The W
Views: 100932873
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.11.14 0254
The W - Current Events & Politics - Presidential Town Hall Debate thread anyone? (Page 3)
This thread has 7 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.25
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
(316 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (48 total)
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 17 hours
#41 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.85
My thoughts:

1. McCain looked old, nervous, agitated, grumpy, and like he was stalking prey. If these townhall meetings are his forte, I hate to see what he is bad at "my friends."

2. Obama was much better than in the first debate but to me seemed a little aloof and professorial. The big advantage he had to me was that he seemed much more relaxed tha McCain and didn't take McCain's bait. And he needs to be more concise and punchy to really connect.

3. Too many bullet points by each and too few real answers.

4. I give Mccain credit for no overt POW references.

5. I feel bad for McCain. He sold out his belief system to the neocons to get the nomination and he sees that he is sinking.

6. And in fairness to "W", even though he was just a governor, it was Texas, not Alaska, and he did have business experience. He is a trainwreck overall as a President but quantam leaps above Palin.



Perception is reality
Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 142 days
Last activity: 13 days
#42 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.73
    Originally posted by Leroy
    Removing employers ability to deduct workers health insurance will probably mean that a lot of employers stop providing insurance - so you will have an even greater number of uninsured who are then trying to turn $5k into $12.5 (assuming $12.5 is what private insurers will charge individually, which not the best assumption).
Actually, I messed up because there is no 40% tax bracket anymore. The highest marginal tax bracket is 35%, so the benefit would have to be worth approximately $14,300. And, that bracket begins at an income of $357,700. Something tells me no one is too worried about those households having to cover their health insurance premiums above $14,300. And, for the 25% bracket, the benefit would be $20,000, which would go for households making between $65,100 and $131,450 (again, not exactly the poor). I should point out that this would be adjusted gross income, which is almost definitely significantly less than net income. At the lowest brackets, the tax credit would be worth more than households' incomes. To me, those are the people who need the benefit the most. So, it's not an irrational plan and it's not like benefits get taxed as income but without any sort of offset, which was hansen9j's original question.

    Originally posted by Leroy
    There's also no mandate that it be used to pay for health insurance - so there's a distinct possibility that everyone will be given a $5k credit, only for us to be in the exact same situation we are now (if not worse).

What's wrong with giving people money to use as they see fit, assuming that people who take their check and decide not to spend it on health insurance only get medical services to the extent they can pay for it out of their own pocket? {note: I'm being sarcastic--I recognize the moral hazard in the plan}
    Originally posted by Leroy
    That is precisely why a large number of major city emergency rooms closed their doors.

Which was precisely my original point. It doesn't matter if it's government-provided or not, people generally don't get wellness check ups and other preventative care, which really drives up costs. And, that's the crux of the problem with health care costs (at least that consumers can control). But, how do you force people to do the preventative stuff? Because that will drive up the cost dramatically no matter who is paying.

I would like to see expanded health coverage but also a more efficient health care system because part of the problem is that our current system is so unbelievably inefficient, which can't be fixed simply by allowing the government to pay for everything. That won't solve the issue of cost. And government-provided health care will also create a host of other issues.
Leroy
Boudin blanc








Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 day
#43 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.79
    Originally posted by Corajudo
    Actually, I messed up because there is no 40% tax bracket anymore. The highest marginal tax bracket is 35%, so the benefit would have to be worth approximately $14,300. And, that bracket begins at an income of $357,700. Something tells me no one is too worried about those households having to cover their health insurance premiums above $14,300. And, for the 25% bracket, the benefit would be $20,000, which would go for households making between $65,100 and $131,450 (again, not exactly the poor). I should point out that this would be adjusted gross income, which is almost definitely significantly less than net income. At the lowest brackets, the tax credit would be worth more than households' incomes. To me, those are the people who need the benefit the most. So, it's not an irrational plan and it's not like benefits get taxed as income but without any sort of offset, which was hansen9j's original question.


Wait... are you calculating the total tax benefit or just the tax credit as proposed by McCain? Are you suggesting that McCain's tax credit is based on income level and not a fixed $2500/$5000? Where are you getting these numbers?

As I understand it - and using Kaiser Family Foundation's numbers - my tax credit will be $2500 (assuming McCain's plan provides a credit for those with employer-provided health care - I've heard conflicting things on this point alone), my total plan is valued at $4479, of which I pay $694. Finding my own insurance would still set me back a few thousand dollars. If I were married, I'd be in even worse shape... so, I still don't see how McCain's plan allows us to come out ahead.

And even if I stay with my employer's coverage, I'll be taxed on the $4479 and, if I am not eligible for the McCain tax credit, I lose money. If I am eligible, then I am getting money I don't need for health coverage I am already getting. So, again, how does this solve the problem?

    Originally posted by Corajudo
    I would like to see expanded health coverage but also a more efficient health care system because part of the problem is that our current system is so unbelievably inefficient, which can't be fixed simply by allowing the government to pay for everything. That won't solve the issue of cost. And government-provided health care will also create a host of other issues.


True story....

