I haven't thoroughly pissed off any of my more liberal friends lately, so I decided that it was time to 'take off the gloves' again, regarding healthcare.
As is true with nearly every tidbit fed to us by the media, I think that it is sometimes wise to question their facts, fact-finding process, and even their core assumptions.
For 2 years (since the beginning of the primary races), the media has been whole-heartedly supporting the candidate's cry for healthcare with universal coverage. As the healthcare debate has rambled on, I think that very few people have ever looked at the basis for the whole debate.... Do we really need a trillion dollar bill to extend healthcare to an additional 10% of the country (that's all the currently debated bill will cover)?
The following facts were found on google by searching out various websites, including the Illinois public aid office, department of health and family services, patient's first (non-partisan grassroots healthcare forum), rasmussen reports, etc.
In Illinois, a family of 3 (mom, dad, sonny-boy) are eligible for public aid up to 200% of the national poverty level. This means that at an income of $3052/month, there is still no cost to the family for their healthcare. Now, I'm not saying that 36K/year is a comfortable income. I am saying that no one will starve at 36K/year...AND they are still eligible for Medicaid. This seems to substantiate some claims being made by rasmussen and others that over 40% of the uninsured americans fall into one of two categories: are eligible for public aid, but CHOOSE not to apply, OR have income levels in excess of 75K/year, meaning that they could afford a modest healthplan but CHOOSE not to. This brings up a couple of disturbing thoughts to me. First, why can't the lower/middle-class afford healthcare? I happen to manage an indigent clinic. Let me tell you some FACTS about this population group:
1. every single one of them has a cell phone. Is a cell phone a necessity? 20 years ago, no one knew what one was, so I hardly think so. A convenience, yes...but a necessity? please. So this begs the questions, how much does the average cell phone bill run per month? I'd put money on about $100 month.
2. a huge number of people smoke cigarettes. I don't smoke, so I don't know prices other than what I see advertised in convenience stores. In chicago: about 7 bucks a pack. so, at a pack a day, that is $210/month.
3. most drink alcohol socially. Let's guesstimate that that is 2 drinks, twice a week. In a chicago bar, a beer is $4.50, a mixed drink is $6.00. far argument's sake, let's say one of each, to try to reach a fair norm. that's $20/week (with no tip) or about $80/month.
4. we validate parking, so I know that many of these patients have cars. a car may be an arguable necessity in the country, but it is not a necessity in the city. Average car payment nationwide: $250/month, plus $80/month for insurance.
STEPS FURTHER, because I notice things and listen.
5. many come in with hair extensions and fake nails. price? $100/month
6. many come in wearing designer clothes, prada shoes, coach purses. I'm not even going to guess a cost, because I can't afford that stuff, MYSELF.
7. they bring their kids in, sporting cell phones, hand-held playstations, and talking about their Wii's.
so what's my point? Easy. I read a letter the other day from a Physician who hit the nail on the head. We don't have a healthcare crisis, we have a lifestyle crisis. If you pick and choose only a COUPLE of the lifetyles above, most people have enough money to purchase major healthcare insurance, but CHOOSE to squander their money on other things. Then, they cry that the health insurance industry is unfair, so the government should step in and give them the insurance for free...not because they can't afford it, but because they don't want to change their lifestyle.
the kicker? the things that I have listed (and observed) above are public aid patients, which means that they are under the 36K scenerio...and they can STILL afford these amenities. How much more-so the people making 50 or 60K?
We need healthcare reform, and I'm not saying that we don't...but until we have some lifestyle priorities reformed, it will do little good.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Healthcare Summit
So the media is on a frenzy talking about the healthcare summit on Friday. FOX is reporting how unfair it is to Republicans, the others are all reporting an Obama triumph for bi-partisanship.
I've decided that the best way to really get a feel for what is going with the national healthcare debate is to take healthcare OUT of the equation and look at it from a common-sense, easily related-to scenerio: a family vacation.
