Author Topic: 2011 political changes debate thread  (Read 2736 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mooshi

  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
2011 political changes debate thread
« on: January 04, 2011, 02:33:38 pm »
The republicans now have a bit more power and now want to change some things. Most notably health care reform and food regulation. What are your thoughts?

I'm actually somewhat in favour of this. Why? 13 trillion in debt is pathetic. Something like universal health care is noble, but we simply can't afford it right now. The real problem is the corruption on the backend. All the lobbyists and greedy big pharma companies. Clean that mess and make plans affordable. That's the logical way to go at it. Not offsetting everything to debt. It's irresponsable for a citizen to do this, let alone the government! Maybe someday it'll make sense, but not until the debt is taken care of. I hope the right balances things out because as an American, that debt is just embarassing. My fear is that the agenda may be pushed far-right and that's no better than far-left. We need a healthy balance and responsibility.

As for food. I do think our food safety should be a top priority. However, I wouldn't be in favour of increased regulation unless the numbers are right. I'd take this a step further and start growing a majority of our food here instead of importing. That also makes more logical sense because god only knows the lack of regulation in foriegn countries.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 03:44:16 pm by Mooshi »

Offline KitsuNinja

  • Space Pirate
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 574
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2011, 03:29:51 pm »
Er...Mooshi?

It's "Trillion".  ;)
Kemono Party > Furry and kemono fan realists who would rather embrace random and cuteness over being drama-queen furries, furry vs furry bashing or a furry who tries too hard. :3

Offline Mooshi

  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2011, 03:45:24 pm »
Shush you. D< My cat was distracting me. Anywho, fixed.

Offline Yip

  • Species: vulpes vulpes
  • *
  • Female
  • Posts: 4005
    • Furaffinity
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2011, 04:03:03 pm »
Something like universal health care is noble, but we simply can't afford it right now.
If we have to wait until the debt is paid off, it may never happen. So I say that's a poor excuse.

Offline Mooshi

  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2011, 04:18:19 pm »
Don't look at me. Both major parties are the ones responsible for the mess we're in. There are too many leeches bleeding the social services we got. If I were in charge, I would have at least a safety net. An emergency fund if you will for those who can not afford healthcare. I know first hand how it feels so I'm not one of those pampered out of touch types. However, these emergency funds would have a stipulation. You must pass a test to prove you're doing this to become a productive member of society again. It will be based on a case by case basis. If you have lung cancer, but smoke 10 packs a week, too bad! Same goes for individuals who are struggling, but keep pumping out kids. Personal responsibility is constantly overlooked. Tax payers shouldn't pay for someone elses life choices. If someone was involved in an accident or became ill, they will be entitled to emergency healthcare funding because those things were unplanned and not the same as being irresponsible. Low cost plans make the most sense here. Face it. Even with universal, you'll be paying for it regardless with higher taxes. May as well fix the system instead to bring the prices down.

Offline Drake Blackpaw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 3109
    • http://www.drakebp.furtopia.org/
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2011, 04:36:14 pm »
I'm with Vararam on healthcare, and in the long run, the healthcare changes may reduce health related spending.  The government isn't subsidizing it as we have to pay the full costs, but there is a cost to start it up.  No one will know how the numbers really play out until years down the road, but the bill was written to be deficit neutral and actually cut into it a tiny bit in the later years.

However, I do agree that the deficit needs to be addressed and it is going to take more than removing discretionary spending.   We need to modify Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, reduce defense spending, and dare I say it, raise revenue - a.k.a. taxes.  Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and defense are the three things that take up most of the budget and are the only things big enough that cutting into them will seriously make a dent in deficit.

I'm not sure if the newly elected Republicans are willing to realistically tackle the debt.  It's much easier to say we can cut our way out of the deficit until you start bringing up specifics on what to cut.  I've heard some Tea Party Republicans suggest cutting whole departments like the Dept of Education, but that's politically unfeasible and these departments do serve a purpose.  Proposals like that are more motivated by a very conservative political agenda than any real desire to fix the deficit.

The sad thing with the political change is that we lost the moderates of both parties.  You may not always agree with the moderates in the party you belong to, but nothing really gets done without them.  Moderate Democrats lost their seats in the house in the last election and they were a group of law makers that were serious about debt reduction.  Moderate Republicans were culled out of their seats by the Republican primary.  It's all well and good to stick to your guns on a position, but that doesn't get laws/changes to government passed and that doesn't get the deficit reduced.

Offline Mooshi

  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2011, 05:00:50 pm »
It's an easy business model to comprehend. Make more than you spend. The problem is that both parties can't seem to come to an agreement on how to acomplish that. The left is more for higher taxes and the right is more for cut access spending. In reality, we  need both and then some. Infrustrature doesn't come from nowhere, but that's no excuse to live on credit, either. Both sides should really make it an issue to increase domestic production of goods. America is importing too much..I look at my cat's carrier cage and my toothbrush and see "Made in China" / "Made in Tawain". Really? We can't even make our own simple goods anymore? If America made more, the ecnomy would be stronger and we'd also have more cash comming in, in the form of exports. Simply raising taxes or cutting spending isn't enough if we're serious about the debt.

