Go Back   Android Forums > Android Community > The Lounge > Politics and Current Affairs
Politics and Current Affairs All things political.

Get excited for the Samsung Galaxy S5! Find everything you need and discuss it in our Galaxy S5 Forum!

Like Tree14Likes

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old November 10th, 2012, 05:42 PM   #51 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
copestag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,304
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 236 Times in 186 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
Whatever about your biases against the VA system, I AM NOT ON ABOUT GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTHCARE.

All I said is that medicaid/care is currently more efficient than the pure free market alternative. I think they are shitty systems but the point stands.

You constantly fail to read what I say in my posts. I never mentioned veterans hospitals or whatever (which IMO are a completely ridiculous concept in the first place, but whatever).

and thats just simply not true

medicaid and medicare spend more money for less care than the free market alternatives and unlike the free market alternatives who are profiting.. both programs would be bankrupt if not for the unlimited funding they get from govt

copestag is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old November 10th, 2012, 06:51 PM   #52 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,325
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,116
Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,101 Posts
Default

Ok, too much to respond to, I'll just make a few points.

1-The democrats are not trying to "soak the rich, big time". Going back to Clinton era levels is not pre Nixon or pre Reagan. Not draconian at all. Poor little rich folk. Waaah.

2-I agree that raising taxes on the rich alone won't come close to raising enough money to fix the problems.But it's what they can get right now. It's not just the democratic base that won't accept tax increases on the middle class, it's the whole country. You can't get elected proposing raising taxes. Americans feel way too entitled, but we don't want to pay for anything. Plus Obama based his campaign on not raising middle class taxes, it would be kind of hard for him to go back on that now. Maybe he could get away with lowering or eliminating some deductions in a deal with the republicans. Personally I would have no problem with everyone going back to Clinton era tax levels, but once you give those tax cuts it's extremely hard to take them back.

3-There is absolutely, 100% , no way we can cut our way out of this mess. Anyone with a brain knows that. Even the group of CEO's of major corporations is calling for a combination of cuts and tax increases. Also, the same with the bipartisan super committee. Plus, basically any reputable economist. It's no secret what needs to be done, it's the political will that is not there. We need a large group of patriots willing to commit political suicide. The president can't do it. Congress is in charge of paying the bills. The president can only make proposals and use the bully pulpit.
__________________
"Machete don't text"
Gmash is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2012, 06:53 PM   #53 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,325
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,116
Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by copestag View Post
and thats just simply not true

medicaid and medicare spend more money for less care than the free market alternatives and unlike the free market alternatives who are profiting.. both programs would be bankrupt if not for the unlimited funding they get from govt
Wrong.
Gmash is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2012, 07:37 PM   #54 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
Whatever about your biases against the VA system, I AM NOT ON ABOUT GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTHCARE.

All I said is that medicaid/care is currently more efficient than the pure free market alternative. I think they are shitty systems but the point stands.

You constantly fail to read what I say in my posts. I never mentioned veterans hospitals or whatever (which IMO are a completely ridiculous concept in the first place, but whatever).
You mentioned government run care. I brought up the VA because it is, by every definition, government run care and government provided free insurance. It's also complete and total crappy care. Our veterans deserve far better and we give them crap. Every American should be ashamed of the healthcare we provide our veterans. End of rant.

I will also add that while mentioned that the costs of Medicare haven't risen at the same rate that private insurance companies have neglects to mention the fact that Medicare is broke. It can afford to keep costs down because it operating at a loss and that's not sustainable long term.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Last edited by A.Nonymous; November 10th, 2012 at 07:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 01:42 AM   #55 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Here is an interesting article about the broken system Obama has to wrangle with:

US politics today is as absurd as Britain's under George III | Geoffrey Wheatcroft | Comment is free | The Guardian

As I said before, not having a congressional majority, yet being in charge causes huge problems.
__________________
Sign up for Minus online storage and get 10 GB of Free Space today! Sign up Here!
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 06:15 AM   #56 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
Here is an interesting article about the broken system Obama has to wrangle with:

US politics today is as absurd as Britain's under George III | Geoffrey Wheatcroft | Comment is free | The Guardian

