Dean: Of course ObamaCare is wealth redistribution!
posted at 10:55 am on March 29, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Well, it’s not like this is a shock to any of us on the Right — and it’s not as if other Democrats haven’t been saying the same thing, even if a bit sotto voce. The class-warfare arguments have always based themselves on the idea that government should exist to redistribute wealth from haves to have-nots, although one has to marvel at Howard Dean suddenly becoming concerned that we may tip a little to closely to Europe in our approach. Do class warriors often get caught talking about disincentives like this? (via Naked Emperor News and Breitbart TV)
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
So Obama was telling Joe the Plumber the truth then? And we still voted for him? WTF!!!
manwithblackhat on March 29, 2010 at 10:56 AM
i dislike this man with a great intensity.
blatantblue on March 29, 2010 at 10:56 AM
Alright enlightened voters . . . now what do you think of these communists you elected?
rplat on March 29, 2010 at 10:58 AM
I dislike pretty much all the progressives intensely. I work hard for my money and am tired of watching it get thrown to people who don’t.
search4truth on March 29, 2010 at 10:58 AM
I am glad this all came out after the vote.
rob verdi on March 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM
Dean is honest, I’ll give him that, crazy and strange and odd but honest on this point.
Still, he’s just applying cover for the ‘rats, pretending that they are concerned about too many taxes and too many takeovers. Sure they are.
Bishop on March 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM
48% of “us” pay $0 income tax.
angryed on March 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM
One gets the feeling that the euphoria of the Left will soon shift to nervous swallowing as the economic rot in this onion is slowly revealed.
rickyricardo on March 29, 2010 at 11:00 AM
crr6 will no doubt say that redistribution of wealth is authorized under the commerce clause.
darwin on March 29, 2010 at 11:00 AM
Obamacare is Wealth Distribution
Obama is Wealth Destruction
fogw on March 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM
Only those who believe that liberals really want to help people. The rest are communists or communist sympathizers.
darwin on March 29, 2010 at 11:02 AM
ObamaCare is about wealth not health.
darwin on March 29, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Watch Howard Dean join the Hillary 2012 bandwagon after the Republican rout in November. “Balance” will be the “centrist” term for her campaign, as she portrays Obama as out of touch and obsessed with wealth distribution at all cost.
BigAnge on March 29, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Well in a way, Dean is right in that clip. We do have a progressive income tax and there is a tipping point where too much redistribution disincentivizes the upper income earners(i.e. the job creators) from working.
Here’s where he’s missing the boat. We’re already past the tipping point, even before Obamacare. We have nearly half the country not paying federal income taxes. Why do you think so many states are on the verge of bankruptcy? It’s not just irresponsible legislatures and a decline in tax revenue due to the recession. For too long, people have been voting themselves(through the radical left-wing politicians they elect) more and more entitlements and we’re at the point now where we can no longer afford it.
Doughboy on March 29, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Get ready for lower than “expected” unemployment numbers this week.Last week they were warning us that they would be higher. There isn’t anything about this administration that is truthful.Of course those of us who are unemployed or who lost their homes know the truth.
sandee on March 29, 2010 at 11:03 AM
I say keep the truth coming. They got what they wanted despite what the American people think about it. They think that since they got health care pushed through they can push through anything. They are only shooting themselves in the foot come election time. The attack ads just write themselves. Use this against them in November and they will be hardpressed to get re-elected.
It is this knid of brazen arrogance that will end a political career.
milwife88 on March 29, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Really? Redistribution? No kidding?
Wow, I would never have thought that a huge, liberal program sought after for decades would include key elements of their entire reason for existence.
JamesLee on March 29, 2010 at 11:04 AM
I don’t think wealth distribution, within reason, is even what bugs most people.
What bugs people rightfully is the lie. If the Dems came out and honestly said, “OK, middle-class will have to tighten the belt more, because this is going to cost. The payoff is a more equitable system,” my own guess is that the middle-class would have said, “Later, alligator. I’m facing foreclosure right now and can’t retire, even.”
Seriously. If you asked the middle-class when they felt financially secure, I am guessing you’d get a green light.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:04 AM
“You’ll learn to like it.”
Skywise on March 29, 2010 at 11:04 AM
So when do I get some of this distribution. I’m poor…yet all it seems I do is pay taxes without ever getting a check.
I guess it’s my moral duty to pay for welfare programs that subsidize crack dealers.
uknowmorethanme on March 29, 2010 at 11:05 AM
That’s actually a fair message. People were ripped off, often, by these insurance companies. Pay for individual coverage and then get dumped in the middle of treatment?
