(V):  Agreed.  And the "compromise" failed to get the 3 Republicans "negotiators" on board.  Democrats will have to do this reform on their own.  Hopefully, they will come up w/ something significantly better than the Baucus Bill, which is the insurance companies dream.  And public option is still on the table through other bills.

Übergeek 바둑이: It's Senator Max Baucus version, it's not set in stone. From what the press are reporting on it. .. too much compromise. Ya can't please all the people all the time.

The Democrats just unveiled their healthcare plan:

Yahoo news report

It calls for a price tag of $856 billion. I don't see how they will suceed getting this passed through Congress or the Senate.

Übergeek 바둑이: Aye... it happens... but if your fingers get caught in the pie over 'ere...

It's like with the expenses business. Thatcher's gov made the changes that caused them to get so easy to fiddle, and the conservative party over made a point of being 'squeaky' clean over taking the mickey at the tax payers expense.

.... and MP's got caught on camera moaning that they were hard done by!!

boo hoo.

GTCharlie: Of course are empire days would be taught Just as we get alot of the same and WWII.. Battle of Britain and the like. Oh the Versailles treaty helped alot. Imagine having inflation so bad that you had to be paid daily... the next, your dosh was only half the value.

Concentration camps.. British invention.. 100 years war... 1066 (last time we got invaded), etc...

How the EU stuffed our deal with the Commonwealth countries, hence cutting good trade deals that helped many a developing country. Food mountains whilst millions die of starvation each year.

McCarthyism, Spanish civil war, Marx, Lenin, Stalin.

And religion is freely taught at schools.... But at no time is hate based faith teaching allowed in any school.

(V):
Parties are allowed donations, and lobbyists get paid by private interests to do the work on their behalf. It is a very indirect way to subvert democracy. Parties can disclose how much they receive, and in the news we hear of wealthy men giving millions to campaigns. However, relying on the impartiality and honesty of politicians is rather naive on accounts of the amounts of money involved. It is like putting a dog in charge of guarding the sausages!

Übergeek 바둑이: Can't agree completely.. Lobbying as such as in paid, is illegal over here. Parties are allowed donations, but in no ways can that be from a criminal .. knowingly, or in any means be regarded as a favour. A recent "cash for questions" situation led to criminal prosecution.

Doner's fund the party they like. All parties gain from this, and all accounts must be published as well as all interests of MP's... Like being on a board of directors, org's they support... donations, etc.

King's have fallen here over 'politics' in more ways than one!!

(V):

> No-one wants the USA to fail (not any sane person anyway)

I think the USA and western democracy in general are not going to fail, but a catastrophic change in the economic conditions could lead to big social changes.

My true concern is the "Americanization" of many countries and cultures around the world. As people around the world are influenced by American culture and American values, those values are affecting the political and economic development of many countries around the world.

If American internal policy is adopted in other contries, then those countries could find themselves facing similar challenges in providing essential services to the poor. Millions of people could have similar challenges and in other countries where governments are corrupt we could see millions suffer. Other countries can copy government policy, but not all countries have the means to make that policy work in their own unique settings.

Hilary's plan had really no cost containment, but the Dem's had control of all 3 houses then , so they must not of liked it,, but they did pass nafta.. and plenty has been taught about European influence on the world,, especially UK colonialism, the Napoleonic wars, the wars of unification and maybe that treaty of Versailles that maybe helped create Hitler,, but don/t forget the early Balkan wars before that and later on in the 90's, or maybe the war of 1875 with the fall of Paris so maybe Europe won't get the USA it wants... but that's the way it is sometimes

(V):

> Various other Presidents have tried, but American businesses have protected
> their interests

This is true in every country around the world. Most democracies and dicttorships have "lobbyists" and "special interest groups" which use money to influence policy makers. I consider this the greatest threat to democracy because an individual or a small group of individuals can subvert the democratic process with money.

I think lobbying should be illegal, as should corporate donations to political parties. Candidates should also have limits on how much money they can collect from individuals. The rich and the poor should be in a level playing field. Otherwise democracy is a joke.

Bwild: Talking of cigars.. Have they relaxed the laws on cuban's yet?

Great cigars!! Perfectly legal over here.

GTCharlie: It's not just those outside the USA, Clinton's wife tried when Clinton was in power to get reform sorted on healthcare..... but those lobbying on behalf of healthcare firms paid out millions in backhanders to keep your current system. I even heard a rumour that Hilary even had a price and got bought off, as in shut up and don't rock the gravy boat.

Various other Presidents have tried, but American businesses have protected their interests .... I still remember the case of Nixon being persuaded to delay seatbelt legislation, as the cost of fitting belts upset the manufacturers.

