Health Care Bill

[Aisling]

i've said this before, can't we keep debate civil without namecalling?

there are nutjobs to the far left, there are nutjobs to the far right and there are nutjobs in the middle. however, if someone has a different view point they are not automatically "crazy", that's using emotional/namecalling tactics that really ruin a good debate.

how about letting people explain themselves before commenting on what he/she thinks about a question posed to them specifically.

if you do put forth something that people may see as "contraversial" in topic you do leave yourself open, but not to personal attacks.

i say all this in defense of anyone being called out or having words put in their mouth.

let's hear people's thoughts and leave off the crap... because really, no one wants to make the redhead angry.

LOL

[boarderboy]

Student loan overhaul was included in this new bill. Sounds like a good thing at least.

Apparently, many med students owe $200,000-plus in private ldender (but Fed-backed) loans at 8% interest by the time they're able to practice, and earn, fully. This is cited as a major reason that we have too many "high-income" specialists, and a 30-plus percent shortage of needed general practitioners, especially in rural and high poverty areas.

Why not either reduce, substantially, the interest rate for students who agree to practice as GP's for, say, 4 years when they're "licensed", or outright forgive loan portions (or, alternatively, offer substantial scholarships) for aspiring M.D.'s who make similar agreements to practice in needed fields, i.e., gerontology, family medicine, etc? Especially if, again, they'll agree to practice in rural and/or high poverty areas for a significant period. "Affordable", early GP screening and care can drastically reduce the incidence of very expensive, delayed diagnosis chronic conditions.

Similar incentives could be given to motivated nursing students.

Sounds like a Win/Win to me!

BB

[Aisling]

BB, there were a lot of incentive programs similar to that already in place for medical professionals (docs and nurses, I believe RT and PT as well)... where a good portion of your educational costs could be covered by the place you work for, usually low-income, impoverished areas... problem is, so many students, so few open slots like this. obviously an impoverished area, poorer hospital, can only afford to cover a certain number of people in this manner.

from my end, as a new grad nurse, there are so many grads looking for employment that each position is highly competitive and there just isn't enough room/money for everyone. so there's the rub, it always goes back to where do we get the money to do these kinds of things while the country is deep in debt?

side point, I've sent out hundreds (literally) of resumes and gotten 2 calls back. one from the federal bureau of prisons where they wanted me to work in a maximum security prison.... thanks but no thanks... i don't want to go to work in fear for my life. (male prison, max sec, hardened criminals, murderers, rapists...would you want your sister working there?)

and the second from the military. 2nd options not a bad one, in truth they give out the idea set forth... you work for us for 4-6 yrs you get lower pay scale but we do help you with loans, etc. i didn't think I'd be looking at wearing a uniform other than scrubs...but...

[bobdea]

i've said this before, can't we keep debate civil without namecalling?

there are nutjobs to the far left, there are nutjobs to the far right and there are nutjobs in the middle. however, if someone has a different view point they are not automatically "crazy", that's using emotional/namecalling tactics that really ruin a good debate.

how about letting people explain themselves before commenting on what he/she thinks about a question posed to them specifically.

if you do put forth something that people may see as "contraversial" in topic you do leave yourself open, but not to personal attacks.

i say all this in defense of anyone being called out or having words put in their mouth.

let's hear people's thoughts and leave off the crap... because really, no one wants to make the redhead angry.

LOL

petrol is just being treated with as much reason and civility as he's using in this thread. go back through the posts. look at Jack's posts and my responses, more civil.

I'm speaking in the terms and tones he speaks in, sometimes to communicate with someone you have to speak their language. his seems to be party talking points and feeling like a victim.

I'm waiting for the conspiracy theories to start.

[Aisling]

petrol is just being treated with as much reason and civility as he's using in this thread. go back through the posts. look at Jack's posts and my responses, more civil. I'm speaking in the terms and tones he speaks in, sometimes to communicate with someone you have to speak their language. his seems to be party talking points and feeling like a victim. I'm waiting for the conspiracy theories to start.

fair enough point though surely you know i posted that i spoke in defense of anyone being personally attacked... That would include you if you were :) i find if someone gives opinion its just that...opinion. If its spoken as fact...that bears backing up which i appreciate that a lot of people here do. :)

[boarderboy]

it always goes back to where do we get the money to do these kinds of things while the country is deep in debt?

that we be that way!!

