pettyfog wrote:Just where the hell would they come from but a May Day parade in which major participants were 'occupy'?
Mo: Do you know what the employer tax penalty is for not providing group health care? There was talk on how it's fair and levels the field but anyone with a small business would be nuts to not go that route. And I'm sorta neutral on it. Health care should never have been an employer perk in the first place. I've benefited from it for sure, but it would have been better for it to been a 'co-operative' venture like it was supposed to have been Blue Cross' first ventures.
Even then.. there's plenty of exemptions provided under the Obama Plan and the Labor Unions themselves were the first to apply for them. We all know how the Unions feel about their OWN employees, right?
Are you saying he doesnt want single payer?
It did go viral.. The MSM wasnt interested. It was on Fox News... too bad you didnt see it, I dont believe MSNBC showed it
So.. here's Nader for Single Payer.
He makes a powerful argument. He obviously speaks from the Progressive side, but he doesnt address where this corporate power done away with goes. When it goes to government then the last stage of oversight is gone. Let's face it.. you really have the same people managing it. The same avenues for fraud and abuse.
Perhaps the press will do it, right?
Clevelandmo wrote:'fog my recollection is that Obama supported a public option which I view as different from a "single payer". A public option, depending upon what it covers, might put some private insurers out of business, but not all. Even though England has the NHS they still have private medical insurance which a lot of people opt for if they have issues that the NHS care doesnt include.
And Don, continuing to refer to Tea Party participants in derogatory and inaccurate terms is not running a SERIOUS campaign either. It is also intolerant and bigoted. I consider myself a Tea Party supporter and I did vote for a democrat. They have many female supporters and I bet plenty of them have voted for democrats before. I dont see conservatives' treatment/depiction of the occupy movement any worse than democrats' treatment of the tea party movement.
My concern with the Tea Party movement is that it seems to list government as the cause of the vast majority of the nation's ills AND the "Tea Party Candidates" that have so far been elected to Congress seem to have -- as their central aim -- shutting down the national government through legislation that would permanently damage the national government's ability to govern. The newly nominated Republican senatorial candidate from Utah made it clear that he has no love for the 14th Amendment to the Constitution with what was basically his first public statement in that position.
I'm also not in love with the birthers and racists who seem to attend all Tea Party "events." Finally, I'm not thrilled that the same people who provide various Tea Party organizations with significant funding, are the folks that are writing cookie-cutter state laws designed to decrease the civil rights of union members, LGBT citizens, and hispanics.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests