Draginol Draginol

Liberal super majority: The ramifications

Liberal super majority: The ramifications

Good article at the WSJ discussing the likely results of the upcoming election.

- Medicare for all. When HillaryCare cratered in 1994, the Democrats concluded they had overreached, so they carved up the old agenda into smaller incremental steps, such as Schip for children. A strongly Democratic Congress is now likely to lay the final flagstones on the path to government-run health insurance from cradle to grave.

Mr. Obama wants to build a public insurance program, modeled after Medicare and open to everyone of any income. According to the Lewin Group, the gold standard of health policy analysis, the Obama plan would shift between 32 million and 52 million from private coverage to the huge new entitlement. Like Medicare or the Canadian system, this would never be repealed.

The commitments would start slow, so as not to cause immediate alarm. But as U.S. health-care spending flowed into the default government options, taxes would have to rise or services would be rationed, or both. Single payer is the inevitable next step, as Mr. Obama has already said is his ultimate ideal.

- The business climate. "We have some harsh decisions to make," Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned recently, speaking about retribution for the financial panic. Look for a replay of the Pecora hearings of the 1930s, with Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Ed Markey sponsoring ritual hangings to further their agenda to control more of the private economy. The financial industry will get an overhaul in any case, but telecom, biotech and drug makers, among many others, can expect to be investigated and face new, more onerous rules. See the "Issues and Legislation" tab on Mr. Waxman's Web site for a not-so-brief target list.

The danger is that Democrats could cause the economic downturn to last longer than it otherwise will by enacting regulatory overkill like Sarbanes-Oxley. Something more punitive is likely as well, for instance a windfall profits tax on oil, and maybe other industries.

- Union supremacy. One program certain to be given right of way is "card check." Unions have been in decline for decades, now claiming only 7.4% of the private-sector work force, so Big Labor wants to trash the secret-ballot elections that have been in place since the 1930s. The "Employee Free Choice Act" would convert workplaces into union shops merely by gathering signatures from a majority of employees, which means organizers could strongarm those who opposed such a petition.

The bill also imposes a compulsory arbitration regime that results in an automatic two-year union "contract" after 130 days of failed negotiation. The point is to force businesses to recognize a union whether the workers support it or not. This would be the biggest pro-union shift in the balance of labor-management power since the Wagner Act of 1935.

Read the whole thing: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html

55,104 views 105 replies
Reply #101 Top

So presumably clothing isn't a need, since you can often survive without it?
End of quote

You might want to tell that to the Tahitans.

For economic purposes, needs are generally seen as: Food, Water, Shelter, Clothing, Healthcare/Medicine (not to say everything in those catagories is a need of course; caviar, distilled water, a mansion house, leather jackets and cough sweets would all be wants not needs, despite fitting in each catagory respectively).
End of quote

No, that is a very recent "need" and is truly not a need.  I mentioned the necessities of life, not the things to make life easier and happier.  YOu do the same thing that is happening in this country now.  Your arguments can be applied to TVS (got to know when that tornado is coming, right), Phones (got to know when the Abombs are falling) or even cars (to outrace the devil).  But in reality those are wants, not needs.

That you would be attempting to compare healthcare to things such as a car, a phone, or other luxuries demonstrates just what sort of a gulf there is between the two. I can live without a phone, I can (and do) live without a car. I can live without fine foods, or designer clothing. I can live without a fancy house, holidays abroad, wine, cigarettes, etc. etc., but not healthcare. If I get a disease, or a severe injury, or [insert any other life endangering health related problem], I need healthcare
End of quote

No, you want health care.  Others want cars.  SHould I make you buy a car?  To some that is the decision.  But you can do without health care (live in the country) or the ones that "need" cars can move to the city (and worry about health care because of the polution and muggings).  But neither is needed.  Both are wanted - by some, not by all.

Reply #102 Top

So presumably clothing isn't a need, since you can often survive without it? Similarly shelter isn't a need because you can live on the streets?
End of quote

Depending on the weather... in places like alaska, the sahara, etc, clothing and shelter are a must, you will die immidiately without them.

In other places they are not. Where you could live your entire life without clothes or shelter.

Generally humans are not very good at protecting their body against the weather due to our lack of fur. that defect makes shelter and clothing a necessity of life.

The clothes and shelter issue is closer to a hypothetical water to oxygen convertors (via electrolysis) necessary for life in space / IO.

Reply #103 Top

No, you want health care.  Others want cars.  SHould I make you buy a car?  To some that is the decision.
End of quote

If you go away from abstracts and back to our current economical status, than this is the key issue... if a person who has the choice, healthcare or a car, chooses a car. should he be rewarded by giving him "free healthcare" paid for by others?

Those who can choose neither (the poor) get free healthcare already.

Reply #104 Top

Those who can choose neither (the poor) get free healthcare already.
End of quote

SHow me a "poor" person that does not have a car (not homeless - poor), and I will show you one that already made that decision.

Reply #105 Top

bump