Thirty years of "Starve the Beast" (aka the U.S. Guv'ment) tax policies have resulted in the widest income disparity of any Western democracy. And it's so amusing (nae galling) that an 8-year war, in a country (oil-rich EyeRack) that didn't attack us, has been prosecuted without any real effort to raise the money to pay for it.

Moreover, it's really hilarious that Republicans have cited Social Security and Medicare viability in opposing healthcare reform when they've tried to end those programs almost from their inception.

We're here because we chose to be here.

We repealed the 55 mph speed limit when we knew, conclusively, that it did two things. It saved lots of lives. It saved lots of gas, hence money. But the latter statistic didn't jive with the wishes of Exxon or GM.

So, again, here we are.

Projected ten year "cost" of health care reform as passed, slightly less than $$ One Trillion. Approximate "Defense" and intelligence services cost Annually roughly $$ One Trillion!!

And please, please, please, before the flaming begins, let me just say, I "walk the walk."

My family lives in a 900 sq. ft., energy efficient, passive solar house. We drive very much used, and very fuel efficient cars. I bike for approximately 30 % of my in-city travel. I served in Vietnam. We've voted for every school bond and tax proposal since we were married, (decades before we became adoptive parents.) And I could go on and on, but my sanctimony is repelling even me.

So, again, please, don't "poor mouth" programs for the country's least powerful, and most vulnerable, populations. That, frankly, is just bunk!

Good luck with your career!! I'm sorry the job market's so lousy as you graduate. (Except for a 3-month contract position, my very experienced, impeccably credentialed wife has been unemployed for almost two years.)

As you know, I admire anyone who goes into the healing professions.

Peace

BB

[Aisling]

that we be that way!!

Thirty years of "Starve the Beast" (aka the U.S. Guv'ment) tax policies have resulted in the widest income disparity of any Western democracy. And it's so amusing (nae galling) that an 8-year war, in a country (oil-rich EyeRack) that didn't attack us, has been prosecuted without any real effort to raise the money to pay for it.

Moreover, it's really hilarious that Republicans have cited Social Security and Medicare viability in opposing healthcare reform when they've tried to end those programs almost from their inception.

We're here because we chose to be here.

We repealed the 55 mph speed limit when we knew, conclusively, that it did two things. It saved lots of lives. It saved lots of gas, hence money. But the latter statistic didn't jive with the wishes of Exxon or GM.

So, again, here we are.

Projected ten year "cost" of health care reform as passed, slightly less than $$ One Trillion. Approximate "Defense" and intelligence services cost Annually roughly $$ One Trillion!!

And please, please, please, before the flaming begins, let me just say, I "walk the walk."

My family lives in a 900 sq. ft., energy efficient, passive solar house. We drive very much used, and very fuel efficient cars. I bike for approximately 30 % of my in-city travel. I served in Vietnam. We've voted for every school bond and tax proposal since we were married, (decades before we became adoptive parents.) And I could go on and on, but my sanctimony is repelling even me.

So, again, please, don't "poor mouth" programs for the country's least powerful, and most vulnerable, populations. That, frankly, is just bunk!

Good luck with your career!! I'm sorry the job market's so lousy as you graduate. (Except for a 3-month contract position, my very experienced, impeccably credentialed wife has been unemployed for almost two years.)

As you know, I admire anyone who goes into the healing professions.

