Home > Community Lounge > Politics > Oops! Sorry little guy, Obama screws you again.

Oops! Sorry little guy, Obama screws you again.

  1. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...3070.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

    "McDonald's Corp. has warned federal regulators that it could drop its health insurance plan for nearly 30,000 hourly restaurant workers unless regulators waive a new requirement of the U.S. health overhaul."

    Although in fairness to progressives, these people will be able
    to get on medicaid in 2014 so its not all that bad...:) :( :D :eek:
  2. Obama: “no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what. My view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what’s broken and build on what works.”

    Hope and Change you idiots!
  3. “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, would you like fries with that?"

    ---Nancy Pelosi.
  4. Money quote from the article: "The move is one of the clearest indications that new rules may disrupt workers' health plans as the law ripples through the real world."
  5. My wife is a physician. She says that in her group they've had the discussion about how they were going to handle the increased number of "government insurance" patients for which they'll be forced to provide care. The plan under consideration currently... "we'll take them one day per week and quit work at 5:00PM". That way, they are "providing care", not "refusing to treat".... however, the waiting list to see a specialist will get long... VERY long.
  6. Yep. Enthusiasts for this type of care really should have checked the realities of other nations which have similar setups before jumping on the bandwagon. WHO and shill organizations like that are full of it. I don't know how many times I've heard a friend in Europe or Canada talking about how their grandparent is in pain and their operation or procedure had to get pushed back yet again, meanwhile their grandparent is stuck at home in constant misery. Waiting a couple of months just for MRIs is pretty par in Canada... Waiting time for tests is absurd, meanwhile the cancer just spreads and spreads...

  7. I don't know what's going to happen but if I need care I'm going to call 911 and tell them I have chest pain. This is good for a battery of tests, then I'm going to say, "Doc, while I'm here can you take a look at this boil on my ass." Somehow there has to be a way to jump to the head of the line.
  8. Good idea, thanks for the heads up.

  9. Add this in the mix for the meltdown to be complete. States are going to go bust for sure. Bottom line, we'll all pay more and receive less.

    By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 31 mins ago
    WASHINGTON – More people signed up for Medicaid last year than at any time since the program's inception, as the recession wiped out jobs and workplace health coverage.
    A report released Thursday by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation found that enrollment in the low-income medical insurance program jumped to more than 48 million. With the economy barely improving, states are forecasting a 6 percent increase in the rolls next year, meaning another strain on their cash-depleted budgets.
    For now, states are cutting Medicaid to try to curb costs.

    Nearly every state - 48 in all - took some action to limit Medicaid spending last year, and most plan more cuts next year. Although they didn't reduce eligibility, Kaiser found that states took steps to restrict the scope of coverage:
    * A record 20 states placed restrictions on benefits, and 14 plan new restrictions next year. Arizona, California, Hawaii and Massachusetts eliminated some or all dental coverage. Other states limited medical imaging, therapies, supplies and personal care.

    *Thirty-nine states cut or froze payments to hospitals, doctors and other service providers, and most plan another round next year. Medicaid payment rates are already so low that in many states it's hard to find doctors who will accept the coverage.

    *Eighteen states placed limits on long-term care services, and 10 plan additional limits next year.
  10. Yeah, and the government (ie, "the people") will end up paying $3,000 to effectively pop your pimple. Anything wrong in that?
  11. Of course, everything is wrong with that but that is the MO of the homeless. In the end we work with what we have, no one asked me.:D anyone ask you?
  12. They can simply limit their practice to those who have private insurance. Or even require cash payment at the time service is rendered. No physician is "forced to provide care" for anyone.

  13. Right, that's great except for the fact that this would effectively drive price through the roof, higher than it is now. So the people with public care would get the horse shit socialized standard, and the people who wanted to pay exorbitant prices would get better, faster care. Ironically it would cause the very thing it's supposed to prevent. Congratulations!

  14. So the self-proclaimed tea-partier is now worried about the equality of outcomes? I thought you guys thought that only liberals did that.

    BTW: everyday day of the week in every city in this country there are many many physicians who limit their practice to those with the ability to pay their fees. It's a fact of life and it will never change whether Obamacare is implemented or not.

  15. I thought you did. A basic level of health care can be provide for MUCH lower cost than for the indigent always going to the ER... Not under Obamacare, of course.
  16. I never said that. You just made it up... I'm not worried about the equality of outcomes, I'm worried about the equality of opportunities. Big difference. You are a victim of left wing brainwashing regarding the tea party.

    Just because I point out the fact that the left wing's plan causes what it's supposed to prevent doesn't necessarily mean I do or do not care about it. Then again, that line of thought is probably too complex for you to understand... Yes, I am a humanitarian, that's why I believe in Capitalism. Laissez Faire capitalism creates more wealth, alleviates the most suffering, and raises the standard of living for a greater % of the population than any other system. Capitalism is the most humane way to go, time and time again. Real world examples include china vs hong kong, n korea vs south korea. Even now, microfinance is doing more to help the 3rd world and it's standard of living and development than decades of programs and trillions of dollars of aid money. Just one more example of how capitalism is the best for everyone. Research and development happen exponentially quicker under capitalism, there again increasing the quality of life for all...

    Yes, many physicians DO limit their practice, but a far higher % of them WILL START limiting their practice under Obamacare which will manifest itself in the way I described above. Then left wingers will call them "greedy", "corrupt", and "unpatriotic".

  17. Out of curiousity, if this is true why do the Scandinavian countries have a higher measured standard of living than the US?
  18. Medical expenses in this country are not going up due to physicians charging full fee for service. There are many reasons why they are going up but the above is not one of them.

    Further, I know many physicians who do limit their practice to those who can pay and many more who will if Obamacare gets implemented. I fully support that, you should too. I want the best and the brightest and the most competent treating me and my family regardless of what it cost. That's free enterprise at its finest. Also, the Dr's that I know aren't acutely engaged in political debate and they don't much care what left wingers may or may not call them.

  19. All those studies weigh factors very subjectively.

    some found that 40% of swedish people were below US poverty line while others say Sweden has a higher standard of living.
  20. Because their standard of living formulas use things like "equality of income". They also base their measurements on PRE TAX income per person (hence negating the effect of excessively high taxation in the formula) and generally do not take into account local average prices. They also don't take into account average sq footage of homes, prices of "luxury" items, cost of essentials such as food and energy, etc nearly all of which are much lower in America.

    Europe beats out the USA on personal freedoms and liberties hands down, but not on actual standard of living... (Yes I've lived abroad and traveled a good bit).

    That being said, Scandinavia is still an awesome place.

    Out of curiosity, why is there a far lower measured AND actual standard of living in Cuba, Venezuela etc?

  21. Yes, but this will make the "best" be more expensive than it is now. This is not in anyone's best interest, especially if you intend to be in the crowd that pays for the "best".

    I too know physicians, who say that it will be good for SOME docs (like psychs since mental health will HAVE to be covered as per the bill) but for most it will not be good. They say it will be good for the poorest people, but bad for average people.

    You don't know why medical expenses are going up or not. You have no clue what you are talking about, you never do. You are just an ignorant clap trap who wants to sound like you know what you are talking about. You are the fucking idiot who tried to say that Leon Trotsky was not a socialist. You are just blowing smoke out of your ignorant ass as usual. You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. I swear to god, sometimes I think you just start typing and see how it ends up.

  22. Just in: Obama admin calling people liars.

    Health secretary says McDonald's not dropping health plans

    A Wall Street Journal report alleging McDonald's might stop covering 30,000 workers because of the health reform law is "flat out wrong," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Thursday.


    White house has McDonald's scared to admit what they are thinking..

    "Media reports stating that we plan to drop health care coverage for our employees are completely false,” Steve Russell, senior vice president and chief people officer for McDonald’s USA, said in a statement today. “These reports are purely speculative and misleading.

    Russell acknowledged that McDonald’s has spoken with regulators “to better understand the implications of the law and to share our point of view. Moving forward, we will continue to have an open dialogue with legislators as well as regulators.”

    hahaha, these guys are afraid to state the obvious. This Bill SUCKS!
  23. Nah, that's not true, at least not for the Human Development Index measure of standard of living. That sounds like a Wikipedia quote.

    Than other Latin American countries? There isn't, actually. Cuba does pretty well against the other, more lassaiz faire countries in Latin America -- it's one of the better ones to live in.

    Lassaiz faire is a great idea until it meets reality, then a mixed system works best.
  24. Simmer down there little tea kettle. It's not necessary to insult someone in polite conversation when you feel logically trapped and don't have a pithy retort. Grow and learn grasshoppa.

    BTW: could you kindly show me the post where I said that Trotsky wasn't a socialist? You seem to be obsessed with that myth.

    I do remember me asking you if you knew what he stood for at which point you called me a fucking idiot or something (as per your style). I also remember acknowledging that as a headstrong idealistic young man he was a socialist but after he was purged he became disillusioned and wrote about his doubt of socialism. Remember that?