As I said before, not having a congressional majority, yet being in charge causes huge problems.
It's what the public wants. At least this time around. Once again, the attitude comes up that it doesn't matter what the public wants.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 10:35 AM   #57 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
It's what the public wants. At least this time around. Once again, the attitude comes up that it doesn't matter what the public wants.
The 10% approval ratings for Congress disagree with you.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 11:33 AM   #58 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
The 10% approval ratings for Congress disagree with you.
Congressional approval ratings are a joke. They are always very very low. Then people go out and reelect the same people.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 12:34 PM   #59 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Congressional approval ratings are a joke. They are always very very low. Then people go out and reelect the same people.
If people do that when ratings are that low its a sure sign reform is needed.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 12:44 PM   #60 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
If people do that when ratings are that low its a sure sign reform is needed.
Not sure what reforms you could put in place to fix it. You'd have to take the power to vote for Congress out of the hands of the people. The problem is people think that everyone else's Congressman is the problem, but not theirs. So they vote for their Congressman and hate everyone else's.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old November 12th, 2012, 01:16 PM   #61 (permalink)
Member
 
cmybliss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Abarat
Posts: 408
 
Device(s): Samsung GSIII (Verizon),HTC Incredible 2, HTC Incredible, HTC Eris
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 58
Thanked 73 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Not sure what reforms you could put in place to fix it. You'd have to take the power to vote for Congress out of the hands of the people. The problem is people think that everyone else's Congressman is the problem, but not theirs. So they vote for their Congressman and hate everyone else's.
Real term limit reform would fix the problem. But of course, the folks in charge of the reform don't want to reform themselves out of a job. Catch 22.
cmybliss is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 01:33 PM   #62 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Not sure what reforms you could put in place to fix it. You'd have to take the power to vote for Congress out of the hands of the people. The problem is people think that everyone else's Congressman is the problem, but not theirs. So they vote for their Congressman and hate everyone else's.
I am constantly suggesting reforms, but you ignore them.
  • Proportional Representation
  • Requirement for the President to command a Congressional Majority, possibly with a Prime Ministerial position a la France.
  • Reduce influence of lobbyists by banning corporate donations to parties and funding them via the government's coffers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmybliss View Post
Real term limit reform would fix the problem. But of course, the folks in charge of the reform don't want to reform themselves out of a job. Catch 22.
Term limits won't really help solve the problem. Its benefits would be relatively minor. You can also look at California to see the problems term limits create - inexperienced politicians abound. A politician being in the system for decades isn't necessarily terrible, although its important to bring new thinking in too.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 01:35 PM   #63 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

None of that will fix the problem that people hate Congress but keep sending the same people back there every election.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 02:37 PM   #64 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
None of that will fix the problem that people hate Congress but keep sending the same people back there every election.
Uhm... it quite possibly would. Certainly would get the approval ratings up past 20-30%.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 02:55 PM   #65 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
Uhm... it quite possibly would. Certainly would get the approval ratings up past 20-30%.
I have no idea how.

Proportional Representation is great in a multi-party system, but here we have a two party system so it makes no sense.

Having the President picked by Congress and not by the people would never happen. We have voted on our chief executive for over 200 years. You would never ever ever get enough people on board to make such a fundamental change in the Constitution. And that still wouldn't solve the problem that people keep electing the same morons year after year.

Reducing the influence of lobbyists definitely needs to happen, but it still won't make a difference in people voting for the same people every year.

Term limits is a good solution. Sadly you'd have to get Congressmen and Senators to agree to it which they never will. Even with term limits I'm not convinced it would entirely fix the problem, but it is a great start.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2012, 03:10 PM   #66 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
I have no idea how.
Then you cannot think analytically?

