Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
Temo: Re:Both times Reagan did it (as governor of California and as president of the US) it worked just fine.
(V): "I've already told you how many politicians have wanted government to take over the healthcare industry."
[ No, that's paranoid. ]
Then what is your explanation for why those same politicians have always resisted tort reform?
"No. When Raygun started off dropping taxes the US debt started rising. Nice cuts for the rich, but no way for the economy to absorb it, this was left untreated for decades."
Ohhhh, I get it now! That explains why our country suffered under Rayguns administration, until Buck Rogers saved us all from Emperor Mings Economic Death Ray apparatus. So where was Dr Who when all this was happening?
"Who profits from the current tort laws.... lawyers, insurance firms and the middle men. Each wanting to take their piece of any payouts. One gets a million.. the other has to get 1.5 million, because it has to be bigger or better."
Exactly, so you can add them to the list of people whose interests would be (negatively) affected by tort reform. But as I indicated before, they are not the ones who institute law... it's the lawmakers (politicians) who do that. And as I've already pointed out the law does not MAKE them do it, the law ALLOWS them to do it.
"We could have delt with the problem of over inflated prices by dealing with the cause. But now we will have to deal with less accessibility and poorer health coverage."
[ You have been for years already. ]
According to the same politicians who have resisted any effort to reform healthcare... in other words, the same liars who have claimed that if they are in control there will be greater accessibility and better health coverage. If you believe that, then I guess I should believe it too... (?)
"Small problem with one bank in particular failing. It'd caused a domino effect in the rest of the industry.... With the amount of lending done interbank."
As I've already said "Banks and other types of businesses have failed due to stupidity before, and fraud has always existed. Why do you think people are aways being cautioned to be careful in their business dealings?"
When the government here forced banks into making bad home loans it created a bubble that was ready to break at any time. Banks and other businesses have failed before without government intervention, but in this case government intervention was the catalyst.
" Lying is a moral issue, not an efficiency issue."
[ Really... It can cause a great deal of inefficiency in the business world. Especially if you end up with a deal worth far less because of the lying. Or, like in the case of the Madoff investors.... screwed.]
I didn't say lying doesn't cause inefficiency. I said they are not the same things. Just because one thing can cause another doesn't mean they are the same.
Believing lies can also cause inefficiencies, but being a fool who believes everything he hears is not the same thing either.
(kaŝi) Ĉu tedas vin klakadi du- aŭ trifoje por atingi tiun saman paĝon? Pagantaj membroj povas aldoni ĝin al sia kunteksta menuo. (pauloaguia) (Montri ĉiujn konsilojn)