  25. No, you are uninformed as usual. The HDI doesn't take taxation into account. They just measure pre tax GDP per capita. They also don't measure that pre tax GDP vs local prices. You have no idea what you are talking about. My cousin works for the world bank where the UN people go for the HDI stats. I'm flattered that you think my writing reads like a wiki quote, but it wasn't. The following IS a wiki quote as to how HDI is calculated:

    Life expectancy at birth, as an index of population health and longevity
    Knowledge and education, as measured by the adult literacy rate (with two-thirds weighting) and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrollment ratio (with one-third weighting).
    Standard of living, as indicated by the natural logarithm of gross domestic product per capita at purchasing power parity.

    Actually Cuba is a dump and ppl live like animals... If you'd traveled much in latin america you'd know that. You probably haven't, so you don't. It's one of the cheapest places to go on vacation... The highest standards of living in latin america are, of course, the ones which are known for their laissez faire policies- chile, argentina, uraguay, etc. Same story in asia. Cuba's stats for the HDI are given by the communist Cuban government...

    Statistical surveys by biased government agencies based on information obtained from biased government agencies are a great until they meet reality....

  26. Sorry you are embarrassed... I guess if I were you, I would be too...

    Yes, here's where you said that Trotsky was only a socialist in his "early years" until he "matured"... ROFLMAO!!!


    Sorry your memory is so poor that you can't remember what your own beliefs are. This reinforces my theory that you just start typing and see what comes out, and that you have no actual coherent thoughts... But I guess some more delusional clap trap is easier for you than actually responding to my points...

  27. The "Wall Street Journal is flat out wrong."

    The 'Christian Science Monitor is right.

    Stay tuned.............
  28. This quote alone proves what a dumb fuck you truly are.
  29. I was in Cuba last year, in fact, and have traveled in Panama, Costa Rica, Mexico (of course), and elsewhere.

    No, Cubans do not "live like animals" -- but it does have many problems. Having said that, however, it compares favorably with other Latin American countries which are not under embargo. The roads are better, health is better than most areas of latin America, and so on.

    And the HDI measures illustrate that these are not just my perceptions. It's not the best country to live in, but it comes in fourth in Latin America for HDI. Yes, I realize this is not addressing other issues such as their lack of freedom and their economic problems in general.

    You are incorrect about the HDI being supplied by the Cuban state. You are misunderstanding what GDP is if you think it's somehow taxable or has tax rates factored into it.

    And you're also incorrect in that the countries you listed -- Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay, all have national health care schemes and Uruguay is described as "Latin America's first welfare state."

    They have mixed economies but lassez-faire they are not.
  30. Spoken like someone who knows zero about Cuba, has never been there, and knows nothing except what he's told on Fox News.
  31. No kidding. Large % of the population doesn't even have electricity there. They can't bitch about it either because for fear of the government... lol and he tries to defend the standard of "living" in Cuba.

  32. Just when you seem like you can not possibly get any stupider you come out with this gem. Look at all that growth that communism has provided for cuba!!!

  33. Quality of life measures don't measure electricity penetration, but your information is likely out of date. Anecdotally I can tell you that I didn't see any areas of Cuba that were without electricity (and yes, I traveled outside of Havana well into the country.)

    Cuba is producing oil and went through a decade or so of severe electrical restructuring, perhaps that improved things. They also implemented a tiered charge per kilowatt for the richest and heaviest users.
  34. Cuba's growth has been terrible (and economically it's a mess), but again, that's not factored in quality of life measures. And nobody's claiming that they're numero uno, just that they compare favorably to most other Latin countries for HDI measures.

    If you're an infant, you're much better off living in Cuba than in Nicaragua.
  35. Fidel Castro disagrees with you.

    Fidel Castro Admits Cuban-Style Communism 'Doesn't Even Work For Us Anymore'

    Now, in a new interview just published online, Fidel seems to flat out admit that the fruits of his revolution aren't exactly flowering in full these days. "The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore," he says to The Atlantic Magazine's Jeffrey Goldberg. Say WHA?!!

    First, a little back story. Both extraordinary Fidel stories come from Goldberg, who incredibly was called out of the blue a few weeks ago from the Cuban Interests Section in Washington with a simple and shocking message: Fidel read your last article and wants to meet you in Havana in a few days.

    Goldberg -- presumably after picking his jaw up off the kitchen table -- hopped a flight out of Miami and was dining with el commandante en jefe a few hours later.

    The results of Goldberg's Cuban trip -- a pair of blogs published today and yesterday -- reveal a very odd turn for the dictator-in-chief. Castro wasn't exactly in top physical shape, Goldberg writes, needing two bodyguards who "appeared to have been recruited from the Cuban national wrestling team" to prop him up at the elbows.

    But Fidel also ate vigorously, drank red wine, and talked at length with a seemingly strong mind. He proposed last-minute trips to watch dolphin shows and joked about fighting with Khrushchev back in the day.

    In Goldberg's most recent post, Castro seems to admit that his vision of Cuban Socialism isn't working on the island nation anymore. Goldberg, as you might expect, had to make sure he'd heard el jefe correctly.

    Julia Sweig, his friend from the Council on Foreign Relations, gave this take on the admission:"He wasn't rejecting the ideas of the Revolution. I took it to be an acknowledgment that under 'the Cuban model' the state has much too big a role in the economic life of the country."

    And yet, at the same time Castro seems to be slowly taking back the power he ceded to younger bro Raul a few years ago after his devastating stomach illness. Just last weekend, he spoke to a huge crowd while wearing military fatigues for the first time in years.

    So, we ask again: What the hell is going on in La Habana? This much is certain -- Fidel is less dead than ever.

  36. Funny how you just like to ignore all the false statements you made about HDI and standard of living measures.

    LOL!!! Then you continue by claiming that having electricity and running water have nothing to do with standard of living... ROFLMAO!!!!

    See how far people have to twist and turn in order to create a defense for socialism??? I'll bet that's what the commie intimidation thugs tell people in Cuba "quit bitching!!! electricity and running water don't make for a better life!!" LOLOLOL!!!

    Because you don't like the information I posted you claim it's "likely out of date" LOL!! Sorry but that's reality in Cuba. If you traveled outside of Havana maybe you didn't see "areas" without electricity but you certainly saw lots of homes without electricity. In fact the majority of homes in rural areas have no electricity.

    The fact is laissez faire nations fare better by far. There's no rational denial of this fact. You can try to argue against laissez faire policy on some philosophical ground if you like, but there's no getting around the fact that it produces the highest standard of living and best societal outcomes.

  37. Please be specific. What false statements? That Cuba ranks well in HDI measures? It does. That it ranks higher than the Latin American "Laissez faire" countries? Mostly it does -- in fact the countries cited as evidence of the greatness of laissez faire are not at all Laissez-faire.

    Nope. I like capitalism as much as anyone, but there is no arguing that a mixed economy produces the best outcomes. That's why Scandinavia beats the US, which is more lassez faire and why Cuba under an embargo, incompetent leadership, and economy in chaos still beats most countries in Latin America.
  38. Certainly they do, but they're not factored into HDI to my knowledge. Other standard of living measures do include them and Cuba still comes out ahead of most Latin American countries. If you've ever been to Belize you'll see what I mean, and that place is absolutely laissez-faire.

    But let's compare Cuba to Cuba. Before the revolution in Cuba under what can only be described as wildly laissez faire, 85% of city dwellers had electricity but only 10% of rural dwellings had it.

    What do you think the ratio is now?
  39. No they are not figured into HDI. Thank you for proving my argument that HDI has little to do with actual standard of living.

    You are an ideologue. Any place who outranks cuba you claim is "not actually laissez faire". Chile, Uruguay, and Argentina are some of the most laissez faire nations in Latin America. They all beat Cuba in terms of HDI, not that HDI is an accurate standard of living indicator... It is not, as you have already confirmed.

    You are confusing banana republic cronyism for laissez faire economics. I know that fits your narrative, but it doesn't fit reality. You aren't interested in facts, you are interested in finding a way to support your narrative. You are so desperate to advance your argument that you tried to compare belize to cuba which is rich in natural resources and has what? 30-40x the population.... Belize has almost zero natural resources and is myopic. Belize is a crony republic, not a laissez faire nation. You seem to have the false belief that the two are interchangeable...
  40. Then pick the standard of living measure you'd like to use. It doesn't matter. Nobody's arguing that Cuba is the best country ever, just that it is at the very least right in the races against the laissez-faire countries.

    No, they're not the "most laissez faire nations in Latin America" and it's just ignorant for you to write that. All of them have public health care systems, for example. Try Belize, which is highly laissez-faire -- a real wild west, or Bolivia which requires private pension plans. The only thing that is really laissez-faire about Chile is their private pension plans (which have pretty much failed according to the US government).

    Plus if I was an ideologue I wouldn't be advocating mixed-markets, I'd advocate for an extreme position.

    Great, then compare Cuba under a laissez faire system to Cuba under a failed socialist system.