That never was a practice that people would just wink at.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:06 AM
Hi! I’m Howard Dean. Open your wallet.
GarandFan on March 29, 2010 at 11:06 AM
So the forceful theft of my money by Gov’t in order to give it to the lazy and corrupt doesn’t bother anyone? It’s just that they lie about that makes us mad?
Dementia might be kicking in…it’s a shame Medicare won’t be there for you when you need it.
uknowmorethanme on March 29, 2010 at 11:07 AM
When you lie on your application to avoid the waiting period for pre-existing conditions…they tend to boot you instead of footing your bills.
uknowmorethanme on March 29, 2010 at 11:08 AM
Chickens everywhere go into hiding.
What? Within reason? Try defining that in Congress.
Bishop on March 29, 2010 at 11:08 AM
Who would have thought – the WMD (Weapon of Mass wealth Destruction) is in the White House.
Neuron on March 29, 2010 at 11:08 AM
Go to an Indian Reservation and ask how many people are willing to stop receiving payments from the government they claim has enslaved them.
cntrlfrk on March 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM
The National Socialist Leftists must think they have a lock on power to let the mask slip like this.
Colbyjack on March 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM
It’s confiscation of private property. Your money is your property. Yeah, I think it bugs most people.
Geez.
darwin on March 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM
I’d agree… if it weren’t so blatantly evident that economic rot in America is de-facto good news for the Left, since it allows the Left to more easily patronize the indigent masses and concentrate ever more power in the neo-socialist federal government.
Edouard on March 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM
As much as I dislike Howard. Let’s not forget that he was one of the few Dems’ against ObamaCare… He previously said it wasn’t about delivering healthcare… Not to say Howard doesn’t want a single payer system like the UK, but he knew this plan was a sham…
phreshone on March 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM
I think that every true taxpayer should be allowed to add a few dependents to our income tax filings, since there certainly are people dependent upon us.
Patrick S on March 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Oh, those situations are legitimate. But this industry really is out of control. They hired hordes to find your “lie,” which was ridiculous.
They were like a private IRS!
The fact is that if it’s “private,” the practices aren’t any more defensible than if it’s “government.”
I think that’s really what people are figuring out.
It’s the process, not the label, that really matters.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Oh it’s about redistribution alright.
redistributing power into the politicians pockets.
EVERYBODY else is going to pay through the nose.
notagool on March 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM
What country do you think you live in????? Good grief. Steal from the working to give to those that don’t and you think that’s OK with most people??????
search4truth on March 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM
Can I at least get a picture and monthly updates on the people I am supporting?
WashJeff on March 29, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Don’t pick the scab
thomasaur on March 29, 2010 at 11:16 AM
The lines are drawn, it’s not about health care, it’s about reparations. The 1862-1865 era wasn’t enough, the Civil Rights Act wasn’t enough, and surely we are unworthy of any dose of forgiveness…
God abhors dishonest scales. The measure by which you use to judge others shall be used against you.
Kinda meant something.
ted c on March 29, 2010 at 11:17 AM
Is it too early to just start running people with Obama bumper stickers off the road?
MikeA on March 29, 2010 at 11:17 AM
Darwin, we really do pay for this through taxes at our hospital ER rooms. That part of the Dem argument is legitimate.
Now, here’s the part I keep asking about and haven’t gotten an answer.
So, let’s say you DON’T abide by the mandate, and you go to the emergency room with, let’s say, a serious condition involving your chronic illness. Let’s pick diabetes.
So, what happens then?
We still treat you, just as in the past, and then “bill” you for the mandated coverage that you failed to obtain?
OK, then we’re talking about collections.
Let’s say your pretty much poor. Isn’t this a ridiculous collections effort?
So I’m seeing that we’ll have the same safety net of hospitals without much benefit from the mandate.
I’m still waiting to hear how this works out. That particularly applies to the illegals in our country. They can’t buy in.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:17 AM
Howard, send me five bucks.
Howard, send me five bucks, please.
Howard, send me five bucks or else.
Socialism.
ted c on March 29, 2010 at 11:18 AM
Don’t pick the scab
thomasaur on March 29, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Preach, brother. New blog up on the discussion board at the other place.
kingsjester on March 29, 2010 at 11:18 AM
http://www.seiu.org
Bishop on March 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM
Gee, I really hope that these redistributers don’t get their hands dirty with any of that money whilst they are redistributing it. That would make them, er, kind of capitalistic if that were to happen. Shouldn’t they all volunteer their time so that no money taint touches their pure intentions?