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Proportional Representation is great in a multi-party system, but here we have a two party system so it makes no sense.
You have a two party system because you don't have proportional representation or the need for legislative majorities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Having the President picked by Congress and not by the people would never happen. We have voted on our chief executive for over 200 years. You would never ever ever get enough people on board to make such a fundamental change in the Constitution. And that still wouldn't solve the problem that people keep electing the same morons year after year.
Oh yeah, I never suggested changing that! In France though they have a President, and a Prime Minister appointed by him. Just an idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Reducing the influence of lobbyists definitely needs to happen, but it still won't make a difference in people voting for the same people every year.
It would reduce disillusionment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Term limits is a good solution. Sadly you'd have to get Congressmen and Senators to agree to it which they never will. Even with term limits I'm not convinced it would entirely fix the problem, but it is a great start.
Well it would simply increase the number of inexperienced politicians as I said. If one simply had less power for lobbyists and less junkets corrupt politicians would be much less of an issue.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2012, 07:29 AM   #67 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 970 Times in 704 Posts
Default

We have a two party system because we have no viable 3rd parties. It's not like there are dozens of 3rd parties clawing around 10% of the vote. You can add up all of the 3rd parties in the past election and they don't add up to 10% of the vote. They may not add up to 5% of the vote. Proportional representation doesn't change any of that. You would still have 3rd parties gathering 2-3% of the vote total. That's not statistically significant enough to warrant any sort of representation.

I have no idea what good would come from splitting the executive office. You could potentially have two executives from two different parties. That doesn't seem like it would improve things.

I don't think term limits would make things any worse. Many states have term limits at the local, city and county levels. They seem to survive just fine.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2012, 09:24 AM   #68 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,325
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,116
Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,101 Posts
Default

Term limits are one of those things that always sound better in theory than it turns out being in practice. You end up sweeping out the good legislators with the bad, and the new guys are usually not any better, plus they don't know what in the hell they're doing. By the time they learn the ropes, they're out. Then they usually just bounce around from office to office anyway, running for whatever they think they have a chance to win. I actually don't mind a divided government, it keeps either party from going too far. Until recently, reasonable things could get passed, now one party will block things they are in favor of just because the other party wants it. I think we need to make some changes to the filibuster rules.
Gmash is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2012, 10:50 AM   #69 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
We have a two party system because we have no viable 3rd parties. It's not like there are dozens of 3rd parties clawing around 10% of the vote. You can add up all of the 3rd parties in the past election and they don't add up to 10% of the vote. They may not add up to 5% of the vote. Proportional representation doesn't change any of that. You would still have 3rd parties gathering 2-3% of the vote total. That's not statistically significant enough to warrant any sort of representation.
I have already explained why they're not viable. Please read my posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post

I have no idea what good would come from splitting the executive office. You could potentially have two executives from two different parties. That doesn't seem like it would improve things.
Well the President would appoint the Prime Minister based on parties willing to form a government. They would have to agree on a platform of sorts. The President
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2012, 05:35 PM   #70 (permalink)
Member
 
cmybliss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Abarat
Posts: 408
 
Device(s): Samsung GSIII (Verizon),HTC Incredible 2, HTC Incredible, HTC Eris
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 58
Thanked 73 Times in 51 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmash View Post
Until recently, reasonable things could get passed, now one party will block things they are in favor of just because the other party wants it. I think we need to make some changes to the filibuster rules.
And that there is one of the biggest problems we have in our government. The Congress used to be able to pass things with a simple majority, you know, the way it was intended to work. Now we've got them using the filibuster, which in the past, had been reserved for extreme cases. Remember the days of cots in the hallways and representatives speaking until their voices were gone? Now we need a super majority to pass the smallest, least important bill. Both parties are guilty of it, though I would venture to say one is worse than the other. Get rid of the filibuster and severely limit lobbyists and we might stand a chance of moving this country forward.

I still like term limits, but they would have to be a reasonable length, say 12-16 years,and staggered so as to always have an experienced person from each state in office.
cmybliss is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to cmybliss For This Useful Post:
Gmash (November 13th, 2012)
sponsored links
Old November 16th, 2012, 05:07 AM   #71 (permalink)
I ain't nobody!
 
saptech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Third Stone from the Sun
Posts: 3,545
 
Device(s): Motorola Moto G, Samsung Stratosphere, Galaxy Tab 2 SE.
Carrier: T-Mobile

Thanks: 572
Thanked 768 Times in 612 Posts
Default

My Way News - Top Republicans say Romney didn't offer specifics
__________________
Like it is...Yusef Lateef
saptech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Go Back   Android Forums > Android Community > The Lounge > Politics and Current Affairs
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.