No-one wants the USA to fail (not any sane person anyway) ... The ramifications of a USA gone nutz or under is a terrible thought.....not sure how much is taught in the USA re Euro history...but we've seen plenty of countries go through hell from some sort of collapse... the last very big case was Germany through the after treaties of WWI..

.. That led to Hitler......

Pedro Martínez: lol

Übergeek 바둑이: in my opinion...the surplus our cigar wielding Clinton had to play with, came from 8 years of Reganomics,and "I never inhaled" Clintons nafta was the small stone at the top of the hill that started the economic landslide here in the USA.

Pedro Martínez: just keep up the good work on the mound, 5-0

oh of course they do, and i agree with what you say, there should be a referendum for this and other issues,,, and I most definitely agree that the US has far too long poked their nose in other countries business, so again no offence

GTCharlie:

What is good and proper is up to American voters to decide. I am merely stating my opinion. I asked for a Republican website simply because the official line from the White House sounds to me too much like propaganda. I imagine that at some point Republicans will disclose whether they have any alternative plans that might resolve the political impasse.

If the US wants or does not want to reform their healthcare, it is up to voters to decide. Personally, I think that ther should be referendums for this kind of things. However, democracies want anything but the public making decisions on actual policy. If people actually voted on key issues rather than on mere political party platforms, then governments would not be able to act.

The US is not perfect, neither is Canada, or Denmark, or any other place. You might tell me why I am telling the US what is good and proper, but hasn't the US done that around the world for decades? Didn't the US impose its brand capitalism in Latin America during the Cold War? If the American government has the right to point to other countries and criticize, don't other people have the right to criticize too?

GTCharlie: But this is ain't Canada or Denmark

... and this ain't Antarctica either.

The USa is far from perfect, but we find our own way, sometimes badly or not,, a lot have hoped for our demise since at least Stalin or maybe Khrushchev,, but , we'll go our way, even if we stumble from time to time

Übergeek 바둑이: But dude, no offense, but aren't you Canadian? Why are you and others trying to steer USA to what you think is good and proper? not that you aren't entitled to your opinion of course, But this is ain't Canada or Denmark

I have been looking for any Republican website dedicated to healthcare reform. After all, we need a balanced view that paints the picture from the other side of the fence. the websites below are official government sites, so the opposition's view is not given. If anyone knows of one, please post it. The Republican party website is still under construction:

http://www.gop.com/splashpage/index.aspx

I think it is important for us (well, at least me) to see both sides of the issues.

For those who were looking for details on healthcare reform, they might find more at the government website on the subject:

http://www.healthreform.gov/

I would be curious to read some constructive criticism on what the website says.

I see all of us flogging a dead horse, and that is healthcare reform. Republicans are determined to make it fail, not because healthcare reform is bad, but because they are afraid that if the Democrats succeed people might see the Democrats as a better political party.

One thing is certain. Republicans will complain and moan about rising taxes and wasteful spending leading to higher taxes. However, they will rarely accept that it was their policies that led to this situation. Consider for example some of the new legislation passed by Obama recently. In particular the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Reform-for-Our-Troops/

I have seen no praise for this from any Republicans. The reason is that the Bush administration mismanaged the defense budget and ran into cost overruns amount to $295 billion.

Republicans ask "Where is the money going to come from? Higher taxes?" The answer would not from higher taxes, but from eliminating corruption fromt he defense budget.

This has many Republicans furious and lashing out at Obama. Of course, they are incapalel of publicly acknowledging that the real motivation behind killing healthcare reform is revenge for exposing the true cause of all the deficit problems that the Obama administration inherited from the Bush administration. At least John McCain has had the decency to adress the issue and seems to be the only Republican willing to do anything about it.

Republicans might complain about higher taxes and the budget, but blame should go to those who deserve it. They will succeed in killing healthcare reform, because their allies in the insurance industry fear that the government will take away the profits they make. The ones who will lose are those millions of Americans who are poor and have no coverage and have to make due with whatever scraps the upper middle class leaves for them.

In the meantime, Republicans can sleep soundly knowing that they pissed $295 billion down the drain and that defense contractors took taxpayers to the cleaners.

Ferris Bueller: Not last I've seen.. just the timetable is a long one. Plus many other countries are now looking at exploration and landings on the moon. It holds the potential of being a good base for long term exploration of the solar system, plus certain valuable resources are noted as being there.

I know Mars is better (as far as I've heard) in regards to H2O.. but I think it'd be wiser to test run long term living on the moon first, being closer if things go wrong.

(V):  Interesting question.  NASA funds have been cut drastically lately also.  I think future plans for lunar exploration have been scrapped for time being.

Ferris Bueller: I wonder how at all if JFK's idea of going to the moon would have stood a chance under the seeming current need for details?

Is Sweden too liberal and has their policies advanced their society or cause more problems than they are worth? 

I just heard the public option is out.  