My girlfriend lost a very good friend last year. She had childhood diabetes and second undiagnosed condition (I want to say Graves Disease but I could be wrong) brought on by a surgery she had while she was a student and had health coverage. She couldn't get the unknown condition diagnosed - she was no longer a student when it manifested and, thus, had no coverage - until she got a job, and was - literally - twelve hours away from treatment when she went into a diabetic coma and died.

This was your average, middle-class, 30 year-old woman who just happened to be in between jobs who came down with a very treatable illness that she couldn't get treated in time. I don't how McCain's solution would have helped her in the slightest.

I am not trying to play some sympathy card here, but I am just saying that any system that doesn't help people like her isn't one that's worth investing. And maybe Obama's would have helped her either, but McCain's seems to aimed at putting a lot more people in a lot worse position.




NonDescript
Tue @ 9a PDT

NonDescript Podcast

Homepage
Hogan's My Dad
Andouille








Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#44 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.81
    Originally posted by JimBob Skeeter
    I'd be more comfortable with with that than President Obama. No, I don't care to elaborate. That's just how I feel.


Don't you think it's silly to vote on a "feeling"? I feel that Sarah Palin's children have the most hideous names I've ever heard for humans. Should I parlay that feeling into a judgment of her ability to lead?

There is the old theory that some folks want someone running their country who's smarter than them, and other folks don't. I think running a nation is a job that is too important for a "hockey-mom" or "Joe six-pack" to do properly, period. I want someone highly intelligent doing that kind of job, especially now. Sarah Palin would have gotten destroyed in a debate at my under-funded catholic high school; she's obviously incompetent. I can't believe anyone is making an argument counter to that at this point. She can't even stay on topic, you ask her about diplomacy, foreign policy, and she steers things back to enegry independece. Now maybe a skilled politician could do this smoothly and no one would even notice, but she's just dreadful at it. And this is after hours of vigorous coaching, by what must surely have been some of the top political handlers in the country. She's not even coherent. As for charges that Obama and Biden haven't had to face the kind of "crap" she has, the old (and eternally absurd) liberal bias argument, maybe they don't sling those kind of things are Biden or Obama because a/ they give interviews, and b/ they know stuff about those guys. People are her rallies are now chanting "KILL 'IM" regarding Senator Obama; even if you take the tack that she can't control what people shout out (and she certainly CAN), surely that says something about the kind of person she appeals to.

The debate, as others have said, probably did not influence anyone one way or the next. But it is making McCain look angry, bitter, and increasingly out-of-touch. Even if you call Obama the elitist, he seemed to say the kinds of things that got head-nods of agreement from the people in the audience. Although that's an unscientific observation on my part, admittedly. McCain certainly seemed to want to go the attack route, but people there looked scared and shaken by these economic woes and disinterested in that; Obama played that game too no doubt, but not as much and not nearly as bitterly.



Quiet, Or Papa Spank!
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2023 days
Last activity: 1957 days
#45 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
I think Obama will happily throw a jab or two at McCain, but he prefers to wait until he's provoked by whatever negative silliness McCain/Palin decide to throw at him.

I find the "Kill him" chants etc repugnant, and they should be spoken out against by McCain AND Palin.



"And here...we...go."
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
#46 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.53
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    I think Obama will happily throw a jab or two at McCain, but he prefers to wait until he's provoked by whatever negative silliness McCain/Palin decide to throw at him.

    I find the "Kill him" chants etc repugnant, and they should be spoken out against by McCain AND Palin.


McCain shut the lady down who was talking about him, and said publicly that Obama is a good man. What more would you like?



AS for the two health care proposals, after reading both, Obama's makes more sense to me.
Brian P. Dermody
Liverwurst
Moderator








Since: 20.9.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 973 days
Last activity: 395 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#47 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.50
    Originally posted by StaggerLee


    McCain shut the lady down who was talking about him, and said publicly that Obama is a good man. What more would you like?




I'd have liked his crowd to not boo him for doing that. Okay okay, that's strictly speaking out of his hands.

He could have said "Now now, let's not be ignorant and possibly racist" as soon as it had happened and not waited for a few days into it happening. That he could have controlled.



Reward TV -- TV just got better!

Ars Gratia Pecuniae.
DrDirt
Banger








Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 17 hours
#48 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.98
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by oldschoolhero
      I think Obama will happily throw a jab or two at McCain, but he prefers to wait until he's provoked by whatever negative silliness McCain/Palin decide to throw at him.

      I find the "Kill him" chants etc repugnant, and they should be spoken out against by McCain AND Palin.


    McCain shut the lady down who was talking about him, and said publicly that Obama is a good man. What more would you like?



I applaud McCain for doing that but part of the problem is that he and his running mate (especially Palin) helped stir this crap up. The veiled terrorist crap, the mentioning of his middle name, etc. are all thinly veiled attempts to plant the ideas that are surfacing at his rallies. McCain sold his soul and belief system to get this far and now it is haunting him.



Perception is reality
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
Thread rated: 5.25
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
Thread ahead: Sara Palin found gulity of abuse of power.
Next thread: This oughta improve the rep of insurance companies...
Previous thread: Is Barney Frank to blame?
(316 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Unless you work for Walmart. HAHAHAHAHA!
- Cerebus, Because I'm The Taxman (2007)
The W - Current Events & Politics - Presidential Town Hall Debate thread anyone? (Page 3)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.111 seconds.