In our scenerio, we have:
Dad (Obama, congressional Demo's)
Mom (congressional Repub's)
Kids (americans)
I'll do my best to keep this straightforward:
Kids: we should go on vacation, we're tired of the broken down old park!
Dad: the kids deserve vacation, the old park stinks.
Mom: can we afford vacation, maybe we can do something different at the park, maybe pitch in and fix the broken equipment?
Kids: can we take all of our friends with us?
Dad: sure, take the whole neighborhood...they deserve it.
Mom: seriously, we can't afford it if it just OUR kids... for half the money, we could make the park really nice.
Kids: can we go on a 14-day cruise of the Mediterranean islands?
Dad: sure! that sounds great! The whole neighborhood will love it. maybe they'll even close the park.
Mom: HEY! where will we come up with the money? that is 10 times more debt than we have EVER gone into!
Dad: we'll cut out on our excursions to the park and borrow some of the kids' college money.
Mom: Umm...that won't save anything and will cost us money in the future.
Dad: well, we'll just cut the allowances for the kids as well.
Mom: still won't pay for 1/10 of it. we'll need to cut out grocery money too.
Kids: ummm...no allowance cutting, no grocery cutting...maybe the park isn't so bad.
Dad: you can't have the park anymore, you said you wanted a vacation. you're getting a vacation, whether you THINK you want it or not. trust me.
Kids: we don't want to give up our allowance so that the whole neighborhood gets the same vacation as us...that's not fair. Can't we just fix up the park...it IS the nicest park in town, even if does have some problems.
Dad: no. i know best. the park needs to be torn down so we can go on a cruise.
Mom: other people like the park, it seems to me that helping to fix the park is a good investment.
Dad: i don't care who likes the park. you shouldn't be so mean to the neighborhood kids who don't have parks.
Mom: most of the neighborhood kids could go to the park if they really wanted to. If we fixed it up, we could make it beneficial to everyone.
Dad: If you all hate it, fine! We'll discuss it when we get back.
Mom/Kids: once we do that, we won't have money to fix up the park, and the park will be gone.
Dad: Fine, we are going to have a family "vacation" summit. You will then tell me which parts of my vacation plan you want to change. maybe a 13-day cruise instead?
Mom: no one can afford ANY part of your vacation plan! We need to start over.
Dad: I'm telling the kids that you just aren't cooperating, and that you are a whiney, selfish person that just wants to say "no." You should be ashamed of yourself for hating the neighborhood kids!
Kids: you KNOW we can hear you, right Dad?
Dad: shut up. I'll tell you when to think.
I've decided that the best way to really get a feel for what is going with the national healthcare debate is to take healthcare OUT of the equation and look at it from a common-sense, easily related-to scenerio: a family vacation.
In our scenerio, we have:
Dad (Obama, congressional Demo's)
Mom (congressional Repub's)
Kids (americans)
I'll do my best to keep this straightforward:
Kids: we should go on vacation, we're tired of the broken down old park!
Dad: the kids deserve vacation, the old park stinks.
Mom: can we afford vacation, maybe we can do something different at the park, maybe pitch in and fix the broken equipment?
Kids: can we take all of our friends with us?
Dad: sure, take the whole neighborhood...they deserve it.
Mom: seriously, we can't afford it if it just OUR kids... for half the money, we could make the park really nice.
Kids: can we go on a 14-day cruise of the Mediterranean islands?
Dad: sure! that sounds great! The whole neighborhood will love it. maybe they'll even close the park.
Mom: HEY! where will we come up with the money? that is 10 times more debt than we have EVER gone into!
Dad: we'll cut out on our excursions to the park and borrow some of the kids' college money.
Mom: Umm...that won't save anything and will cost us money in the future.
Dad: well, we'll just cut the allowances for the kids as well.
Mom: still won't pay for 1/10 of it. we'll need to cut out grocery money too.
Kids: ummm...no allowance cutting, no grocery cutting...maybe the park isn't so bad.
Dad: you can't have the park anymore, you said you wanted a vacation. you're getting a vacation, whether you THINK you want it or not. trust me.