They could all take a vow of poverty.
GnuBreed on March 29, 2010 at 11:19 AM
Sure. Most of us don’t mind some of that method. We didn’t like welfare, and we definitely supported welfare reform. I think it’s dangerous for countries to create welfare pockets, personally.
But I don’t think most people are that darn into “stingy.”
I got my own career based on state-supported schools, funded through the old GSL program. It provided for my own family, raising 2 kids and putting them through college.
So I’d be a hypocrite to suggest that I didn’t get some help along the way.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Hey: This has been a test run for the election of an Islamic Mullah and his agenda of installing Sharia law and his militant followers into the United States.
Looks like it could work to me.
Doesn’t look like anyone in the United States Government has the guts or balls to stop it.
I’m buying my lead now, before the price goes through the roof.
Cybergeezer on March 29, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Weird…that doesn’t make me feel any better.
WashJeff on March 29, 2010 at 11:23 AM
It is impossible to redistribute wealth. Impossible.
You can redistribute money, but not wealth. Having money will not make someone a wealth creator. Nor a producer. As they always do, they will destroy that particular vehicle of wealth, not utilize it as a resource and will still claim to be a victim after squandering the work of another.
Until liberals can wrap their minds around that, they will never understand why socialism (in all it’s many forms) will just not work.
Human nature dictates that people will have different ambitions and work ethics. And those differences are why some people will be wealth creators and others wealth destroyers (typically human devices such as governments).
ButterflyDragon on March 29, 2010 at 11:23 AM
No, it’s not. So people will now be ripped off, often, by the government. They WILL be forced to pay for coverage and the government WILL cut them off. Worse, there will be no recourse through the judicial system because you can’t sue the government.
And the Democrats will just wink at it.
Skywise on March 29, 2010 at 11:25 AM
Didn’t you say a while back that you were leaving this site? You lied.
AsianGirlInTights on March 29, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Make sure you shave your head before you try that.
Cybergeezer on March 29, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Don’t go there with the stingy comments. We all pick charities of our CHOICE to donate to. What you are talking about is money TAKEN from us. There is a difference that isn’t that hard to differentiate. You can pay back help any way you want, that is your choice. A lot of us still cling to Bibles and choose to give money out of pockets to those organizations we deem fit. So just because we don’t want the government confiscating money from us to spread around how it wants (poorly), doesn’t mean we are Scrooges.
search4truth on March 29, 2010 at 11:28 AM
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:20 AM
SEE YOU ON ANOTHER THREAD….BYE BYE
NJ Red on March 29, 2010 at 11:28 AM
That expired awhile ago:
WashJeff on March 29, 2010 at 11:29 AM
Ann, this doesn’t directly answer your question but I think it is a relevant point:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Yzg5NmFlNDdiNTljYmQ5MDBhNmE5ODc0ZmYzMmJhZGU
From my point of view, there is no longer health insurance anymore, just a welfare system. If you can’t be denied and you can’t be dropped and the government controls the cost of premiums then that is not insurance but rather a good’ol government entitlement.
yubley on March 29, 2010 at 11:30 AM
Dean is an enemy of Americans and should be treated as such.
daesleeper on March 29, 2010 at 11:30 AM
It bugs people a bunch. Look, everyone is (relatively) OK with helping someone down on their luck for a short time to get them back on their feet. The problems come when it is relied on indefinitely, and THAT is what bugs people.
That was one of the things in the late 80s and early 90s that led to 1994. Story after story of people living all their lives on welfare checks and food stamps, without lifting a finger to help themselves. Stories of people pooling their welfare to count as “income” to buy a house were one I remember.
Now the main difference, as I see it, is instead of just giving people your money, they are given services paid for by your money.
JamesLee on March 29, 2010 at 11:31 AM
sky is right. So now, instead of a handful of individuals “getting ripped off”, now we expose the collective populace to the risk of getting ripped off by the federal government. The largest denier of care and the authors of the most byzantine medicolegal nightmares on the planet. It’s one thing to have BC/BS drop you for a preexisting condition, it’s a whole other thing for the fed to drop that diagnosis code (ie, Alzheimers) from coverage. The magnitude of effect just went from 1 to above a million, simply because of the concentration of power, and decision making, further and further away from the individual and an insurance company.