Peace

BB

seriously where the heck did that rant come from? haha

the question wasn't "how did we get here?", rather, since we are here (broke/deeply in debt) where does the money come from? can't really get blood from a stone as it were.

what about a VAT in lieu of income tax? can be across the board, and makes more sense in my head than taxing people's hard earned income.

heck legalize pot and tax the hell outta that as well, like they do cigs. there have to be other options rather than taking more income tax from hard working people.

i don't feel i "poor mouthed" anything... just asking logical questions. the "blame game" of how the country got in debt is useless as what's done is done. the emotional argument that anyone who looks for any options aside from being taxed to oblivion is an unfeeling lout who hates poor people doesn't jive. last summer i spent money i didn't have (and still don't) to go on a delegation for nurses to South Africa where we helped in clinics that really were astoudingly poor. i saw one of the worst cases of what could happen in a two-tier system with the public clinics/options in just horrible conditions, people waiting weeks to see a practitioner, nurses having to play roles of doctors because there are so few doctors due to "brain drain"...nurses caring for upwards of 20 patients each. unheard of conditions... and then the private system where they ask first for your credit card, then what's wrong with you. impeccably clean, well-maintained places where the country's leaders get their care as those who cannot afford it wait on line.

now. do i believe that is what would happen here? most likely not. but it makes me ask questions and try to get answers on how we can get things back on track without erasing the middle class with tax increases.

ok. phew. didnt mean to ramble on there. my original query is what I'd like to focus on... alternative ways to cut debt and help fund important things like healthcare and education.

sorry to hear of your wife's predicament... its rough atm, which is why the military nursing is looking more like where my course will take me. best of luck to you both as well.

[newcarver]

Apparently, many med students owe $200,000-plus in private ldender (but Fed-backed) loans at 8% interest by the time they're able to practice, and earn, fully. This is cited as a major reason that we have too many "high-income" specialists, and a 30-plus percent shortage of needed general practitioners, especially in rural and high poverty areas.

Why not either reduce, substantially, the interest rate for students who agree to practice as GP's for, say, 4 years when they're "licensed", or outright forgive loan portions (or, alternatively, offer substantial scholarships) for aspiring M.D.'s who make similar agreements to practice in needed fields, i.e., gerontology, family medicine, etc? Especially if, again, they'll agree to practice in rural and/or high poverty areas for a significant period. "Affordable", early GP screening and care can drastically reduce the incidence of very expensive, delayed diagnosis chronic conditions.

Similar incentives could be given to motivated nursing students.

Sounds like a Win/Win to me!

BB

There are current federal programs which pay back some of the med loans if you practice in a rural area. Won't pay them all back but around $25,000 of it over 3 yrs. Better than nothing, but most Dr.s have loans in excess of $100,000 and have to pay interest on it. You're idea sounds good to me.

[newcarver]

Sure!

Why not have burden the fed with every more power & control to dictate a quota based, tax-payer funded student loan program that rewards biased schools of 'higher-education' with plenty o cash at the expense of moderate schools while downright penalizing schools that dare have alternate political personalities . . .

and what say we cut you a check to cover your past expenses today?

sounds great

I guess you work for a finance company too. You don't want them to lose all their profits at the expense of people's education. I went through college with the least amount of loans I could get by with. Lived off ramen noodles, worked part time/full time while taking a full course load. I still had to depend on loans to get by and I went to school in one of the cheapest states for college if you were a resident (NC). A lot worse at the private universities and other states. I paid off my loans while having to pay $1000's back in interest to private financial companies. You must have had everything handed to you by you parents or something What is wrong with getting loans at low to no interest from the Gov and paying them back? You have been watching too much Fox News and listening to right wing talk show propoganda.

[Petrol]

One would have to ask, Petrol, by which schools do you speak of that have 'alternate political personalities'? Berkely, as an example, could be thought of by some to have a rather 'liberal' political personality...and yet they don't seem penalized. Others, such as Duke, have a MUCH more conservative general outlook, but I don't really see them being penalized either...and they are about as opposite, politically, from Berkely, as one can get. By which side of the median do you speak when you ascribe "alternate"? Jes wunderin'.

And on that same token..how do you define a school that is "biased" and why juxtapose that with "moderate"? Moderate in what way?

I'm just a little confused.

and quite easily so, j/k :)

my point is simple. an all intrusive big-gov is a major problem for all, be the school in question liberal or conservitive, if/when control of big-gov lie in the hands of the opposition.

you see unlike your average lib, I don't bother carrying around two sets of standards ;)

[Petrol]

I guess you work for a finance company too. You don't want them to lose all their profits at the expense of people's education. I went through college with the least amount of loans I could get by with. Lived off ramen noodles, worked part time/full time while taking a full course load. I still had to depend on loans to get by and I went to school in one of the cheapest states for college if you were a resident (NC). A lot worse at the private universities and other states. I paid off my loans while having to pay $1000's back in interest to private financial companies. You must have had everything handed to you by you parents or something What is wrong with getting loans at low to no interest from the Gov and paying them back? You have been watching too much Fox News and listening to right wing talk show propoganda.