(V):  It's very hard to find bipartisan solutions when the goal of the GOP is to make Health Care "Obama's Waterloo".  He is going to have to work within his own party.  Unfortunately, the Dems are not all in agreement either on the public option because of misinformation put out by the insurance lobby, & people don't want to be educated.  They'd rather scream at town hall meetings.

And in regards to my last post.... when it came to GWII, was every detail expected to be available for scrutiny by those against Obama and his plans? Did Bush and his gov have a plan before invading Iraq regarding the reconstruction after defeating Saddam and his crones? ................ No.

I, like others did question that lack of planning, and those who supported Bush at that time said... so what. He's the President.

As I mentioned before.. Running a country can be like a building project, you cannot feasibly plan every detail ahead... A thing every manager of a building project knows. Even a simple job, like putting up a shelf can have complications.. a simple slip of the drill.. old plaster can lead to needing to think on the job.

I thought everyone knew that!!

Artful Dodger: Then I suggest you look on the web, the Whitehouse one maybe and pour over the details. It appears that Republicans and Democrats, Doctors, Nurses, drug companies, etc have all had input. And to detail every single bit would take hours, possibly days.. and I don't think any politician has that kinda stamina regarding their voice.

.... But as such, which ever President gets in (left, right or independent) ... you'll never be satisfied and find fault. That's if you want to that pernickety and pedantic.

As one book says.. no-one is perfect and to expect perfection is a foolish thing.

Oh btw.. Obama has stated that if anyone has any good ideas, he is happy to listen.. but to just trash a good idea over political partisan rhetoric he will not accept.

(V):  An idea or a concept is not the same as detailing one's plan. 

Artful Dodger: P R E M I U M S

btw.. have you been to a panto recently??

(V):
Yes he did.

No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn't

Yes he did.



No he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn'tNo he didn't

Hey, here's an idea.  How about you explain PRECISELY those details.  Remember, I said DETAILS.  Not theory. Not sound bites.  No general concepts.  DETAILS.

Artful Dodger: The part about your country's financial system melting down, that companies (such as car) were going to cave in, leaving many many people to go on social??

"But he hasn't detailed how that will happen. It's just a theory now."

Yes he did.

"And likely it will cost the US taxpayer tons. The government never has run a public service well."

Probably because there is so much interference from the private sector... I hear there is 5 lobbyists on ya gov's back regarding finance. And the health care public system (by the speech of Obama) is to be paid for by the premiums.. or did you miss that sentence in listening to his speech last week??

"Yeah. One has to wonder why now? Congress has allowed the fraud to go on and on and now they are going to fix it?"

Best it does get fixed now rather than left to go on. Bush wasn't brave enough to fix it, others have tried and had so much pressure put on them by elected politicians living in the back pockets of private sector business...

... I guess it's like our expense business over here. The opposition (conservatives) moaning about how bad it is, but it was their government who change the rules so the gravy train was so easy to ride.

We could play the blame game as infinitum, but isn't it best to just fix the problem rather than play partisan politics which solves nothing??

(V):  No.  Obama's bait and switch has to do with the whole package he presented and not just his health care idea. 

Obama said (as far as I read) that he would work towards reducing
Healthcare costs by about $2.5K.

But he hasn't detailed how that will happen.  It's just a theory now.  And likely it will cost the US taxpayer tons.  The government never has run a public service well. 

As such, making the market for
healthcare more competitive, cutting down on fraud,

Yeah.  One has to wonder why now?  Congress has allowed the fraud to go on and on and now they are going to fix it?   Guess they were saving that one for a rainy day.

As to Healthcare.. Obama said (as far as I read) that he would work towards reducing Healthcare costs by about $2.5K. As such, making the market for healthcare more competitive, cutting down on fraud, unnecessary tests, silly cop outs (such as "you didn't tell us you had acne, your insurance is cancelled") will do that.

Over here, we have plenty of price comparison sites where someone can shop for cheap insurance on cars, house, etc..... If the health insurance system in the USA was opened up in the same manner then surely it'd get to be a buyers market, where companies are fighting for peoples custom.

Isn't that living upto a pre-election promise??

Artful Dodger: As he said in his speech, more will be explained next week. He did the speech as many right wingers are making bogus claims about what he means, and he wanted to state his position, not 'spin'.

"Obama didn't clarify anything in his pre-election speeches. Few knew what he stood for."

Really.. I cannot agree from what I've seen of his pre election stuff. Plus if Obama was vague... then Palin and McCain were so vague that vague looks like a fact.

"others have said you were wrong in your analysis."

Nobody has presented anything to back their claims. That's my whole point. Where is the stuff to back up what some folks are saying??

"The budget experts are telling us (the people) that Obama's plans will only raise taxes and increase the deficit by billions (if not trillions)."