The same greed or problems that would cause an individual company to drop an insured member exist in far greater magnitude in the government. The government cares no more, and likely less, about your individual health, than does an insurance company. It is a fallacy to believe otherwise. There is no virtue, or very little virtue, in government service such as this. There is greed, corruption, cost control, vengeful guilds, and a complete failure of responsibility and accountability.
Think I’m wrong? I’m a gov’t health care provider.
ted c on March 29, 2010 at 11:32 AM
No, it’s mainly paid for by paying consumers, i.e. by raising insurance premiums. There is some reimbursement from the government. And no, that part of the argument is a lie. In Massachusetts ER visits have shot up because the waiting time to see a doctor is now almost two months. It makes it worse, not better. See every other country with this crappy system.
The problem, is people think health care is some sort of right. If you need medical care and you don’t have insurance … you will be treated but you should also have to pay. I don’t know of any hospital that won’t set up a payment plan, no matter how small, so you can pay back.
It happened to me when I was in Wisconsin. I needed medical care, no insurance … so I worked with the hospital to set up a plan I could afford. They were extremely nice about the whole thing. Not once did I think I shouldn’t have to pay.
Plenty of people can pay under a payemnt plan. Many of our so-called “poor” have money, and use it to buy stuff like cell phones and expensive cars.
Of course there will always be those who are truly helpless. Those are the people we should help, not the clueless.
darwin on March 29, 2010 at 11:33 AM
So Obama doesn’t really care about my health? I feel so used. /s
BKeyser on March 29, 2010 at 11:33 AM
No ducking fuh, Dean. It’ll first redistribute wealth to the insurance companies and then to the government.
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:33 AM
I guess it’s my moral duty to pay for welfare programs that subsidize crack dealers.
uknowmorethanme on March 29, 2010 at 11:05 AM
Your post brought to mind a question i always have on my mind, if you or i were to go for a state or fed job we are subject to drug testing, why arn’t the recipients of our funds (welfare,ssi ect)subject to the same rules?
heshtesh on March 29, 2010 at 11:35 AM
I think you’re confused about what “welfare reform” actually did. It required welfare payments to STOP after a period of time. It REQUIRED the recipients to go out and find a job. In fact, it was called (get this, I know it’s going to be shocking) Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act!!
People supported it because it removed people from the persistent state of being on the welfare roll and put them back into the workforce.
You are correct, Americans aren’t that stingy. Which is why America leads the world in philanthropy and charities. Which is why so many of the poor in this country are assisted in so many different ways.
You did pay back your GSL loan, right? If so, then you were a productive member of society that still paid their own way. If not, then you’re an irresponsible looter who has stolen the work of another for your own benefit.
There is nothing to “borrow” from the current state of this health care “reform”. It’s theft. Nothing less.
ButterflyDragon on March 29, 2010 at 11:36 AM
there’s a great 60 second ad in combining this with what baucus and sharpton said.
reliapundit on March 29, 2010 at 11:36 AM
You have no credible evidence to support that broad allegation and you know it. The real issue is the abdication of personal freedoms and liberties to an over controlling state, not the use of government loans or even compassionate charity in isolated cases.
rplat on March 29, 2010 at 11:38 AM
No ducking fuh, Dean. It’ll first redistribute wealth to the insurance companies and then to the government.
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:33 AM
College kid, it is very difficult to redistribute wealth to an industry that you drive out of business.
kingsjester on March 29, 2010 at 11:38 AM
You can give a man a fish, he eats then. Teach him to fish, then he can fish for his own damn food and not live off the sweat of others.
You want to keep everyone dependent on the government for their every need, like slaves.
I want to make sure everyone can fish on their own. If you wont fish, then you starve. If you REALLY cant fish, then it is ok for the government to help you out (but really it should be the private charities stepping up).
Thats all this ‘health-care’ reform is for. One more piece in the attempt of the progressives like you to make slaves of us all.
Do we need health care reform, of course. What we need is things like make sure everyone who needs it is on EXISTING programs, competition across state lines, and fixing all the malpractice issues with tort reform. We need to remove all illegals from this country IMMEDIATELY, regardless of how long they have been here or what roots they have put down. The key issue here is they are here ILLEGALLY. I have nothing against legal immigration. You come through the front door, I will welcome you with open arms. You come through the back door, illegally then you deserve to be treated like the foreign invader that you are.
Progressives like AnninCA want nothing more than to yoke us into slavery of the federal government.
Wolftech on March 29, 2010 at 11:38 AM
I personally think that the entire issue is on the wrong track.
I personally would advocate for repeal and reform.