Offline Foxpup

  • Hero Member
  • Species: Cyborg Fox
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 1183
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2011, 07:11:56 pm »
Who gives a turkey about the national debt? The national debt consists mainly of bonds sold to idiots (who think government bonds are a sound investment - ha!)*, and the government pays off the bonds by selling more bonds to even more idiots. While it may seem like an economy supported entirely by idiots is a bad idea, it's actually pretty stable. I mean, it's not like we're going to run out of idiots anytime soon.** And the best part is, we non-idiots get tax cuts. It's win-win.

* To all of you who did buy government bonds, I hope you realise it's all a big scam and sell out while you still can.
** Of course, if we ever do run out of idiots, the economy will collapse like the house of cards it is. But that will be a small price to pay.
“Hmm... They have the Internet on computers now.” - Homer Simpson

“Art doesn't work without pain. Art exists for compensating pain.” - Till Lindemann

“There's a fine line between sayings that make sense.” - Too Much Coffee Man

Offline Mooshi

  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2011, 07:16:02 pm »
I wouldn't exactly call a country that imports so much and panics over oil prices "stable". :P Debt doesn't help the value of the currency - I personaly find it a sign of weakness. Or at least irresponsible. Though, I do ponder why we can't press an imaginary "reformat" button and pretend it never happened. :D
« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 07:18:07 pm by Mooshi »

Offline Foxpup

  • Hero Member
  • Species: Cyborg Fox
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 1183
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2011, 07:44:59 pm »
Hey, I didn't say the whole economy was stable, just the part supported by idiots. Debt doesn't hurt the value of currency, until you try to pay it back in cash and the value of said cash falls on its face. That's why we pay it pack with more bonds. And you can't just pretend debt never happened, because then the creditors get angry and kill you (yes, even if they're not associated with the Mafia).
Now stop acting like there's something wrong with this scheme. It's no worse than the banks' scheme of lending money that isn't theirs, and nothing bad ever came of that... oh wait. Never mind.
“Hmm... They have the Internet on computers now.” - Homer Simpson

“Art doesn't work without pain. Art exists for compensating pain.” - Till Lindemann

“There's a fine line between sayings that make sense.” - Too Much Coffee Man

Offline Drake Blackpaw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 3109
    • http://www.drakebp.furtopia.org/
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2011, 02:10:09 pm »
The problem with selling more bonds to fuel the debt is that one of the biggest buyer of US bonds is China and all they have to do is to stop buying to start the bond/debt house of cards to fall.  Gives China a nice lever over US policy doesn't it?

I have a feeling you are being sarcastic Foxpup, but I still wanted to point out that one issue with US bonds.

It was sad that none of the sitting congressmen had the balls to vote yes for the debt commissions plan on balancing the budget.  A couple of sitting senators said yes from both parties, but no one from the house.  There would have been a nice time to see some leadership.

Offline Foxpup

  • Hero Member
  • Species: Cyborg Fox
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 1183
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2011, 08:41:04 pm »
I have a feeling you are being sarcastic Foxpup, but I still wanted to point out that one issue with US bonds.

I may be joking, but I don't write my own material. The U.S. government does that for me. :D I just hope the rest of the world realises it's all a joke before it's too late...
“Hmm... They have the Internet on computers now.” - Homer Simpson

“Art doesn't work without pain. Art exists for compensating pain.” - Till Lindemann

“There's a fine line between sayings that make sense.” - Too Much Coffee Man

Offline Mr. Apple

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 573
    • FurAffinity
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2011, 04:15:10 pm »
My roots are in the republican/conservative party. I really don't care for any party right now but if there has to be a party running this place, i'd want it to be the republicans. Sure, some of the things that they want to do like with the net neutrality thing, don't really please me, but i trust them more. I think it's just the way i'm being brought up. The democratic party also seem's a little naive and/or shady to me. This is all just imo.
"Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange."

DA: http://x13killer.deviantart.com/
FA: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/x13killer/

Offline Serra Belvoule

  • Hero Member
  • Holder of the Cookie Jar!
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 17006
    • Serra's Photo Album
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #13 on: January 20, 2011, 07:50:43 pm »
Honestly I think the universal answer in such matters lies in education. Not just investing in school but actually promoting independent thinking, individualization and free thought, and emphasizing the importance of critical thought, and restraint.
Mostly, teaching people not to be dumb x3
I ate a bag of grapes and now I own the world.

Offline Mr. Apple

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Male
  • Posts: 573
    • FurAffinity
Re: 2011 political changes debate thread
« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2011, 02:38:59 pm »
Honestly I think the universal answer in such matters lies in education. Not just investing in school but actually promoting independent thinking, individualization and free thought, and emphasizing the importance of critical thought, and restraint.
Mostly, teaching people not to be dumb x3

A government? promoting independent thinking?  :o
"Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange."

DA: http://x13killer.deviantart.com/
FA: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/x13killer/