"at the EXPENSE of people's education" . . . PLEASE!

WTF is so wrong with a bank/finance company making a buck off a loan, or is higher-education now a 'Right' as well

I'll make it simple for you. I don't care if you had to dine at the dumpster-dive-thru, shop at the salvation army grab-n-go, and sleep at the pasteboard inn. Get you hands back in your own dang pockets.

YOU decided to 'Buy' it (higher-ed)...

YOU took loans to 'Buy' it...

YOU must be held responsible for the repayment of those loans.

btw, talk of confusion... you argue that I must have had everything handed to me AND then demand support for greedy big-gov dependancy. Typical. I suggest someone swear off huffpo.

No, Nothing was handed to me, and I learned the importance of personal responsibility and the rewards there in, rather then 'collectivism' and their need to steal from producers to make up for 'depenants' shortcomings because of it.

someone JUST proved Thom right

"Among the many other questions raised by the nebulous concept of ‘greed' is why it is a term applied almost exclusively to those who want to earn more money or keep what they have already earned – never to those wanting to take other people's money in taxes or to those wishing to live on the largess dispensed from such taxation." — Thomas Sowell

[newcarver]

I want to point out some things that show your thought process is broken.

1) You don't want your tax $'s to be LOANED to a student to be paid back. You would rather have tax $'s GIVEN to a for profit corporation so that company will LOAN their money to the student for a profit. YOU SUPPORT CORPORATE WELLFARE IN THE FORM OF SUBSIDIES.

2) You won't ride at a resort that enforces the ski code when someone rides recklessly and injures another skier or rider. YOU WON'T GO TO DURANGO MOUNTAIN RESORT BECAUSE OF THIS?

3) You think you need antique 3 strap bidings to be able to carve in softies? YOU JUST PURCHASED BURTON TORQUES AND SAID THAT NOW YOU WILL BE ABLE TO CARVE IN SOFTIES AGAIN.

You must be totally misinformed or stupid is all I can say. And please don't come out west to ski. We don't need anyone like you around to ruin our paradise. That is all I will say to you. You are a waste of time and effort.

[Petrol]

I want to point out some things that show your thought process is broken.

:lol:

K, now you're showing your azz so I'll try to help you out with an opportunity tocover it a bit

1) HOW is requiring a debtor to pay his own dang debts 'corporate-welfare'?

2) Until such point as you & yours manage to wrist away any remaining control I have over my own damn money, I can chose to spend it where and when I want, AND for whatever reason I want. Beit at a resort sans courtesy-nazis like Finn's friend or one that excludes snowboarding altogether. It's MINE.

3) Again, IT'S MINE. Should I decide to break out my old softboots out and ride retro, rather then run out and buy a new boots, binders & a metal BX board with $$$ that could otherwise be TAKEN from me from your beloved Taxman who can without doubt put it to better use, tough-titties to ya.

and when next you post something so misinformed, hate filled or stupid, please take a minute to consider the face you are unmasking for all to see.

whatever, I'll give you the benifit of doubt and say you're just being cranky because your season is over for some reason...

BACK ON TOPIC...

I hope that now some folks are seeing that this whole "health-care" bill is Far more about Power, Control & Taxation then it is your health.

AND it is being shoved down your thoats by the party of intolorance and greed!

:popcorn:

[Buell]

I hope that now some folks are seeing that this whole "health-care" bill is Far more about Power, Control & Taxation then it is your health.

AND it is being shoved down your thoats by the party of intolorance and greed!

Um, yeah, wow.