Kids: we don't want to give up our allowance so that the whole neighborhood gets the same vacation as us...that's not fair. Can't we just fix up the park...it IS the nicest park in town, even if does have some problems.
Dad: no. i know best. the park needs to be torn down so we can go on a cruise.
Mom: other people like the park, it seems to me that helping to fix the park is a good investment.
Dad: i don't care who likes the park. you shouldn't be so mean to the neighborhood kids who don't have parks.
Mom: most of the neighborhood kids could go to the park if they really wanted to. If we fixed it up, we could make it beneficial to everyone.
Dad: If you all hate it, fine! We'll discuss it when we get back.
Mom/Kids: once we do that, we won't have money to fix up the park, and the park will be gone.
Dad: Fine, we are going to have a family "vacation" summit. You will then tell me which parts of my vacation plan you want to change. maybe a 13-day cruise instead?
Mom: no one can afford ANY part of your vacation plan! We need to start over.
Dad: I'm telling the kids that you just aren't cooperating, and that you are a whiney, selfish person that just wants to say "no." You should be ashamed of yourself for hating the neighborhood kids!
Kids: you KNOW we can hear you, right Dad?
Dad: shut up. I'll tell you when to think.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
How to destroy a society
I am more and more troubled by the expectations of society. A free-trade society is what made this country great. People immigrated to this country with an idea so revolutionary that it was even named, "the American Dream." This dream was to live in a society where hard work paid off, innovation flourished, and even the poorest could prosper by simply putting thier hearts and minds into action. This 'drive' is what made this country great. This 'drive' has unfortunately been slowly eroded by socialism. Once, an entrepreneur could pour his life into an idea and make a fortune. Today, the same entrepreneur is slowed by power-hungry politicians, taxed to pay for those who choose not to follow the dream, extorted by unions demanding increased wages, and demonized by the liberal media.
We have become a society of 'takers' instead of a society of inventors. We have become so dependent on the government that we nearly become a welfare state without even knowing it. The more that the government dishes out, the more that we think we deserve. Thomas Jefferson once said to remember that a government can never give you anything that it has not first taken away from someone else. He also said that any government big enough to give you everything you need is also big enough to take away everything that you have.
America has lost perspective. She has gotten so invloved in setting policy to protect the minority that she has paid no attention to the majority. One person can sue and cry about thier individual rights tot he point that we take away the common rights for everyone else in the process.
The constitution and bill of rights only guaranteed us the rights to: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. No where did it promise to run our schools, our retirement programs, our indigent programs, our healthcare system, etc, etc, etc. This is a problem that runs deep into our lives as Americans. We have become accustomed to being taxed, allowing the government to take care of our needs, having little thought as to whether or not this is the best system. The government gets the money and power, while the patriot gets taxed and loses freedoms. Because the taxes rise slowly and the freedoms are lost slowly, over generations, we just accept it.
Mark my words, this cycle has happened in nearly every major civilization and it has ended in the destruction of the society. I venture to say that we will someday be victims of the same arrogant ignorance. The resignation speech of Evan Byah should be ringing strongly in the ears of every American. I believe it to be speaking to the same end. A change has to come. As the partisanship chasm grows deeper and the parties get further apart, the patriots are torn from one extreme to the other. Nothing gets solved, nothing gets better, nothing changes.
A year ago, I made a prediction in my blog. I predicted that
1. Barrack Obama would not be able to live up to his promises, despite control of the house, the senate, and the executive branch. Even with a super-majority, nothing is changing.
2. There would be a clean sweep of the incumbants in the mid-term elections...and it seems that we are on-track for that. **as a side note, make no mistake that the resignation of democratic incumbants are calculated. Polls show that a super-majority of voters hate the incumbants more than the opposing parties....the only way some democratic seats will be kept is to put in a 'new,' non-incumbant democrat. It's brilliant strategy, if it works.