Can you elaborate and break down what these "experts" are saying, as it sounds like this is a general statement, not specific.

Btw.. The polls did show he was losing ground, but since his speech that he is gaining confidence... But if you have polls that differ, please present their figures.

(V):  It's not surprising that a high percentage of Democrats favor his "plan."   And it's true that he's clarified some of his ideas in his speech (which I DID watch in full).  Still, there are many unanswered question.  But back to your original claim.  You suggested that people ought not to be surprised with what Obama is doing as president because they knew of these things since he explained them in his campaign.  It's your assertion that's in dispute and others have said you were wrong in your analysis.  Obama didn't clarify anything in his pre-election speeches.  Few knew what he stood for.  It's becoming clear now that Obama wants to fundamentally change America.  That's why people are going crazy.  The budget experts are telling us (the people) that Obama's plans will only raise taxes and increase the deficit by billions (if not trillions).  There's no other way it can be paid for.  Obama can't explain how this will all work other than to speak in generalities and ambiguities.  

BTW, the polls show him losing ground, not gaining it.

Artful Dodger: I don't know where you got you figures from, but from a quick scan of polls.. I'd say it's divided. 85% of Democrats seem to approve of what he is saying.

As to clarity of his plans.. before the speech, many were not sure, but since that figure has decreased dramatically.

Part of the confusion over his plans seems to directly come from those who oppose him and his reforms presuming and creating fear... rather than a 'wait and see'.

Those who've watched his speech in full, seem to feel that he has a plan, he is explaining it... and, as he said, next week more will be released in clear legislation.

I got this info from scanning a few polls. Though as usual in polls a few % points either way has to be included as a matter of the inherent problem that polls have.

Jules, Obama didn't ever really outline the details of his plan.  He gave some general ideas and revealed his "big picture" but not the details.  Many questions have gone unanswered.

Also, Obama was put in the White House by the Independents.  Those same people are now scratching their heads because they are beginning to see the clear descrepencys between what was pre-election promises and post-election reality.  It's not the Right that's opposing his health care ideas, it's the Right, AND the Middle and those folks include many in his own party.

Artful Dodger: Ohhhhhhh yes he did. Or did you miss the bit about premiums paying for it??

And as for sound bites. THAT COULD BE SAID OF ANY POLITICIAN in the last 50-100 years in any country seeking to be the leader.

Please... I see nothing in any posts today that speaks, explains or debates any point!!

(V):"So in fact.. he was elected on the outline of his plans,"

You are wrong once again.  He did NOT have any such plan in place when campaigning.  Just typical election sound bites.  

(V):  Yes I listened to his speech.  And keep in mind that he's been in office more than 200 days.  More than enough time to have already clearly outlined his plan.  He still hasn't.  He hasn't outlined how it's actually going to be paid for or how it will look logistically.  He speaks in sound bites.  A speech is fine, but there IS NO WRITTEN PLAN to examine.   Obama wants to build the airplane after it's taken off.

Vikings: Yes he did IN HIS SPEECH.

Have you watched it??

Ok, I can wait for a few days if you want that to gather info!! Don't wanna spoil your football

(V): well since you can't (or don't want to) believe what you see in front of your own eyes. and since HE HAS SUBMITTED NO PLAN. All there is left for proof that is in the house bill. which has in it that no one can join a private group the year that that the bill is instated, I've seen it,and since the bill is thousands of pages long and I don't want to spend my football saturday finding more proof that you will ignore, I;m done, I've proved it, you ignored it

Vikings: *sigh* what part of listen to his speech don't YOU understand??

ALL politicians say rough policies when they are on the campaign run. They cannot be exact until elected and they've worked the figures.

Now.. prove me wrong, by direct analysis and not others 'clips'. I'm asked to do it, and do.

(V): what part of in his own words is "private insurance will be out of business in 10-20 years don't you understand, this is and has always been his goal. It doesn't matter if you listen to the entirety of his talks, he still lied thursday, the only context you don't like is the fact that you have been proven wrong.
His entire speech was a lie and a balloon and I or anyone who opens their eyes can see and prove it

Vikings: the fast clip has distorted his intent. It's a miss-mash of words put in order to create fear in right wing people.

No good. No evidence.. It would be better if you didn't rely on 'clips' and did the research yourself.

That's how us public trip up our politicians come the likes of "Question Time"

well here is a fast clip http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/

Vikings: Sigh... listen to his speech, it's kinda looking like you are just objecting out of Republican loyalty and copying objections from right wing webs.

Because he was very clear in his speech over plans.

Now, if you have any actual proof he lied. I (as we do in the UK) expect to see evidence in the form of what he said (then and now).. any links you've used (so I can see the whole of what is said on the site).

Basically prove it by his words and by showing how he has differed from the normal run of politics and how governments and policy setting and enactment works.

Simplesss!!