    You haven't answered the question -- what do you suppose the percentage of rural electrical penetration is now versus what it was then?
  41. [​IMG]
  42. No it doesn't fare well. Average cuban workers have a salary of what? I think it's about 15 dollars a month? In the HDI calculations they use the national gdp per capita when workers are assigned salaries by the state. So the revenue of the state has zero to do with the earnings of people. You are being intellectually dishonest if you can't admit how this throws ANY standard of living figure based on GDP per capita right out the window. What is the most accurate figure for standard of living? I'd say notional gdp per capita normalized for taxes and cost of living. Just plain nominal gdp per capita would probably provide a roughly accurate picture, at least more so than HDI.

    Yes they are absolutely the most laissez faire nations in latin america. You have no clue what you are talking about. Milton Friedman was an economic advisor to Chile. Chile was well known for it's free market reformation.

    The "Miracle of Chile" was a term used by free market Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman to describe liberal and free market reorientation of the economy of Chile in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, and the purported benefits of his style of economic liberalism. He said the "Chilean economy did very well, but more important, in the end the central government, the military junta, was replaced by a democratic society. So the really important thing about the Chilean business is that free markets did work their way in bringing about a free society." Chile now enjoys the highest rate of GDP per capita in Latin America; this lends strong credence to the assertion that economic freedom is more important to prosperity than are democratic institutions.

    The state-centric approach to neoliberalism is not critical, but it concurs with the critical approach that neoliberal ideas are really just laissez-faire liberal prescriptions that overthrew Keynesianism. State-centric theorists hold that neoliberalism is "the attempt to reduce the role of the state in the market through tax cuts, decreases in social spending, deregulation, and privatization."

    You are clueless. Chile is very often referenced as a model of what laissez faire reformation can accomplish. And of course chile has the highest standard of living and gdp per capita in latin america.

    Whether or not a nation has a public health care system is not a qualifier for being or not being a laissez faire economy. Switzerland has (more or less) a public health care system, it's a highly laissez faire nation. In fact it's the nation that Ron Paul cited as being "most ideal". Hong Kong has a (largely) public health care system and it's probably the most laissez faire economy in the world. You mentioned belize again, after I have already explained to you that it is a crony republic, not a laissez faire economy. "Wild west" isn't "laissez faire", even though it fits your deluded narrative to try to pretend they are the same. Belize isn't laissez faire, it's good ole boy cronyism.

    Quit trying to change the subject. This conversation isn't about my estimation of what the regional % of households with electricity in cuba are.

  43. Remember when I said: Because their standard of living formulas use things like "equality of income". They also base their measurements on PRE TAX income per person (hence negating the effect of excessively high taxation in the formula) and generally do not take into account local average prices. They also don't take into account average sq footage of homes, prices of "luxury" items, cost of essentials such as food and energy, etc nearly all of which are much lower in America.

    Then dave said:

    ROFL! Big dave sticks his big foot in his big mouth, once again!! ROFLMAO!!!

    Same old show around here folks!!!!! :D :D :D
  44. There's nothing sadder when a guy on a trading site doesn't understand how GDP or PPP works.
  45. You pick any quality of life measure you like then. You are badly confusing GDP per capita with income per capita, but I'll happily accept any standard quality of life measure you wish to choose.

    Milton Friedman was never an economic advisor to the Chilean government. He wrote Pinochet a letter and met him once. In addition, even if you were able to claim that Chile is more laissez faire than Bolivia, for example, you'd still have to contend with the other two -- Uruguay and Argentina.

    All this exercise for you two to deny the obvious that mixed economies are superior to laissez-faire. Wow.

    So I guess I won't be receiving an answer on Cuba's rural electrification from either of you two.
  46. Agreed, which is why you should do more reading.

  47. I'm not confusing anything. GDP per capita is the single biggest variable used in calculating GNI per capita. So much so that people often use them interchagably. GDP calculations are the primary basis for GNI calculations.

    "The calculation of GNI is equal to GDP minus primary income paid by resident units to non-resident units plus primary income received by resident units from the rest of the world (ROW)."

    Again, none of these measures are adjusted for local income taxation or local pricing, that's my main problem with them.

    What do *I* personally think is the best representation of standard of living? I don't know. Again, none of these measures are adjusted for local income taxation or local pricing that's my main problem with them.


    GNI per capita is as good as anything. (And appears to put the USA over all of Scandinavia except for Norway). But again, this doesn't measure how much actual money is earned per capita because it ignores taxation. It also ignores how much a "low","average", or "high" standard of living costs to procure in a given nation. I agree that Sweden is a fine country. However, have you ever simply bought a bottle of water from a street vendor there?! HOLYSHIT! Have you ever looked at the price of housing? Swedes live very modest lives by American standards. Swedes pay lots of money (by american standards) for very so-so, modest housing. In other european destinations like say France? OMG you will pay a small fortune for what can only be called a shack! It's absurd. The same sum in the United States would get you a 4 year old mcmansion. Go to Paris and the bottle of water fromt he street vendor is like 3-5 euros!!! Around 4-6.5 USD for a regular size bottle of water!!!! A bottle of water same size in USA is like .69-1.09. Not to mention gasoline being 3-4x as expensive. The problem with these GNI/GDP per capita, or HDI doesn't take these pricing realities into account. It also doesn't take the horrific taxation in most of Europe. Sure Swedish and Norweigan incomes look great as long as you don't count the roughly half of your income that goes to the government, and that's BEFORE you start paying all those absurd prices...

    Creative government statistics are great, until they meet reality...

    Don't get me wrong, I think Scandinavia is a fantastic place. They have a far better record with upholding individual rights and freedoms, personal liberties, etc. However, with regard to actual standard of livng, the reality is they just don't compete with America.

    Friedman was absolutely an advisor to Chile, he just wasn't on the payroll for it, and hence didn't have the job title. He wrote letters, spent lots of time there advising, giving speeches to staff, helping to apoint staff, etc. He comminicated with them regularly for a long time afterward. He was very much the seminal architecht of the modern Chilean economy. The most robust in Latin America.

    I already addressed your irrelevant and diversionary Cuban electricity question. I said that I don't know. I'd bet, based on my conversation with multiple cubans, including a whole family of cubans, that rural, residential electricity penetration is under 50. I was told in no uncertain terms "Most people outside the city don't have electricity in their homes but they stay there anyways because they dont have to worry about the crime and govt harassment inside the city"Why? Because that's what cubans tell me. A better queston, who gives a shit? And what the fuck does that have to do with this conversation? You need to go to a seminar or workshop on diversionary tactics, you aren't so great at it.

    What you don't understand is that a Laissez Faire (which you finally learned how to spell, it only took you 5 pages, congrats) economy IS a mixed economy. I have no idea what you are referring to laissez faire economies and mixed economies as being different things, they are not.

  48. Sigh. PPP IS the adjustment for local pricing, and it IS factored into HDI. Plus, regarding adjustment for taxes, Cuba DOESN'T HAVE an income tax except on hard currency earners.

    Seriously, do you guys trade? And what do you trade? Because I want to be on the other side of you!

    GNI is not a measure of standard of living. And even then, per capita, adjusted for PPP, Norway beats the US.

    Standard of living measures aren't "How much does the country make" -- it's "How good do the people live."

    Bull. He gave private talks to non-government people, sponsored by right-wing think tanks. Then his followers started claiming that he was an advisor to the government, which was beyond exaggeration. Then when people started pointing out that he never even criticized Pinochet for murdering thousands he gave some weak, mild, criticism after the fact. Not his finest moment.

    Well Cuba electrical penetration seemed pretty important when it was brought up in this thread just a few posts ago. Now suddenly it doesn't seem so important when Cuba under a laissez-faire system did worse than under their current (and bad) mixed socialist/private system.

    Also false. Go check the definition and get back to us.
  49. Cuba has done surprisingly well considering the unethical US embargo. And on an anecdotal note, I found the people there surprisingly happy, in spite of their privations.

  50. Whoa, we agree, the US has treated Cuba unfairly.

    You can buy all the Cuban women you want for a buck a piece too.
  51. The government is utterly incompetent, but it generally seems to have the best interests of the people at heart (despite their absolutely awful propaganda). They're liberalizing under Raul, imho, but they still have a way to go.

    But then I compare it to other areas of Latin America that I've been to which are dictatorships, corrupt, utterly wild-west and laissez faire, and by comparison Cuba is doing alright. Not great, but alright. If I was an infant I'd have better odds of surviving in Cuba than in many US states.
  52. Just try it when you travel there next, in 2050. Cuban women are very assertive and they don't put up with nonsense. On the bright side you'll get to see what the inside of a testicle looks like.
  53. WTF are you talking blabbing about?
  54. Bullshit. PPP is the adjustment for currency exchange rate. Cuba doesn't have have an income tax, they just have an average monthly salary of about 15 dollars (which is set by the government). And yes, they get to keep ALL 15 dollars!!!