And most importantly,
3. That the Republican party will split into 2 factions. I still believe this. The Republicans don't know who they are anymore. At one time, they were the party of small-government, controlled spending, state's rights, and free-market enterprise. the Republican party has not been this since 1984. Despite it's assertion of being pro-small government, GW Bush increased the size of the Federal Government by 44%. Spending increases regardless of which party is in office. The 10th amendment has been all but destroyed. Special interest groups and lobbyist have put a choke-hold on free-market.
and so, a new era IS dawning. Republicans must decide who they are. Will the 2010 Republican party be one of freedom, controlled spending, and decreasing federal Government...or will it be a party of social oppression, continued spending, negativity, and greed? If the John McCain (moderate) Republicans win the primaries, there may be a period of healing within the party. But, mark my words, if the Sarah Palin (religious right) Republicans win, there will be an exodus to a new, third party. i had once thought that it would be the Libertarians, now I am watching the "Tea" party very closely. If the Republican party splits, the moderate branch WILL pull the 'fiscal conservative'/'social moderate' Independents back to a common party. Given the current unpoularity of the nation's direction, I even venture to say that it will pull some conservative democrats too. The unfortunate thing is that the two "Republican" factions will be too small to defeat the Democrats in a three-party system.
so, to answer my title question: how do you destroy a society? Easy. base all policy on outliers, only elect extremeists, and have the governement believe they are more important than the patriot it represents. I'd say we are well on our way.
We have become a society of 'takers' instead of a society of inventors. We have become so dependent on the government that we nearly become a welfare state without even knowing it. The more that the government dishes out, the more that we think we deserve. Thomas Jefferson once said to remember that a government can never give you anything that it has not first taken away from someone else. He also said that any government big enough to give you everything you need is also big enough to take away everything that you have.
America has lost perspective. She has gotten so invloved in setting policy to protect the minority that she has paid no attention to the majority. One person can sue and cry about thier individual rights tot he point that we take away the common rights for everyone else in the process.
The constitution and bill of rights only guaranteed us the rights to: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. No where did it promise to run our schools, our retirement programs, our indigent programs, our healthcare system, etc, etc, etc. This is a problem that runs deep into our lives as Americans. We have become accustomed to being taxed, allowing the government to take care of our needs, having little thought as to whether or not this is the best system. The government gets the money and power, while the patriot gets taxed and loses freedoms. Because the taxes rise slowly and the freedoms are lost slowly, over generations, we just accept it.
Mark my words, this cycle has happened in nearly every major civilization and it has ended in the destruction of the society. I venture to say that we will someday be victims of the same arrogant ignorance. The resignation speech of Evan Byah should be ringing strongly in the ears of every American. I believe it to be speaking to the same end. A change has to come. As the partisanship chasm grows deeper and the parties get further apart, the patriots are torn from one extreme to the other. Nothing gets solved, nothing gets better, nothing changes.
A year ago, I made a prediction in my blog. I predicted that
1. Barrack Obama would not be able to live up to his promises, despite control of the house, the senate, and the executive branch. Even with a super-majority, nothing is changing.
2. There would be a clean sweep of the incumbants in the mid-term elections...and it seems that we are on-track for that. **as a side note, make no mistake that the resignation of democratic incumbants are calculated. Polls show that a super-majority of voters hate the incumbants more than the opposing parties....the only way some democratic seats will be kept is to put in a 'new,' non-incumbant democrat. It's brilliant strategy, if it works.
And most importantly,
3. That the Republican party will split into 2 factions. I still believe this. The Republicans don't know who they are anymore. At one time, they were the party of small-government, controlled spending, state's rights, and free-market enterprise. the Republican party has not been this since 1984. Despite it's assertion of being pro-small government, GW Bush increased the size of the Federal Government by 44%. Spending increases regardless of which party is in office. The 10th amendment has been all but destroyed. Special interest groups and lobbyist have put a choke-hold on free-market.