I DO absolutely agree with a large portion of voters that this particular system isn’t working. It’s not even working for my relatives, who worked for YEARS in Texas and now have a healthcare retirement plan that is ridiculous. Our family joke is that it doesn’t cover eyes, teeth, or hearing.
So what goes when you’re old? *haha
It’s a mess, in short.
However, I think the path the Dems went down? Retro-thinking.
And it shows. This is a bad piece of legislation.
I think it can honestly be addressed by tweaking parts. If you look at the GOP proposals, take the best and leave the rest, and then look at the Dem plan, take the best and leave the rest, I see a window for real reform that would be totally embraced by people, regardless of party partisan politics.
And that is the real solution for any politician today. You have GOT to find real solutions. If you on either side think you’re going to win by simply spouting off talking points from one side or another, think again.
We’re simply too mad.
We are NOT in the mood for talking points politicians, from either side.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:38 AM
Crazy teabaggurrrrr wingnutz and their silly rhetoric about socialism and collectivism and “spreading the wealth around.”
Its almost as if they wanted to point out to you that those in the WH and Congress who have surrounded themselves with socialists, radicals and assorted leftist malcontents are intent on imposing socialism and collectivism on the populace.
Psha! The nerve of those brainless teabaggerz.
Good Lt on March 29, 2010 at 11:39 AM
Enforced mandate first, takeover later.
Exactly what part of that is so hard for you lot to understand?
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM
We didn’t vote for it’s leader, chief salesman and promiser-of-hopeychangeyness-in-chief – that is, Mr. Obama.
You did.
Good Lt on March 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Yeah, but you don’t understand. From the democrats point of view this is great legislation because it’s not about health … it’s about redistributing wealth.
darwin on March 29, 2010 at 11:41 AM
Grand-slam homerun Ann.
Take the best from both sides, and to blazes with the talking heads and their hordes of braindead followers who want it all their way.
A recipe for success…if only we’d follow it. (and I doubt we will)
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:42 AM
I didn’t vote for Obama.
I don’t mean to brag, but I did see this coming.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:46 AM
Ann, as usual your opinions are nothing but a hazy collection of useless generalities. Why don’t you get specific about what parts of each you like?
AsianGirlInTights on March 29, 2010 at 11:47 AM
If I decide to quit my job, I can get free healthcare and my mortgage will be paid by uncle sam. Obamacare will charge a 40% tax on all over-the-counter meds and we all know a VAT tax is coming. The more taxes the Democrats impose, the more incentive I have to stay home.
Why work?
TN Mom on March 29, 2010 at 11:48 AM
I don’t have to follow it, since I’m not running for office.
I think the smart ones are already rising to the surface.
It’ll be regional, of course. What’s smart in the Southwest may not be the best message in CA.
But it’s already happening.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:48 AM
What amazes me for all the harping on ‘people dropped when they came down with something’ is that in such a lawsuit happy country not a single freaking one of those people could find a Lefty ambulance chaser to take on the big, bad insurance companies for breach of contract, medical expenses PLUS pain and suffering.
If these are such slam-bang, ‘yes they really did it’ cases then the lawsuit will be air tight when the contract is brought out, the condition specified, your diagnosis confirmed and the insurance company dropping you.
Yet I do not hear of a single one of these sob-story people ever getting one of these sweet John Edwards clones to ever do that for them. And do it pro-bono or on contingency fee basis where they don’t get paid unless you win.
What is up with that? Folks sue McDonalds over hot coffee they spill in their laps, but not over an insurance company denying coverage they agreed to cover? WTF? That does not compute and is lunacy on its face. Lots of lawyers would love a chance to sink their teeth into an insurance company just on the contingency fee basis, alone… yet folks can’t find them?
That complaint has rung hollow for decades. Show me the case, show me the contract, show me the condition and then show me how that person could not GET a lawyer to help them. No more anecdotes. No more ‘it really did happen’. It is starting to sound like UFO stories, save I’ll believe those far faster than a lawyer turning up a case against a large insurance company that is air tight.
ajacksonian on March 29, 2010 at 11:48 AM
Go back to DailyKos, Troll
Wolftech on March 29, 2010 at 11:48 AM
Wealth distribution in any form means you labor and get compensated for that labor, the ‘gubmint’, by force takes part of that compensation you labored for, and gives it to someone else that hasn’t done a thing to earn it. They receive it because they exist.