[boarderboy]

the question wasn't "how did we get here?", rather, since we are here (broke/deeply in debt) where does the money come from? unquote]

BUT I'm very confident that if we want to raise it, we CAN raise it, and that the President IS very serious about busting the deficits with cuts and with additional revenues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/us/politics/18simpson.html?scp=1&sq=Alan%20Simpson&st=cse

Obama has already shown himself willing to buck the "lefty liberals" of his party and has reaped a veritable firestorm of criticism from them (including yours truly.) And even the much-despised Nancy Pelosi has stated she's willing to look at some sort of consumption tax.

I, personally, have no problem with a VAT. But then, again, I've never thought the "middle class" was really over-taxed.

HOWEVER, what I'm very determined to achieve for myself, and for millions of others who've been brutalized by private sector health insurers, is the ability to choose between private health plans and some sort of "Public Option".

You see, with a public option, I'm "on the board", so to speak, of the insurer. If the execs try to screw me, or others, I can try to "throw the bums out."

I can't do that at the moment. As a matter of fact, through my State Employees Health Plan, I have to support Blue Cross/Shield of N.C. And they, strangely enough, have been one of the most ardent and active opponents of any kind of public option, with the help of my money!!

So gimme a public option, liberate all employers from the albatross of having to provide employee health care, and then tax my consumption. (As a start, a base price of $3.50/gal for unleaded regular would do wonders for our dependence on foreign oil.)

Finally, if you do choose to "wear the uniform", I know you'll do it with pride and excellence. The women and men who serve our country deserve the very best.

Again, peace, and following seas.

BB

[Petrol]

the President IS very serious about busting the deficits with cuts...

REALLY? :lol:

Obama has already shown himself willing to buck the "lefty liberals" of his party and has reaped a veritable firestorm of criticism from them (including yours truly.)

Bucked them how?

by expanding the 'warrentless-wiretapping" to say that no one has the epected right to privacy on their cell phone? By renigging on his promise to bring the troops home from Iraq?

And even the much-despised Nancy Pelosi has stated she's willing to look at some sort of consumption tax.

As if she'd ever seen a tax she would be unwilling to impose?

BTW, I also have no problem with a VAT (Value Added Tax, sounds nice don't it) PROVIDED that it be a REPLACEMENT for the needlessly confusing, unfair and expensive to implement Progressive Federal Income Tax code.

You see, with a public option, I'm "on the board", so to speak, of the insurer. If the execs try to screw me, or others, I can try to "throw the bums out."

I can't do that at the moment. As a matter of fact, through my State Employees Health Plan, I have to support Blue Cross/Shield of N.C. And they, strangely enough, have been one of the most ardent and active opponents of any kind of public option, with the help of my money!!

As I've said before, one of the biggest the problems folks are having is that They are NOT the customer. Meaning Your employeer, not You, is the 'consumer' of the health insurance providers services.

If You truely were able to shop for your best compromise of cost, benifits and risks, across state lines, as you do for auto insurance, things would change. You want a and con afford a Cadillac, buy a Cadillac, you want a Toyota but can only afford a Kia, I here the Soel is a good choice

Yep, we could see real change, without needless expansion of an already to imposing 'big-gov', if folks 'spent' healthcare dollars as if it were their own dollars. At present

...(As a start, a base price of $3.50/gal for unleaded regular would do wonders for our dependence on foreign oil.)...

ONLY if the modern home of socialists within the enviro-mentalists roll over and play dead.

BTW II, Am I alone in understanding that Taxes are not only a means of revenue generation for governments, but that they also serve to "nudge" folks away from behaviors (smoking).

the greater the tax, the bigger the "nudge", the less revenue generated as behaviors change.

[newcarver]

"

Heath Insurance Companies Drop Plan to Exploit Loophole in Bill

The nation’s top insurance companies, meanwhile, have pledged to comply with a provision in the new healthcare law requiring them to cover children with pre-existing medical conditions. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius had written top insurers on Monday after reports emerged the companies were mulling exploiting what they saw as a loophole that would allow them to delay compliance until 2014. On Tuesday, the trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans said insurers will “fully comply” with the new rules. The Wall Street Journal, meanwhile, reports America’s Health Insurance Plans and the US Chamber of Commerce have formed separate task forces to help influence the regulatory process of implementing the new healthcare law. In a letter to board members, US Chamber of Commerce president Thomas Donahue said the task force will “participate in the years-long process of writing the thousands of pages of federal regulations that will implement the many provisions of this legislation.” Donahue also says the Chamber plans on spending $50 million this summer and fall to help defeat vulnerable Democratic candidates who supported the healthcare bill."

