definitely not a good idea.

Actually if you read the national sales tax plan online (many people have sites on it). Everyone gets a set amount to live on from the govermnent. What ever you earn after that is yours. Now you spend as usual. Rich people would naturally pay more, since what they buy is more expensive. This helps tax people who work in industries/occupations that tend not to report all their incomes:
-wait staff
-strippers/prostitues/pimps/drug sellers
-those who embezel(sp?)

later,
epic