    In fact, as you can see, as per PPP Scandinavia have some of the most expensive prices for goods in the world! Even then PPP only tells part of the story...


    Also, PPP was based on the following false belief: "The concept is founded on the law of one price; the idea that in absence of transaction costs, identical goods will have the same price in different markets."

    Of course NOW we know that this isn't the case. But we still use PPP to normalize for exchange rates. No one, except maybe you, thinks that PPP normalizes for the cost of living and cost of goods.

    Per capita GNI is the best measure of material standard of living in my opinion. You said pick any you like, so I did. Besides like I said, it doesn't factor in income taxes or cost of living. There was a per capita GNI which did normalize for those variables, that would be a more accurate standard of living.

    You don't need to be trading at all. You don't even know what PPP means or how per capita GNI relates to per capita GDP. You need to be saving your money for marriage counseling.

    Norway beats the US if you don't take cost of living and income taxes into account. If you do, it doesn't beat the usa by a long shot. Norwegians live fairly modest lives compared to Americans, on average of course. They do seem better off than Swedes though. What does Norway have to do with this conversation? This is the first time you have mentioned it (after I posted the chart ) LOL!!

    "How good people live" is very subjective. How good people live materially is easier to measure.

    You just contradicted yourself. You said friedman didn't talk to Chilean govt personnel, but to private individuals. Then you said he didn't criticize Pinochet. How could he if he didn't talk to government personnel? LOL!!! It's funny to watch you squirm and flop about desperately trying to defend your argument.

    Of course he spoke with numerous government personnel. Pinochet included. They invited him to advise them. He accepted and spent some time there advising them on how to restructure their economy. It has since blossomed into the the most robust economy of latin america. He didn't criticize Pino's social liberty infractions because he wasn't asked to come as a social commentator, he was asked to come as an economic advisor. That's what he did.

    I never said it was it was "pretty important". I just offered it as one example of how communist nations are almost always shit holes. In fact, I haven't seen any evidence that electricity penetration is any better now that it was then! Cuba never had a laissez faire system, it had a bannana republic cronyism system. I'd hope that it's residential electricity penetration is better than it was in the 60s. Technology has developed quite a bit and become ALOT cheaper since then, and most of them still don't have it... ROFLMAO!!! They sure haven't developed at the pace of the laissez faire nations though, not even close. All the laissez faire nations have run laps around them as far as technological development goes. Even the people in Cuba who DO have electricity have it going out constantly for 12 hrs at a time. Cuba is a shit hole. People live in squalor, and in fear of the government. People aren't free to speak out against the government without fear of going to jail. I know that it would wet your panties to have that be the condition in America, but as of yet, it is not... Anyhow, Cuba hasn't developed technologically anywhere near the rate of the rest of the world.... Thanks for once again confirming my point that Cuba is underdeveloped compared to nations with laissez faire policies.

    You check the definition. You are the one who has consistently demonstrated the informational deficiency, so the fact that you don't know that laissez faire economies are mixed economies shouldn't surprise us...

  55. He's very delirious. He's under lots of stress from his unhealthy marriage. Sometimes he makes comments that are incoherent.

  56. Another demonstration of your ignorance. A nation can not be "wild west" and laissez faire. They are fundamentally opposites.

    They are liberalizing now that castro and co have admitted that socialism doesn't work (just like russia did, and china is admitting by defacto).

  57. Why should the US embargo be of much consequence to them? They can still trade with the entire rest of the world. The US embargo should be almost inconsequential to them if they actually produced much of any value.

    Even if they did, it wouldn't matter given that they have a parasitic communist government. How many examples of socialism/communism failing do people need to see before they figure out that it doesn't work?

  58. And you're... wrong again. And the hits just keep on coming. PPP is an adjustment for pricing (if you've ever heard of the Big Mac index you'll understand how PPP works.) The only difference with PPP is that it's usually the pricing of a basket of goods.

    GNI is not a measure of the standard of living, it's a monetary measure. For example -- a country with 50% infant mortality, where nobody can afford any products, not unlike Alabama, might have a good GNI, but a lousy standard of living.

    My wife would kick you in the balls for that. And me. And everybody else. :) I think you need to understand the meaning of the words "self-deprecating humor."

    You brought it up as an example of a Scandinavian country which beats the US (which is more laissez-faire) despite the fact that it's economy is more mixed socialist/private than the US. If laissez-faire systems were always superior, as you contend, this would not happen.

    And GNI doesn't do that.

    Now you're really going off the rails. Why would he need to talk to Pinochet to criticize a brutal dictatorship? You understand they had things called "newspapers" and Pinochet's human rights abuses were widely known.

    Well if repetition is an argument you've got a sure winner there.

    You already suggested that rural penetration is about 50% (which is much higher than the 10% pre-revolution). In fact, it's about 85% penetration.


    I bet it never had a true Scotsman, either. (Yes, that was a joke, a joke that you're not going to understand but others will. Rest assured that this joke is very funny and many people are snorting in laughter at you right now.)

    I won't bother responding to the rest of your post because it's just too confused.
  59. Did you get your economics degree from the Austrian Elementary School?
  60. For a person who can't admit defeat when you are very obviously proven wrong, it shouldn't come as any surprise that your marriage is troubled.

    Infant mortality rate is 50%?? I'll add that to your list of gems.

    I'm sorry to hear that your wife is abusive. However, having to deal with you on a daily basis, I can't say I don't sympathize with her... She probably feels stuck with you, because you knocked her up, and she now has your children, or some such thing... Of course she kicks you around... You are a beta male, it's nature...

    No I didn't bring up Norway. I posted a chart which had norway above the US in pre-tax per capita GNI, without being normalized for cost of living. After that, you started talking about Norway.

    Yes, self depreciating humor is your coping mechanism for your low self esteem.

  61. This BigDave guy has been annoying me for a long time.. I'm just now realizing what a dumb bastard he really is... and that via quotes only since I had to hit the ignore button on the guy to improve the ET signal to noise ratio...

    I used to listen to shortwave broadcasts from Cuba. In the 1980's they were talking about sending people out into the countryside to find "alternate food".. they were talking about turning rocks over and eating grubs... and this vociferous moron, BigDave is telling people that Cuba is a good place to live...
  62. Um, no, that was a hypothetical to illustrate how GNI is not a measure of standard of living.

    Here's the post in this thread showing that you brought up "Norway:"


    If I had low self-esteem I'd be very hurt by that. :)

    So what can we conclude from this exchange?

    1) More laissez-faire systems, where government takes a greater degree of hands-off approach to regulatory governance, do not consistently, by any measure, outperform mixed systems for quality of life and standard of living, and mixed economies are right in the running for economic output per capita.

    2) The top rated systems for standard of living are mixed economies.

    3) Many of the mixed economies that weight more towards regulation and even socialism outperform countries with less regulation and more emphasis on laissez-faire governance.

    4) The statement "The fact is laissez faire nations fare better by far. There's no rational denial of this fact. You can try to argue against laissez faire policy on some philosophical ground if you like, but there's no getting around the fact that it produces the highest standard of living and best societal outcomes." is therefore proven false.
  63. If Canada and Europe are so bad, why are their life expectancies higher than the U.S.?

    Life expectancy...

    Canada - 81.3

    Bosnia - 78.6

    U.S. - 78.2

    France - 81.1

    Italy - 80.3

    U.K. - 79.1

    Netherlands - 79.4

    Germany - 79.4

    Spain - 80.2
  64. Actually I'm using it as an example of mixed economies (or even socialist economies) performing adequately against more laissez-faire economies.

    It's important to understand how the world works in order to know where to invest and what to invest in.

    It's likely that most of the posters in the Politics and Religion section don't actually trade or invest, but like to pretend that they do.
  65. Often times when i meet people from South America i realise ignorance is bliss. This isnt to take anything away from them, but often times they dont tie themselves into all the things other people have, just because it is not a realistic possibility for them. I have a couple friends from south america and they both work manufacturing jobs for nothing wages, and they really dont ever worry about anything, they live pretty humble lives, and their only real concern is going out to the club and having a couple beers on the weekend, as long as they can afford to do that they are happy.

    I always find myself all wound up over how much money i have made on the month in the market, and i dont feel that succesful alot of the time, solely because i see other people doing better then me. I make a mid six figure living but still find myself not happy alot of the time, whereas these friends of mine make peanuts and they are happy with everything the way it is and really dont concern themselves with things that are happening in the world. It has helped me alot since i started putting in time at the homeless shelter just to realise that i have a lot and im still always on edge.

    I think it is true that you can definately have a lower standard of living and still be more happy, because you dont concern yourself with alot of the meaningless shit we tend to get caught up in. I often times think to myself that i could very easily be happy if i could find an incredibly hot girlfriend, who loved sex and was content with living on in a cabin on an island in the middle of nowhere and living off the land. :D

  66. Good for you for volunteering. Consider this a friendly pat on the back.
  67. 1) False, standard has an overwhelming tendency to be higher in laissez faire economies.