[newcarver]

1) HOW is requiring a debtor to pay his own dang debts 'corporate-welfare'?

You must have not read what I wrote? Tax Payer funded subsidies to financial institutions is a form of welfare. Try and find out how many of our tax $'s are given to private businesses. Also, tell me how much is given in the form of tax credits, incentives, and tax breaks. The average tax paid by a corporation is 18%. The oil and gas industry pays only 11%. Most any cleanup is paid by tax $'s. You ever heard of superfund sites? How much do you pay in taxes? I know I pay around 30-33% of my income. Corporate welfare is real and we the people pay for it.

[pebu]

BTW II, Am I alone in understanding that Taxes are not only a means of revenue generation for governments, but that they also serve to "nudge" folks away from behaviors (smoking).

the greater the tax, the bigger the "nudge", the less revenue generated as behaviors change.

In fact, the combination of income tax and welfare has nudged alot of people to not even work.

[newcarver]

In fact, the combination of income tax and welfare has nudged alot of people to not even work.

There are always some who will take advantage of the system and are just plain lazy. These people will not get very far in life and will always be a burden on the system. The system needs to be set up to promote someone to get ahead or kick them off the system unless they are truely in need. And once they get ahead they would be cut off from the system support. One way would be through providing affordable education and child care for someone to be able to get a decent paying job. I would also like to see mandatory drug testing.

[Petrol]

1) HOW is requiring a debtor to pay his own dang debts 'corporate-welfare'?

You must have not read what I wrote? Tax Payer funded subsidies to financial institutions is a form of welfare. Try and find out how many of our tax $'s are given to private businesses. Also, tell me how much is given in the form of tax credits, incentives, and tax breaks. The average tax paid by a corporation is 18%. The oil and gas industry pays only 11%. Most any cleanup is paid by tax $'s. You ever heard of superfund sites? How much do you pay in taxes? I know I pay around 30-33% of my income. Corporate welfare is real and we the people pay for it.

<TABLE style="WIDTH: 270pt; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=360 x:str><COLGROUP><COL style="WIDTH: 270pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 13165" width=360><TBODY><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; WIDTH: 270pt; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" id=td_post_301196 class=xl24 height=20 width=360 x:str="ya, I read what you wrote. ">ya, I read what you wrote.

</TD></TR>

<TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20>You buy the big-gov storyline that outlawing private encouragement to private firms to take on the added risks associated with student lending through federal subsidies will "save" $61 billion over ten years.</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20>You probably also believe them when they tell you that their 'draconian' spending cuts are Really cuts, instead of the slight reductions of the previously approved exorbitant budget increases.</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20></TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20 x:str="Further, your premise that Tax Credits and reduction incentives are welfare, just crazy. ">Further, your premise that Tax Credits and reduction incentives are welfare, just crazy. </TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20>First off, a little secrete for you. Corporation don't 'really' pay taxes, they pass them along to the consumer wrapped up in the cost of the goods & services. Higher taxes for them equal higher cost to you with the added risk that if the taxes are to high, the availability of those goods & services vanish.</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20></TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20 x:str='What is being done with these "subsidies" is the encouragement of a desired activity. For example, in the case of the Oil & Gas industry we ALL desperately need energy. It is a Requirement to our very survival. '>What is being done with these "subsidies" is the encouragement of a desired activity. For example, in the case of the Oil & Gas industry we ALL desperately need energy. It is a Requirement to our very survival. </TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20>The exploration, production and distribution of affordable Oil & Gas (and Coal and Nuke and Wind & Solar for that matter, though at variable rates) consume absolutely incredible of money that is put at very great risk of evaporation should any part of that triangle fail.</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20></TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20>BTW, yes I've heard of "Super-Fund" sites. In case you don't know, many of those sites where money is being spent are sites where previous government regulations & acceptable disposal methods were utilized but later found to be insufficient. Some fault must lay with those past regulators, as well as with current regulators who demand sites be returned to economically unviable levels of pristine condition.</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20></TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; HEIGHT: 15pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8" class=xl23 height=20 x:str='BTW II, I estimate that approximately 44 percent of my income is taken from me by the "taxman". '>BTW II, I estimate that approximately 44 percent of my income is taken from me by the "taxman". </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[newcarver]

