Republi-CONS Now Out to Get Seniors - Good Luck!

Well that doesn't really answer the question regarding what we replace it with.

And to tell you the truth we have exactly what you describe happening now with private health insurance. I'd rather have a bureaucrat making decisions like this than a corporate bean counter whose primary allegiance is to profit and the bottom line. Gotta pay for those corporate salaries and perks somehow plus make sure that the shareholders are happy.

 

One really doesn't have to read your entire rant to know you are simply repeating the far left's talking points & using the same hate-filled rhetoric.

 

The disabled, the elderly with no family, orphans, the mentally retarted, and so on? The Right envisions a very cold reality for people like these but we've seen this approach in the past. Who do you think I'm referring to?

 

And they are paid bonuses to not pay claims. Nice system eh?

 

Funny, I'd like you to show me where anyone on the Left or the Right has penned my solution. I know this request will go unanswered as usual.

 

I f you could show me just where any bureaucrat has made any decision as good as the corporate world, I might agree with you.

 

You know, if I were really paid not to pay claims, I think that is exactly what I would do. Funny, but I have not heard of any company making a go of that. On the other hand, the government is now denying 64% of SS disability claims and letting the courts settle the resulting suits. Maybe it is just my area, but I have never heard of an insurance company denying 64% of their claims.

 

So your "solution" is to increase the corporate tax burden when the unemployment goes up so they have less money to hire more people? I don't wonder why no one has ever penned that solution.

 

Remember what I said? I didn't your post. I have read enough of your other drivel to know where your inspiration (marching orders?) comes from. You have been caught trying to pass the words of others as your own. Remember?

 

Ahhhh! But what your mind can't conceive of is that unemployment wouldn't go up since the system is incentivized to not shed employees because it simply increases your tax burden. I didn't expect you of all people to be able to think outside of the box on such a complicated issue and certainly every detail has not been hammered out but my solution works with the private sector it doesn't just hand over more money without any guarantee of results like the current model does. Now go harass someone who actually cares what your opinion is if that is even possible.

 

No I really don't. So you're not going to try and find someone else that has already thought of this idea? You're just going to assume it's just me copying someone else with no proof?

***Sitting, blank stare, unsurprised again....

 

Presenting ideas is not encouraged. Please stick to criticisms only.

 

Would a bureaucrat decide that forging thousands or mortgage documents in order to facilitate foreclosures was a good decision? I don't know, but apparently corporate people at some big banks did. Would a bureaucrat think it a good decision to team up with the corporate world to electrocute soldiers in their showers? I guess an Army bureaucrat and his or her corporate counterpart would. Could a private corporation be as user unfriendly as our local DMV? Our cable provider for one.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/01/60minutes/main20049646.shtml
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/toll-rises--at-least-18-u_b_124863.html

 

Yeah, I hear ya. What is it they say, "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do."

 

Nope! You are correct. My mind cannot conceive of such ridiculousness.

 

Really, my problem with a plan like that is I believe our tax system needs to be simpler because the more complex it is the more fraud and bribery that occurs. In a theoretical US, a plan like that might work. In the real US, there would be loopholes, breaks and subsidies for any industry that paid enough to get them and the local restaurant up the street would end up paying during a bad economy while some big industry wouldn't. Just like now.

Now, as part of a systematic overhaul eliminating all subsidies, loopholes, deductions and tax breaks as well as restricting money paid to politicians, it might be more realistic. But I think that will only happen after the crash and burn, if ever.

 

I know, it's probably Communism. I'd like to apologize for even trying to think of new ideas. The current system is working so well, why bother to try and change it? I mean really! What would be the point of coming with new ideas that might actually work? I shouldn't have even strayed from your method of complaining about everything instead of suggesting something new. You go ahead and take form here. I'm sure complaining and whining will work as well as it always has.

 

No reason those additions couldn't be added to the mix and should be in my opinion.

 

Yes they would and yes they did. First off, the documents were not forged. Secondly, you article states

Last time I checked, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) was the government. You want to talk screw ups, what about the New Orleans dikes for Katrina? And 6 years later, they are worried about the dikes not even holding Lee (not even a hurricane). (BTW, they have the money in the bank, but they will not spend it. Great bureaucracy for you!) Ever hear of "Fast and Furious"?

 

Do you ever tire of not being able to read?

"Scott Pelley explains a bizarre aftershock of the U.S. financial collapse: An epidemic of forged and missing mortgage documents.

It's bizarre but, it turns out, Wall Street cut corners when it created those mortgage-backed investments that triggered the financial collapse. Now that banks want to evict people, they're unwinding these exotic investments to find, that often, the legal documents behind the mortgages aren't there. Caught in a jam of their own making, some companies appear to be resorting to forgery and phony paperwork to throw people - down on their luck - out of their homes."