    2)True the best performing economies are mixed economies, asLaissez faire economies ARE mixed economies.

    3) False, the countires which weigh more heavily towards regualtion and socialism emperically underperform those which have laissez faire economies.

    4) What can we conclude from this? Dave is a biased ideologue, who doesn't know what laissez faire means. Dave should go back to school, engage in independent study before, or at least figure out what a laissez faire economy is before attempting to engage someone in a debate about it.

  68. No one ever said Canada and Europe are "so bad", you just made that up. I personally don't happen to think they are "so bad" at all. Nor do I recall anyone else in this thread claiming that they were. Perhaps you are confusing threads, or perhaps you are just trolling looking for a stupid argument?

    Why are their life expectancies higher? They go to the doctor for any and everything. Sore throat? Go to the doctor. Hung over and dont wanna go to work? Go the the emergency room. Sore stomach? Go to emergency room. It's their culture. Also, there's a lot less violent crime in those nations for "whatever reason". Those nations send a far lower number of troops into war as well. Also the lifestyle is far more laid back, and the people eat a lot better, work less, and relax more... They "work to live" and we "live to work". All these factors have a huge influence on the average lifespan.

    Also, let's not confuse lifespan with material quality of life. Which is what this debate is about..

    That being said, the United States has higher cancer survival rates.

  69. Since you like repeating false statements, here -- argue with the Merriam-Webster dictionary for a while:

    Definition of LAISSEZ-FAIRE
    : a doctrine opposing governmental interference in economic affairs beyond the minimum necessary for the maintenance of peace and property rights
    : a philosophy or practice characterized by a usually deliberate abstention from direction or interference especially with individual freedom of choice and action
    — laissez–faire adjective
    Origin of LAISSEZ-FAIRE
    French laissez faire, imperative of laisser faire to let (people) do (as they choose)
    First Known Use: 1825
  70. Yes, it's true... unfortunately because the health care systems are so flooded much of the time people who go to the hospital or emergency room aren't able to actually see a doctor but have to been seen by other medical personnel. Sad but true...

    Way to cherry pick the comments you think you can refute, yet ignore all the one's you can't refute.. Don't worry it's not REALLY obvious or anything... LOL!!!!

  71. Oh he's not dumb. You may not like his politics, but he's not dumb.
  72. Hilariously wrong. Nurse practitioners are more unusual in Canada than the US, and actually people in the US often get diverted to NP's rather than doctors.

    In fact, you have it entirely, 100% backwards. Why am I not surprised?
  73. Thank you, that's very kind.

    My favorite magazine is the Economist, so that should tell you about my politics. At the same time I've noticed a enormous tendency recently of the, errr, not-very-bright to develop an interest in the political scene and to believe they understand it. Reality is often much more complex than the blanket statements, cliche's and slogans they are fed from all sides.
  74. Ehh, he kind of is... When he's proven wrong, he tries to change the subject in hopes that no one catches the fact that he's proven wrong. Until you prove him wrong on the next point, he then ignores or evades addressing that and moves on to the next diversion. Rinse repeat.

    That's not a debating tactic of a terribly bright person. Maybe not "stupid", but not bright either...

  75. Partially right, NPs are more rare in Canada than in the usa, moreso in Europe. However, most people don't even get to see one of those most of the time, much less an actual doctor. Sad but true.

    Also, another misleading fact of yours. Your "doctor visits per captia" stat doesn't include hospital visits. Most people in Europe and Canada rarely go to the actual doctor, but rather just show up in the Emergency room. Your stat refers to actual doctor visits.

  76. Guess Ric will hold his position regarding dave's intelligence?? Hell he's already described China as "humane" and tried to tell us that cuba has a good standard of living, why not go all the way and try to convince us that dave is smart!!! ROFLMAO!!!! :D :D :D

    LMAO!!!!! For 10 pages, this dumbass has been ranting against laissez faire capitalism, then turns and says you should be able to tell about his politics from his favorite magaizine ( after he speaks out against cliches and slogans in the same breath!!) only to THEN say that this favorite magazine is the economist of course, and i quote: ", the newspaper The Economist was founded, and became an influential voice for laissez-faire capitalism"... exactly what he's been ranting against for 10 pages!!! LOL!!! LOL!!! LOL!! LOL!!!

    THEN Ricter starts talking about how intelligent he is... ROFLMAO

    Are you guys politicians or something??? You clowns are priceless!!

    All we're missing is Dr. Z in here telling us how Trotsky wasn't a socialist... LMAO!!!!

    Have a good weekend guys ROFL!!

  77. Sad, false, nonsense as I've already cited for your perusal.

    And what's the percentage of rural electrification in Cuba, now that you've been told it?

    And do you now understand what a standard of living measure is and how it's not GNI?

    And do you understand that Canadians and the citizens of the UK do not visit the doctor in any greater numbers than in the US, and probably even less, and that they rarely get shuffled to non-doctors?

    Oh brother. "Yes, what I posted was absolutely false, but look at me waving my arms!"
  78. You would have convinced me that you're not crazy if only you'd gone for the fifth "LOL." So very close! :)

    Better luck next time.
  79. Right. And a resident of Miami I know nothing about Cuba. I talk to more Cubans each day than you'll speak to in your lifetime.

  80. This may surprise you, but most residents of Miami have never been to Cuba and the ones who were there were from a distinct political upper class. Additionally, it's changed a lot since the 60's when they had tens of thousands of political prisoners in jail. Now it's actually more politically lenient, although still imho oppressive, despite them only having a few dozen political prisoners in jail and allowing limited private enterprise.

    But that's really got nothing to do with the conversation which was that more laissez faire systems are not as strong in terms of quality of life measures than more mixed systems.
  81. Are you as clueless as you seem? Cubans fled here in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and today. For every doctor who came to Miami in 1961 there's been 100 laborers since. If Cuba is paradise then why are Cubans STILL trying to enter the U.S.? You don't see Dominicans coming here. From today's Herald:

    "Until Sept. 1, Lara, a retired Havana teacher, boosted her meager pension by reselling the four cigarette packs she bought each month with her government-subsidized ration card.

    Lara, 73 and a non-smoker, bought them for 11 pesos and sold them on the street for 31, a 20-peso bump to her 260-peso retirement income -- roughly $10.83 a month.

    ``It was a pittance, but critical to surviving,'' she said. ``But now they've removed the cigarettes from the ration card. What am I do? Go hungry! You can't live in Cuba on 260 pesos.''

    Government officials concede it covers only half of a person's monthly food consumption, but most Cubans say it covers no more than one third. The rest must be bought, at much higher prices, at farmers' markets or the illegal black market.

    In an island where the average monthly wage stands at 429 pesos and the average pension at 262 pesos -- about $20 and $10.50, respectively -- the rations' cuts have been hard felt.

    ``The ration card was barely enough to live on if I had a glass of sugared water for breakfast and a piece of bread for lunch ... ``If they keep cutting it, I'm going to starve to death,'' Lara said by phone from Havana. She asked that she not be further identified to avert government retaliation.

    In the past year, potatoes and peas were taken off the card and their prices soared -- potatoes from about 30 cents to about two pesos a pound, and peas from 10-20 cents to 3.50 pesos per pound. Cigarettes, allocated to all those 54 and older, were removed from the card on Sept. 1.

    Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/10/...ts-in-government-subsidies.html#ixzz11L6qjvmt

  82. Nobody's saying that Cuba isn't poor. Nor is anyone claiming that there haven't been many boat people over the years. And Dominicans, fyi, do illegally immigrate and in fact tens of thousands have illegally immigrated to Puerto Rico.

    So your two points are irrelevant, and your third point is incorrect. Quality of life is a different measure from immigration or poverty. If you're an infant you're more likely to survive in Cuba than in many other Latin American countries. That's a significant difference (although not factored into HDI as far as I know.)

    The idea that laissez-faire economies always result in a superior quality of life is statistically wrong and provably wrong.
  83. Yep, you heard it here first folks!! From the guy who says that laissez faire economies produce worse outcome than socialist ("mixed")economies: Poverty has nothing to do with quality of life!! Guess we can tell all of the left wing fruitcakes over here that they can quit crusading against it in america now... Whew!!

    Maybe one of these days he'll figure out that laissez faire economies ARE mixed... or maybe my optimism is in vain...

  84. :D LOL
  85. Here, I'll blow your mind again: "Quality of life is a different measure from immigration or poverty."

    But if you need to stuff the words "Poverty has nothing to do with quality of life" into my mouth to make yourself feel good, knock yourself out. But seriously, is that the stupidest thing you could come up with for me to have said? It's not very creative. How about "Cuba is dah greatest countri evar!" or "I love the Saddam Hussein! Arf!" or something with "Freedom," "Patriot" or "Tree of Liberty" in it? Or, "I'm voting Republican because I want to see a balanced budget!" Or anything with the search tag "phenomena?" :)

    One key aspect of "quality of life" measures is the measuring of "life" or life expectancy (along with education as well as wealth.) So, strangely enough, it's considered a better quality of life to not be dead than to be richer. For example, the infant I previously brought up which lived in a country with greater levels of prenatal care such as Cuba or Uruguay and thus survives, would be considered to have a greater quality of life than an infant in a more lassaiz-faire state like Alabama which the public chooses to let die rather than supply easily available, extensive, thorough and subsidized prenatal care. I know, it's just crazy, but that's how quality of life measures work.
  86. Bigdave understands Cuba have many problems. I do not think Bigdave try to promote socialism of Cuba as success in everything. What Bigdave can see is for so much scarcity, Cuba did educate all people, and provide health care to all people. He can acknowledge that success and not be the communist.
    Right now you have Brazil moving forward very fast. A country with rich in natural resources. But what do they neglect in the past so their (own people) can benefit from private enterprise? Education.
    And like the whole world have setback from this global recession (capitalist or socialist countrys) Cuba lose so much money from 2007 to now when the price for nickel go very, very low from the high of 2007.
  87. How will you know that being "anally raped" is bad...unless you are anally raped??? How is that a materially different statement than "We have to pass the bill, so that you know what is in the bill?"

    Where are the f'ing liberals on this one...where is the "moral outrage" of the "left???" The left is a bunch of worthless, morally bankrupt pieces of dung! They have NOT shown themselves to be anything other than anti-societal sh!t!!! Watch this one CLOSELY middle-of-the-roaders and right wingers... If George W. Bush had said to the American public, "We need to pass the Patriot Act. It is only after passing the Patriot Act that the American public will know how much safer they are by the beloved workings of the Patriot Act."

    Watch the worthless pieces of crap libs reply along the lines of: "Well G. W. Bush did...blah, blah..." or the libs will respond along the lines of "we need to give up a little freedom, to be a bit safer!"

    The above statements "supporting" G. W. Bush are WORTHLESS!!! The useless, idiotic, so called "left" does not want to open its eyes and see that true conservatives (including many on the "religious right") - see NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BUSH AND OBAMA!!! Talking a$$hatS from MSNBC can say what they want to support liberalism, but the truth is...the Tea Party is NOT PALIN, the Tea Party is NOT BECK!!! The Tea Party is (and not necessarily doing it well) trying to represent FREEDOM FROM GOVERNMENT!!! I know this flies in the face of liberalism that thinks that all freedoms and "rights" are derived from the "government," but the left does NOT want to see that the "right-wing" views our freedoms as coming from a HIGHER SOURCE than some jacka$$ politicians.

    To the left wing that does NOT want to think I say: "Please die soon!!!! You are worthless and an enemy of the people!!!" That statement will have blocked off many "left-wingers," but if you ACTUALLY READ THE STATEMENT I WROTE, than you will see that I want the part of the left that does NOT THINK GONE!!!! THINKING LEFT-WINGERS STAY AROUND!!! - we can debate "some policy," but the "debating ground" has to be thought. To the "right" that does not think...please shut up and hide! You do NOT do the "right" a service by speaking....Ms. O'donell PLEASE NOTE!!!

  88. ??? What's your beef with her? Ideally, regardless of her few whacky notions, she should win the seat. She should be voted in based upon "how she is likely to vote". That is (a) she is likely to vote AGAINST Leftist Agenda bills, (b) she's likely to vote FOR Tea Party principles... and her whacky notions are likely to NEVER come to vote. THAT'S why she should win the seat.

    Senators don't have to lead, plan, nor govern. They don't even have to be smart. They should be elected based upon how they are likely to vote.
  89. Infants in Alabama the public chooses to let die? Oh please. Wrong again littledaviedumbass.

  90. Except that's not what she said. She actually said "find out what's in it away from the fog of controversy."

    The real problem is that there's a huge group of people like yourself who are being led around by Beck, Rush and Ailes because you're too lazy to look things up for yourself. You might as well have a ring through your nose.

  91. You got a lot of bullshit in this post. Got any links for most of this garbage?
  92. You're living up to your standard of making a bigger ass out of yourself with each post. Not just a website, a comprehensive program. And if someone doesn't use it it's their fault. Or should the government provide limousine rides in addition to welfare?

    By your link the percentage of mothers beginning prenatal care in the first trimester in Alabama in 2006 was 81.7% when the national average was 83.2%.

    So even though taxpayers are paying for the healthcare of freeloaders, you don't thank them -- you slander them:

    the public chooses to let [infants] die rather than supply easily available, extensive, thorough and subsidized prenatal care.

  93. Links to calculation of typical quality-of-life measures like HDI (Human Development Index)? You can see how it includes things like life-expectancy.

  94. That's not great. Some countries have nearly 100% for prenatal care.

    You see it as them needing limousines, but perhaps what they need is fewer barriers (ie forms, payment, etc.) to receiving prenatal care.

    The fact that you feel that some of these women are "freeloaders" says a lot.

  95. I see HDI was developed by the UN, which makes a statement.
  96. You can see how it DOESN'T include things like income tax, housing prices, energy prices, availability of consumer goods, or cancer survival rates.

  97. [​IMG]
  98. Some of the women who don't pay their own way absolutely ARE freeloaders, littledaviedumbass. It's not what I "feel." It's a fact. Are you actually claiming there are NO freeloaders in Alabama? LMAO!!!

    The fact that you lied about and slandered the taxpayers who pay for those freeloaders with this "gem" of yours exposes you for the disingenuous troll that you are.

    the public chooses to let [infants] die rather than supply easily available, extensive, thorough and subsidized prenatal care.
  99. littledaviedumbass claims he's "extremely fiscally conservative" yet he slanders taxpayers who provide Medicaid because he apparently feels welfare should be bigger and better :p
  100. Quote from bigdavediode:
    "[I'm] Extremely fiscally conservative."

    dave claims to be fiscally conservative??
    I'm curious, how does a tow the party line flaming liberal make such a claim?

    Oh Davie, how would you propose Obama care gets paid for, without increasing the budget deficit of course? And don't tell me yet another behemoth federal bureaucracy isn't going to increase the deficit without taking significant counter measures.

    Same question for dealing with your MMGW?

    For that matter how do you propose we balance the budget?

    And please, be specific.
  101. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CQFEY9RIRJA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CQFEY9RIRJA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
  102. Sigh. Most HDI measures use GDP at PPP. Since you're a wikipedia fan it even says that in the Wikipedia article. PPP is also referred to as "purchasing power parity" to accommodate for different costs of goods. As well, life expectancy includes things like cancer survivors.

    So yes, it does include things like prices, goods and cancer survivors.

    Okay, be honest now -- how many people here who don't even know what PPP is are "investors?"
  103. Well that's absolutely correct. The fact that you see these pregnant women as freeloaders illustrates that you value independence over maternal health. Nothing wrong with that -- well, I wouldn't, but apart from any moral judgment -- that helps to explain a prevailing attitude of why many US states do worse than places like Cuba or Uruguay for prenatal care.

    In Uruguay, for example ('cause you guys freak out so badly if I bring up Cuba) there is no charge and afaik few barriers to prenatal care, whereas in Alabama or other states there are forms to complete because society in the US is more concerned with payment and subsidization concerns than 100% prenatal care.
  104. Well what costs more? Prenatal care or lifetime care for a disabled child or crippled mother?

    Yes, the fiscally conservative choice is "an ounce of prevention." It's also the moral choice.
  105. We do know what PPP is, that's why we know it doesn't mean much. It's based on false assumptions, and nobody even takes it to normalize for actual costs of living anymore, except for maybe you. PPP doesn't include housing prices (the largest expense of a household). PPP basically just factors out any exchange rate differential. It also doesn't include income taxes, consumption/vat taxes, which are HUGE factors.

    No HDI doesn't include cancer survival rates, it just includes average lifespan. Cancer survival has nothing to do with the HDI calculation. The fact is the united states has higher cancer survival rates than europe or canada.

    Since you can not educate yourself, I'll do it for you.

    The main reasons why different measures do not perfectly reflect standards of living are
    PPP numbers can vary with the specific basket of goods used, making it a rough estimate.
    Differences in quality of goods are hard to measure and thereby reflect in PPP.
    PPP calculations are often used to measure poverty rates.

    The goods that the currency has the "power" to purchase are a basket of goods of different types:
    Local, non-tradable goods and services (like electric power) that are produced and sold domestically.
    Tradable goods such as non-perishable commodities that can be sold on the international market (e.g. diamonds).
    The more a product falls into category 1 the further its price will be from the currency exchange rate. (Moving towards the PPP exchange rate.) Conversely, category 2 products tend to trade close to the currency exchange rate. (For more details of why, see: Penn effect).
    More processed and expensive products are likely to be tradable, falling into the second category, and drifting from the PPP exchange rate to the currency exchange rate. Even if the PPP "value" of the Chinese currency is five times stronger than the currency exchange rate, it won't buy five times as much of internationally traded goods like steel, cars and microchips, but non-traded goods like housing, services ("haircuts"), and domestically produced crops. The relative price differential between tradables and non-tradables from high-income to low-income countries is a consequence of the Balassa-Samuelson effect, and gives a big cost advantage to labour intensive production of tradable goods in low income countries (like China), as against high income countries (like Switzerland). The corporate cost advantage is nothing more sophisticated than access to cheaper workers, but because the pay of those workers goes further in low-income countries than high, the relative pay differentials (inter-country) can be sustained for longer than would be the case otherwise. (This is another way of saying that the wage rate is based on average local productivity, and that this is below the per capita productivity that factories selling tradable goods to international markets can achieve.) An equivalent cost benefit comes from non-traded goods that can be sourced locally (nearer the PPP-exchange rate than the nominal exchange rate in which receipts are paid). These act as a cheaper factor of production than is available to factories in richer countries.
    PPP calculations tend to overemphasise the primary sectoral contribution, and underemphasise the industrial and service sectoral contributions to the economy of a nation.

    In addition to methodological issues presented by the selection of a basket of goods, PPP estimates can also vary based on the statistical capacity of participating countries. The International Comparison Program, which PPP estimates are based off, require the disaggregation of national accounts into production, expenditure or (in some cases) income, and not all participating countries routinely disaggregate their data into such categories.
    Some aspects of PPP comparison are theoretically impossible or unclear. For example, there is no basis for comparison between the Ethiopian laborer who lives on teff with the Thai laborer who lives on rice, because teff is impossible to find in Thailand and vice versa, so the price of rice in Ethiopia or teff in Thailand cannot be determined. As a general rule, the more similar the price structure between countries, the more valid the PPP comparison.
    PPP levels will also vary based on the formula used to calculate price matrices. Different possible formulas include GEKS-Fisher, Geary-Khamis, IDB, and the superlative method. Each has advantages and disadvantages.
    Linking regions presents another methodological difficulty. In the 2005 ICP round, regions were compared by using a list of some 1,000 identical items for which a price could be found for 18 countries, selected so that at least two countries would be in each region. While this was superior to earlier "bridging" methods, which is not fully take into account differing quality between goods, it may serve to overstate the PPP basis of poorer countries, because the price indexing on which PPP is based will assign to poorer countries the greater weight of goods consumed in greater shares in richer countries.

  106. I would cap the military budget at the total of the top three countries in the world for military expenditures.

    I would slowly change the tax structure to match the 1950's or 60's.

    The health care budget is actually deficit negative, so that doesn't concern me. And as I stated above prevention is cheaper than cure.

    I would index SS rates to income.

    I would partially uncap the payroll tax or change the tax rate slightly (or a combination of the two); gradually increase the retirement age to 68; and adjust the inflation calculation for annual benefits slightly. Also I would reduce benefits for high earners.

    I would eliminate farm subsidies. Slowly.

    I would slash doctor's reimbursements from Medicare, and if they didn't like it, I would outsource Medicare doctor's services to high end clinics in Mexico. I would create a public option which would drive insurance companies' rates into the ground.

    I would eliminate the Republicans' prescription drug benefit for high earners, and I would mandate caps on prescription drug costs by averaging other countries' retail prescription drug cost for the same medication. (Thus reducing expenditures on pharmaceuticals.)

    I would mandate no private election expenditures by corporations, nor their principals, nor their directors by legislating that corporations are no longer people under the law. (Thus preventing future holes in the budget.) I recognize this one is problematic.
  107. Yes, the PPP isn't entirely accurate. However, despite your arm waving, it DOES INCLUDE a basket of goods to accommodate for differing costs. Some HDI measures include standard PPP, some include the Big Mac Index, or other methods of adjusting for costs. And yes, life expectancy includes cancer survival rates -- if the cancer survivors were dead, then life expectancy would be lower. Think about it.

    Are you going to wave your arms this much every single time you're proven wrong? It gets boring, especially when you cut and paste an entire page of text.
  108. What's absolutely correct? That you're a disingenuous troll?

    Also, I said SOME are freeloaders -- which is a fact -- so don't misrepresent me. And that doesn't illustrate that I "value independence over maternal health," it illustrates that I value work over welfare and personal responsibility over a nanny state.
  109. Taxpayer funding of prenatal care shows that giving libtards like you an inch is a mistake because you will demand a mile. Fact is, poor women who want prenatal care can get it through Medicaid. But that's not good enough for redistributionists like you so you want to steal even more from the productive with lies about the public choosing to let infants die. And you "rationalize" that by saying if we don't have a nanny state to make sure everyone gets prenatal care, we'll just have to pay for the consequences from cradle to grave. What's moral about stealing from productive people to subsidize (in many cases) the lazy who are not even motivated enough to make use of Medicaid? You're not "extremely fiscally conservative," you're a disingenuous troll who is desperately advocating a socialist welfare nanny state. If you're really such a caring person then donate all YOUR spare money to these "poor people," don't try to steal MINE.

  110. Exactly what I wrote. It's a values thing and your values are independence and self-reliance over maternal health. Your opinions are shared by millions and that helps explain why there are more dead infants in many (or most) states than in, for example, Uruguay.
  111. No littledaviedumbass, YOU value welfare over work and a nanny state over personal responsibility. What a model libtard you are :p
  112. Ah yes, the "No, UR A TOWEL!" response.
  113. It's like talking to a brick wall, except the wall might be a better conversation.

    Davie keeps regurgitating the same info in every post.
  114. Thanks for illustrating once again that high intelligence is not a guarantee of wisdom or good judgment.

  115. Okay, let's see your list. Everything on my list reduces the deficit -- can you say the same?
  116. I haven't seen anyone else give concrete steps to reducing the budget deficit, except for ridiculous things like "If we slash taxes the debt will go down!" (Which is just dumb.)
  117. I wasn't really referring to the this, I was referring to the BS HDI, something about let babies die, and something about Uruguay.

    You haven't seen any concrete steps to reduce budget deficits because 0bomba's SPENDING is the problem. I can't put my finger on how libtards view it as a taxing problem when spending is the issue, really it is that straight forward, control spending.
  118. Yes because at least a brick wall isn't a disingenuous libtarded troll :p
  119. Slash taxes= allow people to keep more of what they earn = people earn more = overall size of pie increases

    Hong Kong and Switzerland both have public option style insurance schemes with reasonable income tax rates, no capital gains tax, and far lower corporate tax than the USA.

  120. Baloney. Republicans slash taxes, then don't pay for them, then put it on the credit card. See years 2000-2006.
  121. I thought it was a pretty obvious point that priorities are different among different populations, that some value maternal health over anything else, and some value independence and self-reliance higher. Or are you referring to the fact that HDI scores are higher in more mixed economies? Again, that's fact, not up for debate and yes, not worth discussing.

    Is it? Bush left the country with two wars ongoing, both have to be paid for -- one to remove troops, and the other to try and win it. You want this spending cut, then the troops will be left without a ride home.
  122. How about this littledaviedumbass:

    Or does a self proclaimed "fiscal conservative" like you prefer Obamanomics:


    <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2900281>

  123. I didn't say anything about republicans? Why did you respond to my comment by mentioning republicans? I never endorsed Bush as a model of economic efficiency. Nice strawman though...


  124. Use the Popsicle Index for all I care, they are useless.

    I am talking NOW not Bush. Besides 0dumba has put Bush to shame in the spending department, but yeah I couldn't stand Bush's spending either.
  125. That reminds me of the wife who goes back to her abusive husband because he really, really, really promises not to beat her again this time.

    So far, so good on the Democrats' budget. The short term projections are for a reduced deficit and I don't put much stock in long term projections.
  126. I suggest lower taxes and this is what he says, when I never mentioned republicans or endorsed Bush or anything. He just offered a strawman.

    Me: Switzerland and HK have lower income and corporate taxes, and don't have cap gains tax. I think we should try to follow a model like that...

    Dave: Oh yeah? Well republicans are bad!!!


  127. I'm talking NOW too. The situation is that the war budgets have to be paid for now. Withdrawal has to be paid for.
  128. slash the number of government employees by 25% or the number of hours they work by 25%. declare bankruptcy and slash government pensions by 25%.have a flat tax on the back of the post card. call the flat tax a progressive tax which it is because there is an exemption for each person. privatize most services starting with post office etc.

    the budget will be in balance in short order.
  129. Oh please... Obama and the democraps have set a new record for irresponsible, wasteful deficit spending.

    Yet again you prove your spectacular ignorance and bias. What a good libtard you are, littledaviedumbass :p
  130. Consider what it would be like to have a health insurance plan that capped annual benefits at $2,000. For any medical care costing more than that, you would have to pay out of pocket.

    Examples of care that costs more than $2,000 — and often a lot more — include virtually any cancer treatment, any heart surgery, a year’s worth of diabetes treatment and care for many broken bones. Even a single M.R.I. exam can cost more than $2,000. A typical hospital stay runs thousands of dollars more.