I resent the fact that the ‘gubmint’ is in the “CHARITY” business funded by force.
belad on March 29, 2010 at 11:49 AM
Exactly what part of that is so hard for you lot to understand?
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Oh, I don’t know, Skippy. Possibly due to the fact that
once the no pre-existing conditions clause takes effect, along with the employer mandates, and this little provision:
(cont.), you will have single-payer. These co-ops will be run by the same people who bought $10,000 toilet seats. No insurance professionals will be allowed on these co-ops.
kingsjester on March 29, 2010 at 11:49 AM
Go somewhere else if you want a right-wing echo chamber, wingnut.
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Yet I do not hear of a single one of these sob-story people ever getting one of these sweet John Edwards clones to ever do that for them. And do it pro-bono or on contingency fee basis where they don’t get paid unless you win.
What is up with that? Folks sue McDonalds over hot coffee they spill in their laps, but not over an insurance company denying coverage they agreed to cover? WTF? That does not compute and is lunacy on its face. Lots of lawyers would love a chance to sink their teeth into an insurance company just on the contingency fee basis, alone… yet folks can’t find them?
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:53 AM
I completely understood the reform act and supported it.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:54 AM
The parts of the democrat health care plan I like best is the funding of abortions(who likes kids really!) and the rationing of care for the elderly(they stink and don’t really contribute anything!).
Democrats rule, rethuglicans drool.
daesleeper on March 29, 2010 at 11:57 AM
That’s the point. And of course they’ll always vote for the suga-daddies that keep folks in food stamps and other bennies.
tru2tx on March 29, 2010 at 11:58 AM
I think that the “sky-is-falling” types of messages will fall flat with voters.
I think the “heavens have opened up and we have reform” message will fall flat.
I am perfectly convinced that most voters DO know that the talking points is about politics, irrelevant.
And the truth lies in that shadow area, in between.
We’ll be looking for anyone who can really thread that needle and be for us.
And those politicians, in my opinion, aren’t so easy to find.
Support them, if they emerge.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 11:58 AM
So has the concept of getting what one pays for. Now customers want something for nothing, and some businesses have people whose job it is to figure out how to give less product for the same amount without alerting the customer.
Its a wicked soup!
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 11:59 AM
The problem is that ‘gubmint’ is the absolute wrong place to go to find solutions to a marketplace issue. The reason healthcare is so expensive now is because the ‘gubmint’ has had its fingers in the mix. The best solutions come from those that find a way to profit from innovation or developing new products, not from government mandate.
When people have the ability to vote for products and services via their checkbook, they determine which suppliers and services survive and which ones don’t. If you are providing cost effective products you will have a steady stream of buyers. If you are screwing everyone that comes through the door, your competitor down the street will start getting your customers in their place, and for those that argue that there isn’t any competition, its the ‘gubmint’ that restricts competition.
belad on March 29, 2010 at 12:00 PM
hahahaha shooting at elected officials offices is funny.
daesleeper on March 29, 2010 at 12:00 PM
I don’t agree. I think people are fair. They are probably a lot more fairminded than their business providers or government.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 12:01 PM
They why are you comparing the rolling back of an entitlement to the creation of a new entitlement that is likely to be 10 times the size?
That doesn’t even make sense.
Unless you’re trying to use sleight of hand by saying people support the idea of welfare because they supported a bill that would limit welfare.
ButterflyDragon on March 29, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Well, that argument won’t fly. They have had an open field.
And they abused that.
That is why gubmint nearly always has to step in and pinch private business.
They will always go too far without some kind of check.
So will gubmint. *haha
They both require watching.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 12:03 PM
So many words to say nothing at all. I’m surprised your head doesn’t implode at sea level.
AsianGirlInTights on March 29, 2010 at 12:04 PM
I was asked about my opinion on welfare reform, and I answsered.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 12:05 PM
Let me give you a bit of unwanted advice.
Join the real conversation on the issues.
AnninCA on March 29, 2010 at 12:07 PM
Odd though that it appears that’s it only our meager resources that are being re-distributed not Congress’s.
jeanie on March 29, 2010 at 12:08 PM
I’d agree that most individuals still fit that description, although the entitlement mentality isn’t going away anytime soon. There’s a good reason why workplace comics and political cartoons lampooning lousy bosses/officials/etc. are so popular.
A person who is, say, an advertisement writer probably knows and admit that deception isn’t nice…but his/her job is to make products look better than they really are.
In the modern world, there’s a logical and moral disconnect between individual lives and collective efforts that truly boggles the mind.
Dark-Star on March 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »