But Germany isn't just the Bismarck model... they also have a Beveridge-type direct price-control over services. Government regulation isn't just over insurance, but directly over prices of services and fees. There's no vouchers in Germany. Everybody simply has access to care. As I said, it's a lot closer to what servicemen get with the VA.
Well you are trying to argue fine details when that's not the point I was making. I'm just saying if you project forward the GOP/Ryan healthcare proposals you can see a path (with democrat tweaking) for it to become similar to the German system.
Now with Obamacare, although he claims he gave us a framework that can be built upon, I don't see it taking us in any particular direction with future modifications. Do you?
I see the Ryan proposal as a path to the out-of-pocket system. Basically, we give you X amount of money indexed to the CPI (not actual healthcare costs) and if it's not enough tough cookie, you pay the rest (how? nobody knows). Couldn't be further away from Germany. It's actually closer to the Congo type of system: if you have money, you get care, if you don't then tough luck.
Barrycare is disastrous because, once again, doesn't address cost, thus it's a system inherently out of control. With the addition of cost controls, you can put Medicare on a path to what the NHI system is in Canada. I just don't think there's political will to implement such cost controls though.
Both systems don't tackle the real problem here: healthcare costs. We can dance around this all day long, but unless we actually address how we're going to tame/cap what's paid for services and fees, we're not tackling the problem.
How does that make him a denier? Isn't he a skeptic instead?
Paul Ryan’s Guru Ayn Rand Worshipped a Serial Killer Who Kidnapped and Dismembered Little Girls
There’s something deeply unsettling about living in a country where millions of people go frothing bat angry at the suggestion that maybe health care coverage should be extended to the tens of millions of Americans who don’t have it; or when they froth at the mouth in ecstasy at the thought of privatizing and slashing bedrock social programs like Social Security or Medicare. It might not be as hard to stomach if other Western countries also had a large, vocal chunk of their population who thought like this, but the US is seemingly the only place where right-wing elites can openly share their distaste for the working poor. Where do they find their philosophical justification for this kind of at ude?
It turns out, you can trace much of this thinking back to Ayn Rand, a popular cult-philosopher who plays Charlie to the American right-wing’s Manson Family. Read on and you’ll see why.
One reason why most countries don’t find the time to embrace her thinking is that Ayn Rand is a textbook sociopath. Literally a sociopath: Ayn Rand, in her notebooks, worshiped a notorious serial murderer-dismemberer, and used this killer as an early model for the type of “ideal man” that Rand promoted in her more famous books — ideas which were later picked up on and put into play by major right-wing figures of the past half decade, including the key architects of America’s most recent economic catastrophe — former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan and SEC Commissioner Chris Cox — along with other notable right-wing Republicans such as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Rush Limbaugh, Rep. Paul Ryan, and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/...=Google+Reader
So you're saying Willard picked a running mate he disagrees with economically and they won't run on the same plan? That would be an even bigger disaster for Willard, tbh...
Here, this article is a pretty good explanation of the German system.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=91971406
Gecko's people are saying Gecko would have signed Ryan's 2 sociopathic budgets if he were Pres.So you're saying Willard picked a running mate he disagrees with economically and they won't run on the same plan? That would be an even bigger disaster for Willard, tbh...
Gecko endorsed Ryan's budgets in the primaries.
Gecko now HAS a specific budget policy and budget, now that he's adopted Ryan.
Why Romney’s Budget Plan Requires Even Deeper Cuts Than Ryan’s
– Under the Ryan plan, core defense spending (the defense budget other than war costs and some relatively small items such as military family housing),[11] would total about $5.7 trillion over the ten-year period 2013-2022. The Romney plan would increase core defense spending to $7.9 trillion. The Ryan plan increases core defense funding modestly relative to the existing BCA caps, but core defense would nevertheless decline to 2.6 percent of GDP by 2022. In contrast, Governor Romney would increase core defense to 4 percent of GDP.
– The Ryan plan would cut en lement and discretionary programs (outside of core defense and net interest) by $5.2 trillion over ten years.[12] The Romney proposal would cut this spending by between $7.0 trillion and $9.6 trillion, depending upon whether the budget is balanced. Thus, Governor Romney’s ten-year cuts would range from one-third deeper than those in the Ryan budget to almost twice as deep as the Ryan cuts.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...t-deeper-cuts/
Ryan to Release 2 Years of Taxes
They’re already working as a team. Bushy-tailed new GOP vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan said Sunday that he’ll be releasing only as many tax returns as presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney—two years’ worth. Most Democrats, and likely some Republicans as well, are likely to find that underwhelming. Ryan declined to divulge how many years of returns he’d made available during the vetting process, though the going-over by Romney’s camp was “very exhaustive,” he said in an interview with 60 Minutes. “It’s a confidential vetting process, so there were several years,” he said.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/...=Cheat%20Sheet
Ryan obviously can't be more open than Gecko.
Born wealthy, secretive, sociopathic, what a plutocratic pair!
Yeah, boutons, Ryan eats small children and old Democrats......
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...-visions-.htmlI keep reading smart people who say that Mitt Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate will produce the anic clash of visions that we’ve supposedly all been waiting for. Ryan will fill in the grey zones of Romneyism, bolstering Romney’s ideological bona fides and bringing the ghost of Ayn Rand into the ring against the spectral tag team of Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson.
Over the next three months, Democrats will do their best to produce that epic battle. In choosing Ryan, Romney appears willing to aide his opponents’ strategy.
Yet there is reason to be skeptical that Romney has just embraced a Manichean struggle. Romney’s campaign is emerging from two weeks of brutal scrutiny of his budget plan. After analyzing the plan on Romney’s own terms, the Tax Policy Center concluded it was “mathematically impossible.”
If Romney wants an epic clash of visions, he doesn’t need Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, on his ticket. He only needs to insert real numbers in his own plan, revealing that the only way to provide his upper-income tax cuts without exploding the national debt is to initiate a sharp retrenchment of government outlays that benefit middle-class and poor Americans. Romney chose not to do that either because he deems it political suicide or because he wants the details sufficiently vague that he can shake free of them if he’s elected president; most likely both.
His selection of Ryan doesn’t clarify that intentional muddle. A Romney plan that deliberately doesn’t add up is now complemented by a Ryan plan that deliberately doesn’t add up. As Ezra Klein explains here, Ryan’s plan assumes that the federal government will eventually shrink to the point that it consists of defense, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And Medicare would be drastically revised. (In essence, the U.S. government would at last be small enough for Grover Norquist to fulfill his dream of drowning it in a bathtub.)
Would a President Romney and a Republican Congress prove willing to inflict high levels of pain on the poor and middle class while further reducing historically low taxes on the wealthy? What of the Republican donors – the contractors and corporate welfare recipients – who feed so well at the federal trough? Do they passively watch their subsidies circle the bathtub drain? Does Mitch McConnell look like a man who wants to run the Senate for two years of ideological glory before surrendering power for a generation in an electoral backlash?
How convenient that Ryan's ideal government consists only of warmongering and Baby Boomer handouts... basically a neocon's wet dream, tbh... not conservative, no principles, only wanting to be elected, and this ticket is supposed to be BETTER than Obama?
"Would a President Romney and a Republican Congress prove willing to inflict high levels of pain on the poor and middle class while further reducing historically low taxes on the wealthy?"
Why is this even a question? THERE IS NO QUESTION, they would be willing. They've been saying exactly that for decades.
They want to "take the country back" for the 1%, no matter how hard they the 99%.
Nobody listens or believes what the Repugs and conservatives have been saying repeatedly for years?
Don’t know anything about him but he does not have the decency to wear a tie at his Romney introduction event right in front of the USS Wisconsin…Weird Alfalfa hair cut going on…Talking about US jobs but Probably drives a Prius…Does not strike me as overly intelligent…Would have rather had real guy "Christie" or "Condoleezza"…
http://nationaljournal.com/2012-pres...0120812?page=2In broad strokes, that agenda generates enthusiastic support among blue-collar and older white voters who have grown increasingly resistant to government spending, particularly for transfer programs to the poor, and the taxes required to fund them. In the 2010 national exit poll, for instance, two-thirds of non-college whites said “government is doing too many things better left to businesses and people,” while only 29 percent agreed that “government should do more to solve problems.” In a Pew Research Center for the People and the Press survey last year exploring the contrasting at udes among American generations, 62 percent of the aging white baby boom-and an even more resounding 67 percent of the older “silent” generation-said they preferred a smaller government that offers fewer services to a larger government that provides more. And in that same survey, a majority of both the baby boomers and seniors said they supported the repeal of the new Obama health care law, which according to other polls many of them primarily view as a welfare program for the poor. In the 2010 exit poll, nearly three-fifths of non-college whites also supported repeal.
But among both blue-collar and older whites at udes about Medicare are very different. In March, the United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll offered respondents two options for the program. Just 19 percent of whites older than 65 endorsed Ryan’s approach, which said “Medicare should be changed to a system where the government provides seniors with a fixed sum of money they could use either to purchase private health insurance or to pay the cost of remaining in the current Medicare program.” Fully 74 percent of white seniors said instead that “Medicare should continue as it is today, with the government providing health insurance and paying doctors and hospitals directly for the services they provide to seniors.” Among non-college whites, 63 percent said they preferred the current system, while only 26 percent backed Ryan’s approach. (Ryan’s plan also drew opposition not only from 66 percent of college-educated white women -- consistently the most Democratic-leaning component of the white electorate -- but even 60 percent of college-educated men, an audience usually receptive to anti-government arguments.)
Generally surveys find white women more resistant to changes in the safety net than white men (although the specific Congressional Connection Poll on Ryan’s plan didn’t show that pattern.) If Ryan’s plan remains a central focus through the fall, it would not be surprising if that debate widened the gender gap -- potentially helping the Republican ticket with men most receptive to the sort of broad anti-government arguments Ryan unfurled in his announcement speech Saturday, but hurting it with white women.
Still smaller than an Obama budget. You may disagree with the spending prioritization/allocation, but that doesn't make it "larger government." Thus, my claim still holds true.
based on ten year projections and everybody doing what they say.
in all likelihood, both of you are probably wrong
lol dueling with paper swords
Paul Ryan Vowed To ‘Protect’ Social Security In A Lockbox, And Other Fun Facts From His First Congressional Run
http://thinkprogress.org/election/20...yan-1998-race/
lol thinkprogress
What a surprise! People support gov't programs that directly benefit them!
Romney Officially Embraces Ryan’s Plan For Medicare
Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign sought to distance the former Massachusetts governor from Paul Ryan’s controversial Medicare privatization plan on Saturday, but by Monday, Romney fully embraced his running mate’s proposal. During a press availability in Miami, Romney turned down three opportunities to explain how his vision would differ from Ryan’s, telling reporters, “my plan for Medicare is very similar to his plan for Medicare.”
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012...-for-medicare/
It was a fun race while it lasted...
You honestly think it's over? Before the money has really started flowing?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