What do you say about the TARP funds that were given out, starting with the Bush administration? $19,000,000,000 of those tax payer dollars went to pay executive compensation (bonuses for CEO's). They gave themselves these bonuses after failing at running a company, which is why we, the tax payers, had to bail them out in the 1st place. I would have to say that corporate America has pulled the wool over your eyes and make you believe they are on your side. You should see the mansions that sit vacant at my local resort for 50 weeks out of the year. Most of these vacation homes belong to these CEOs. These are usually 1 of many homes like this around the world. I'm talking multimillion dollar homes full of luxury items. They just fly in, have someone pick them up at the airport and go to their fully furnished vacant houses for 2 weeks to ski. They actually get a tax break for owning these homes. They probably pay less in taxes than you or I do. This is the result of corporate welfare. Tell me how much CEO salaries have gone up over the last 4 decades and compare that with workers salary. You will see an exponential increase in the CEO salary with little growth for their workers. If given the chance, they will save a $ in the name of profit at any cost to the worker. They don't care about them, they only care about profit margins. If you can't see that you truely are blind to reality.

[newcarver]

As far as oil & gas exploration, why not just give them tax credit for their expenses after wards? Kind of like itemized deductions. Instead, tax dollars are given to them 1st and they make record profits all the while being able to charge whatever they want at the gas pumps due to speculation of crude oil prices. Makes no sense the way things run currently. The reason they can get these "subsidies" is because they sure do spend some money on lobbying. Didn't hurt that the former administration was run by two oil men either. Maybe you forgot that the former VP was the CEO of a big oil company and got $67,000,000 severance pay to become VP and still got paid a salary while in office. Sounds like a huge conflict of interest. Just so happens that we go to war in a country that has one of the worlds largest oil reserves too. All the while his former company and its many subsidiaries racks up billion in tax payer $'s in nobid contracts. Hmmm. I think they really fooled you.

[pebu]

What do you say about the TARP funds that were given out, starting with the Bush administration? $19,000,000,000 of those tax payer dollars went to pay executive compensation (bonuses for CEO's). They gave themselves these bonuses after failing at running a company, which is why we, the tax payers, had to bail them out in the 1st place. I would have to say that corporate America has pulled the wool over your eyes and make you believe they are on your side.

Can you clarify how the government giving money to corporations is the corporation pulling the wool over our eyes? The way I see it, it is the government trying to pull the wool over our eyes saying that these companies are necessary to the country, therefore we're going to take your money and give it to them.

Believe me, if something is necessary to the people it will thrive. If the government would stay out of the way those companies would have to fight harder to give the people what they want because there is the possibility that they will go under if they don't.

And if they DO go under, so be it. The human race is an industrious one. We'll figure out a way to get around not having that company around, IE, if the big three go down then other companies will rise from the dust offering even better vehicles. Cheaper, faster, lower emissions, whatever the "need" is.

[newcarver]

Can you clarify how the government giving money to corporations is the corporation pulling the wool over our eyes? The way I see it, it is the government trying to pull the wool over our eyes saying that these companies are necessary to the country, therefore we're going to take your money and give it to them.

Believe me, if something is necessary to the people it will thrive. If the government would stay out of the way those companies would have to fight harder to give the people what they want because there is the possibility that they will go under if they don't.

And if they DO go under, so be it. The human race is an industrious one. We'll figure out a way to get around not having that company around, IE, if the big three go down then other companies will rise from the dust offering even better vehicles. Cheaper, faster, lower emissions, whatever the "need" is.

I pretty much agree with everything you say. I just think that the corporate interests are the ones pulling the strings of the government. The government should stay out of their business, as far as bailouts, but should have regulated the financial sector more so the farce would not have happened in the 1st place.