and so, a new era IS dawning. Republicans must decide who they are. Will the 2010 Republican party be one of freedom, controlled spending, and decreasing federal Government...or will it be a party of social oppression, continued spending, negativity, and greed? If the John McCain (moderate) Republicans win the primaries, there may be a period of healing within the party. But, mark my words, if the Sarah Palin (religious right) Republicans win, there will be an exodus to a new, third party. i had once thought that it would be the Libertarians, now I am watching the "Tea" party very closely. If the Republican party splits, the moderate branch WILL pull the 'fiscal conservative'/'social moderate' Independents back to a common party. Given the current unpoularity of the nation's direction, I even venture to say that it will pull some conservative democrats too. The unfortunate thing is that the two "Republican" factions will be too small to defeat the Democrats in a three-party system.
so, to answer my title question: how do you destroy a society? Easy. base all policy on outliers, only elect extremeists, and have the governement believe they are more important than the patriot it represents. I'd say we are well on our way.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Mr Obama, what DO you believe?
For 2 years prior to the last election we heard the frustration of the american people about the governmental machine. the 2008 election was, in my mind, a referendum about politics and government as a whole.
Americans were angry and frustrated. We had an unpopular war (or 2) that continued to drag on for years longer than we had hoped; we saw neighbors and friends losing jobs; we saw businesses closing; we saw retirement svings plans evaporate; we saw banks foreclosing on homes. then, we saw our tax dollars given to the banks to keep them afloat, while the banks continued to foreclose on dreams and hoard our hard-earned tax dollars. This was a final blow to the resolve and patience of the American people
There was an internal cry for something different than the "status quo." As the people watched the candidates, they were caught up in the idealism of a government 'newcomer' in touch with the American people and full of hope, ready for change, ready to fight corporate greed that was so destroying our country.
And so, history was made. We elected, by proxy, a referendum on change.
The question is, what did we actually get?
A year into this new administration, built on the principles of hope and change, what has actually changed?
Bush said a tax rebate would stimulate the economy and it failed to do so. The public hated him.
Obama believed Bush was an idiot but said that a tax rebate would stimulate the economy and it failed. The public loved him.
Bush said that bailing out the banks might be a necessary evil and that to do so would stimulate them to write loans and spur the economy...it failed. The public hated him.
Obama believed Bush was an idiot but bailed out the banks at record levels, but no stimulation occured. The public loved him.
Bush said the wars in Iraq and Afghanastan were necessary for stability in the middle east and protection of American lives and interests. The public hated him.
Obama said Bush was an idiot but believes that the war in Afghanastan is necessary for stability in the middle east and proctection of American lives and interests.... the public loved him...and the international community gave him the noble peace prize. (?)
Bush left. The people still hate him.
Obama passed the most expensive bill in US history to stimulate the economy and create jobs, promising a quick recovery. The economy has worsened, jobless rates continue to rise, but now we have another trillion dollars in national debt to repay. The public loved him.
Obama promised that he would fight the greedy wall street bankers and moguls. Then he bailed out the big 3 automakers with taxpayer money. The wall street bankers and moguls were saved once again. The public loved him.
yesterday, an announcement came stating that Bank CEO's Dimon and Blankfein (both of whome received bailout monies) received collective bonuses of $26,000,000. Blankfein, who also controls AIG, approved $100,000,000 in bonuses to its executives last month.
President Obama issued a statement in an interview, about the bonuses, "I know both these guys; they are savvy businessmen...[I] don't begrudge people success or wealth. It is part of the free-market system."
Mr Obama, what, exactly DO you believe? You criticized G.W. Bush, but follow his economic policies to the 'T.' You berate successful wall street executives, so that the American people see you as 'in touch.' Then, you bail them out with the SAME Americans' tax dollars. Then, you tell the SAME Americans that you approve of thier multi-million dollar bonuses for a job well done. I personally, wonder how many of our friends and neighbors houses had to be foreclosed upon to accumulate the $126M in bonuses (at 100K residual mortgage per house, that's well over 1200 Americans that lost their homes so that these guys (who got BAILED OUT of the finaincial crisis of their own doing with our tax dollars) could get millions of of dollars in bonuses.... Again, what DO you believe, Mr Obama? Did I just hear you say that you don't begrudge success, wealth, and the free-market-system? Because you campaigned AGAINST these ideas. You portrayed them as evil and greedy promising to "spread their wealth around" by taxing them and giving the money back in social programs. Again, what DO you believe?
the President justified his statement by pointing out that some pro sports players make many millions/year. umm...ok...quite frankly, that might be stupid too...but at least I have the CHOICE to spend my money on a pro-sports games and merchandise.
