| | | >> Employment has come back significantly.
Sure. It would have been back some time ago with reasonable economic policy. It is coming back in spite of Obama policy, not because of it.
>> So will Medicare, SS and medical care for all will come back and restore this nation's past glory.
These programs have been fiscally untenable since the outset. Every single one of them. The first beneficiary of SS drew out 1,000x what she had paid in. It was never a workable system from an actuarial standpoint. It is true, it made it for 40 years before the first collapse. And by massively raising taxes in 1981, the life of the program was extended for another 40 years or so. Now, you guys want to raise taxes massively, yet again, to give it a few more years of life. But these are not sensible reforms since they do not put it on a permanently stable trajectory. The program, no matter what we do, will collapse.
In 1965, we added Medicare which was a far more terrible program for numerous reasons. Not only the fiscal instability but the devastating effect on the market for health care. In June, 1965, a pregnant woman could go into a hospital, spend four days, have a baby, and write a check for it on the way out the door. $200, including the doctor, the hospital room, the delivery room, the circumcision, all drugs and supplies, everything. But because of Medicare and Medicaid, which were price controlled by the government, we have seen unreal increases in these costs. In 1965, the Ways & Means Committee (before the CBO), projected the 1990 cost of Medicare at $9 Billion. The actual cost in 1990 turned out to be $67 Billion. Today, if you wanted to stabilize Medicare you would need somewhere between 50 and 100 Trillion (depending on how you count it), and obvious impossibility.
Obamacare was originally estimated to have minimal cost, although those of us who understood the projections recognized they were faked to begin with. Just last month CBO notified Congress that it could no longer even ESTIMATE the cost of the program.
So excuse me if I think your claim that these programs will just fix themselves is a ridiculous suggestion. They won't, they cannot, and they never will. They will all go broke and there is absolutely nothing that could conceivably turn that around.
The taking of money from future generations for our own purposes is outrageous, immoral, and unforgivable in my view. We have guaranteed these kids will live their lives in a level of poverty you and I cannot even conceive of. And perhaps you're okay with that, or perhaps you don't understand it, I don't know. But just closing your mind to cold, hard facts does not make the behavior any more acceptable.
I have plenty of liberal friends who are good people but are just too stupid to recognize what is happening. They're told by the likes of Bernie Sanders that all is well, and they believe it. When you say, "But what about the fact that your kids and grandkids are having their futures taken from them?", you get nothing in response. The discussion stops. Because they have no response to the point.
Here, Wharfrat denies the problem exists. Tejek denies the problem exists. Koan denies the problem exists. Yet, cold hard numbers tell us the facts. I don't know if you deny the problem exists or not, but there is not any doubt about it.
You talk about others who "can't understand science", but you guys seem to have a difficult time with arithmetic any 9th grader can handle. You talk about global warming destroying the planet when we're facing a far more immediate and unmanageable situation, even if GW poses a threat. News flash: People living a Dust Bowl existence aren't going to be generating any CO2 in the future. So, don't sweat it. |
|