In defense of our President, he really did have no idea how deep the troubles ran or how hard it would be to fix them...but that's what happens when you elect a leader with no leadership experience.
We wanted a 'newcomer' full or hope, ready to: make changes, fight the insiders, devise ways to fix the economy, and take on corporate greed.
We got exactly what we voted for: someone who had hope that he could do all those things...but without any practical experience to know how to get it done.
On the plus side, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have figured out a way to push the unpopular healthcare bill through the back door.... do any of these people really care what the American people think? I only ask because that is the platform that all of them ran on....
Americans were angry and frustrated. We had an unpopular war (or 2) that continued to drag on for years longer than we had hoped; we saw neighbors and friends losing jobs; we saw businesses closing; we saw retirement svings plans evaporate; we saw banks foreclosing on homes. then, we saw our tax dollars given to the banks to keep them afloat, while the banks continued to foreclose on dreams and hoard our hard-earned tax dollars. This was a final blow to the resolve and patience of the American people
There was an internal cry for something different than the "status quo." As the people watched the candidates, they were caught up in the idealism of a government 'newcomer' in touch with the American people and full of hope, ready for change, ready to fight corporate greed that was so destroying our country.
And so, history was made. We elected, by proxy, a referendum on change.
The question is, what did we actually get?
A year into this new administration, built on the principles of hope and change, what has actually changed?
Bush said a tax rebate would stimulate the economy and it failed to do so. The public hated him.
Obama believed Bush was an idiot but said that a tax rebate would stimulate the economy and it failed. The public loved him.
Bush said that bailing out the banks might be a necessary evil and that to do so would stimulate them to write loans and spur the economy...it failed. The public hated him.
Obama believed Bush was an idiot but bailed out the banks at record levels, but no stimulation occured. The public loved him.
Bush said the wars in Iraq and Afghanastan were necessary for stability in the middle east and protection of American lives and interests. The public hated him.
Obama said Bush was an idiot but believes that the war in Afghanastan is necessary for stability in the middle east and proctection of American lives and interests.... the public loved him...and the international community gave him the noble peace prize. (?)
Bush left. The people still hate him.
Obama passed the most expensive bill in US history to stimulate the economy and create jobs, promising a quick recovery. The economy has worsened, jobless rates continue to rise, but now we have another trillion dollars in national debt to repay. The public loved him.
Obama promised that he would fight the greedy wall street bankers and moguls. Then he bailed out the big 3 automakers with taxpayer money. The wall street bankers and moguls were saved once again. The public loved him.
yesterday, an announcement came stating that Bank CEO's Dimon and Blankfein (both of whome received bailout monies) received collective bonuses of $26,000,000. Blankfein, who also controls AIG, approved $100,000,000 in bonuses to its executives last month.
President Obama issued a statement in an interview, about the bonuses, "I know both these guys; they are savvy businessmen...[I] don't begrudge people success or wealth. It is part of the free-market system."
Mr Obama, what, exactly DO you believe? You criticized G.W. Bush, but follow his economic policies to the 'T.' You berate successful wall street executives, so that the American people see you as 'in touch.' Then, you bail them out with the SAME Americans' tax dollars. Then, you tell the SAME Americans that you approve of thier multi-million dollar bonuses for a job well done. I personally, wonder how many of our friends and neighbors houses had to be foreclosed upon to accumulate the $126M in bonuses (at 100K residual mortgage per house, that's well over 1200 Americans that lost their homes so that these guys (who got BAILED OUT of the finaincial crisis of their own doing with our tax dollars) could get millions of of dollars in bonuses.... Again, what DO you believe, Mr Obama? Did I just hear you say that you don't begrudge success, wealth, and the free-market-system? Because you campaigned AGAINST these ideas. You portrayed them as evil and greedy promising to "spread their wealth around" by taxing them and giving the money back in social programs. Again, what DO you believe?
the President justified his statement by pointing out that some pro sports players make many millions/year. umm...ok...quite frankly, that might be stupid too...but at least I have the CHOICE to spend my money on a pro-sports games and merchandise.
In defense of our President, he really did have no idea how deep the troubles ran or how hard it would be to fix them...but that's what happens when you elect a leader with no leadership experience.
We wanted a 'newcomer' full or hope, ready to: make changes, fight the insiders, devise ways to fix the economy, and take on corporate greed.
We got exactly what we voted for: someone who had hope that he could do all those things...but without any practical experience to know how to get it done.
On the plus side, Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have figured out a way to push the unpopular healthcare bill through the back door.... do any of these people really care what the American people think? I only ask because that is the platform that all of them ran on....
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
National Debt
As my boycott of Facebook commenses, it was time to create a blog instead of simply posting my rants in my FB Notes.
entry 1.
I was reading an article on yahoo news yesterday about politics (big surprise). Buried deep within the article was a statement that should have been a huge talking point. In 2009, the amount of interest paid on the national debt was just over $100,000,000,000. That's the interest. That's not an extra 100B that can be used for humanitarian efforts, healthcare reform, padding politicians pockets...err...strike that last one....
There are approximately 131M tax payer in the US. So, ultimately, each one of us paid an addition $765 in taxes last year, just to pay the interest on the debt. That doesn't sound too horrific, until you realize that the debt doubled last year without the interest yet. And this year's deficit ceiling is being raised another 1.9T. If the healthcare bill gets pushed through, it will double it yet again. so, in addition to having to pay back all of the money, in addition to having to foot the bill for all of the new programs, an additional $2295 per year is tacked on to each taxpayer JUST TO PAY THE INTEREST.
we have to stop this insanity. we can not "spend our way out of recession." We can not continue to build bigger and better (and more expensive) programs. The tax base is too small (and getting smaller as unemployment rises).
It is time for us, as Americans, to take a hard look at where our money is spent and make some tough decisions about cutbacks. As much as I would love to live in an utopian society, sometimes the cold, hard facts of finance have to dictate what we are capable of doing.
either taxes have to increase (and doing NOTHING will force them to increase by proxy), or spending has to decrease. No other choices. None.
entry 1.
I was reading an article on yahoo news yesterday about politics (big surprise). Buried deep within the article was a statement that should have been a huge talking point. In 2009, the amount of interest paid on the national debt was just over $100,000,000,000. That's the interest. That's not an extra 100B that can be used for humanitarian efforts, healthcare reform, padding politicians pockets...err...strike that last one....
There are approximately 131M tax payer in the US. So, ultimately, each one of us paid an addition $765 in taxes last year, just to pay the interest on the debt. That doesn't sound too horrific, until you realize that the debt doubled last year without the interest yet. And this year's deficit ceiling is being raised another 1.9T. If the healthcare bill gets pushed through, it will double it yet again. so, in addition to having to pay back all of the money, in addition to having to foot the bill for all of the new programs, an additional $2295 per year is tacked on to each taxpayer JUST TO PAY THE INTEREST.
we have to stop this insanity. we can not "spend our way out of recession." We can not continue to build bigger and better (and more expensive) programs. The tax base is too small (and getting smaller as unemployment rises).
It is time for us, as Americans, to take a hard look at where our money is spent and make some tough decisions about cutbacks. As much as I would love to live in an utopian society, sometimes the cold, hard facts of finance have to dictate what we are capable of doing.
either taxes have to increase (and doing NOTHING will force them to increase by proxy), or spending has to decrease. No other choices. None.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