    So does this insurance plan sound like part of the solution for the country’s health care system — or part of the problem?

    A $2,000 plan happens to be one of the main plans that McDonald’s offers its employees. McDonald’s offers its hourly workers two different health care plans, which are known as “mini-med” plans. In one, workers can pay about $730 a year for benefits of up to $2,000. In the other, they can pay about $1,660 a year for benefits of up to $10,000, The Journal reported.

  131. That's a joke of a medical plan. If that offering is what the OP is so scared Mcdonald's will have to drop, let 'em drop it. It's a ripoff anyway.
  132. Speaking from experience, no doubt...

  133. After 230 years of budgets and spending, the "debt per citizen" HAS INCREASED 40% IN < 2 YEARS UNDER ODUMBA. He has done SOOOO much damage, we many never get out from under it.
  134. But self-described "extreme fiscal conservative" littledaviedumbass is fine with it. :p BTW those "long term projections" that he dismisses are from Obama's budget.

    So far, so good on the Democrats' budget. The short term projections are for a reduced deficit and I don't put much stock in long term projections.
  135. Uhh, no. This can best be described as "pure fantasy."

    The 2009 budget was Bush's budget.

    Emergency "off-budget" expenditures for wars were not included, and Obama has merged them into the budget.

    The TARP bailout money has been paid back, and it appears that the government may even make a profit on it.

    So if you're against honest accounting, then Obama has been terrible. If you are for honest accounting, then Obama has done a decent job.
  136. Is it just me or is dave starting to sound like one of those 80's California valley girls?

  137. Actually the projections are from the CBO, the congressional budget office, the the CBO is legally required to reflect the assumption that current laws affecting the budget will remain unchanged.

    Plus they've already revised the deficit downwards for 2010. It's still too high, but that's what you get when you people to vote for unpaid-for wars and unpaid-for tax cuts.

    Now tell us again how you're the real fiscal conservative.
  138. I suggest lower taxes and this is what he says, when I never mentioned republicans or endorsed Bush or anything. He just offered a strawman.

    Me: Switzerland and HK have lower income and corporate taxes, and don't have cap gains tax. I think we should try to follow a model like that...

    Dave: Oh yeah? Well republicans are bad!!!

    WTF?! I never mentioned republicans, why is did he respond to my post by bringing up republicans?

  139. Every time I write "Umm... no" it's because my palm is slapping my forehead. :)
  140. Why did I bring up Republicans? Because your "tax cut" model was tried, and it failed. Badly. In fact, it failed so badly that the economy teetered on a new great depression and banks are STILL being shut down, by the hundreds.

    And yet, there's always a person who writes something like "Hey everybody, let's try what we just tried!"
  141. How come once littledave showed up hermit went back into hiding?

    Dave, where is your buddy? You guys would make a great team.
  142. Thanks, I've read a few of his posts and they're generally pretty good. Although I disagree with him pretty strongly on many items, such as steps needed to do things like balance the budget, he does seem to base his posts on reality and logic.

    If he's like me he's probably not bothering to post because I have everything well in hand.
  143. Actually they're from Obama's budget as I originally said, littledaviedumbass. The CBO doesn't write the president's budget, it's just one of many agencies that provides input that the president is free to accept, modify or ignore.
  144. That might explain your apparent brain damage.
  145. You see? I'm slapping my forehead so much that it's causing brain damage. If I hit myself one more time because of your posts I'm going to have you arrested for assault! :)

    Yes, the CBO provides the input to the OMB, and your chart was provided by the CBO, and it's out of date as I already explained, and it's based on a key assumption, as I also already explained.
  146. Once the president accepts input, the numbers are his. The chart wasn't "provided by the CBO" either. As for it being out of date, the national debt projection in the latest version of Obama's budget is actually WORSE ($16.68 trillion in 2020).
  147. LOL. So if I quote Lincoln then the words are mine. Love it! :)

    And if you believe that anyone can predict anything into 2020, I'd like to sell you a bridge that will be worth a trillion dollars in 2020. :)
  148. I didn't think you would understand right away littledaviedumbass.

    When the president accepts input and acts on it (by producing a budget for example), he owns it. Perhaps you've been confused by Obama incessantly blaming everyone else for his failures.

    On the projection out to 2020... again, Obama owns it because it's in his budget. Why don't you contact him and voice your concern?
  149. So that I can reference it, on which page of the budget is this graph?
  150. The closest thing to what I suggested which has been done in recent history was done by regan in the 80s. Bush tax cuts were too small and meaningless to have much impact. And besides, that's just income tax. We also need to cut corporate tax (ours is by far the highest in the developed world), and cap gains tax(which most developed nations don't even have). So no, what I said hasn't been done.

    Well, that isn't entirely true. It has been, and is being done, by switzerland and hong kong, and it's working well for them. We should try it too. America doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem.

  151. I'm concerned about your ignorance and would like to help you improve your ability to research. Along those lines, it would be best for you to first try on your own to find it. If/when you fail, I'll be happy to be more specific but at least make an effort. Hint: go here to find the budget http://www.google.com/ then search for "debt."

    P.S. I didn't say the graph was in the budget, I said the numbers in the graph were taken from it.
  152. No, the US does not have the highest actual tax rates in the developed world. That's the kind of boogeyman that Republicans use to scare their children before they go to bed.

    And if it WAS true (which it isn't) then it would give a lie to the "Socialist countries have high taxes" mantra, so it's not even internally consistent to the philosophy.

    Here's an article about it:


    How about Swaziland or Lichtenstein? :) In both cases they are tax havens and unless you can induce Canadians and Mexicans to dump money into the new US tax haven you simply will have massively inflated deficits and massively inflated debt (see 2000-2006).
  153. :) Yeah, I didn't think you could find it because it's not there.

    I downloaded the entire budget as a pdf and did a search for "projections" and the White House budget projection is significantly better (unsurprisingly) than the out-of-date and incorrect CBO projection that you posted.

    Having said that, I don't put any stock in the White House's projection, either. But I know that you blasting away as part of a noise machine isn't helping.
  154. Bullshit. It's there. You're just too stupid to find it.

    I told you to search for "debt" littledaviedumbass, not "projections." Can't you get anything right? If you didn't get $16.68 trillion for the national debt in 2020 (which is WORSE than on the graph) you're wrong.

    Try again.
  155. I didn't say it has the highest "actual tax" in the developed world you stupid bitch. I said corporate tax. Did your wife crack you upside the head for being a fucking idiot again or can you just not read? Biggaydave= King of the strawman

  156. I don't call him littledaviedumbass for nothing :p
  157. Why didn't you read the article which specifically addresses corporate taxation?
  158. Littledaviedumbass, here's a serious, well-intentioned suggestion. Why don't you learn a trade or get an education or do something, anything to improve your life? Spewing nonsense on ET all day long won't get you anywhere.
  159. I searched for both, actually.

    You can make this easy, of course. You could just tell us all what page has your incorrect CBO graph.

    You could only BS so long, my friend, before everyone caught on.
  160. Phenomena can't do that. It is beyond his comprehensive abilities.
  161. I've been thinking of taking up quilting, but then I also enjoy smashing rocks. :)

    What are your hobbies? Or your opinion of FAS versus SPY?
  162. :) I'm quite intrigued as to how these folks do in the markets. (And I'm not convinced that they do poorly, either, they might do quite well given their drive, or perhaps their absolutism causes them to be unable to learn from error. Either way it would be fascinating to see actual evidence of how they do.)
  163. Well they're definetely "bullies"...! Perhaps that aggression helps them out in the markets. You don't have to be a genius to trade but you have to have some logic in your debates. :D
  164. Oh, and here's the pro DEA jerkoff, coming in to champion high taxes... big surprise...

  165. ...LOL... :D What you don't like the DEA? I'm glad my taxes paid for such a fine agency!:p
  166. Before everyone caught on to what, littleLAZYdaviedumbass? That you're full of shit?

    It's there and can be found by searching on the word "debt." That's a FACT.

    P.S. It's not my "CBO graph" moron. And for the second time, I didn't say the graph was in the budget. I said the graph was made from numbers taken from the budget.
  167. LOL.
  168. If you carefully read the figures quoted in the Smart Money article and do the math, you'll see that even with pass-thru's to personal filers, the defacto Corporate tax rate is still about a third of profits. And that doesn't include the myriad of local taxes including property, sales and utilities. Not to mention that any dividends payed to investors on net earnings are <i>also taxed.</i> Plus, in much of the world, the government is paying for employee health care.

  169. 30% would be a very high rate and a lousy accountant.

    When I ran my business in Canada I paid 19% one year. Any middle income earner paid more than I did.
  170. Yes, you paid 19 pct because your corporation didn't make shit, and because canada's corporate tax rate is lower.

    The usa has a higher corporate tax rate than anywhere else in the developed world except for MAYBE Japan.

    Only this dumbass would bring up corporate tax rates in Canada to make a point about corporate tax rates in the USA. LOL!!!


  171. ROTFL......

  172. Stay in the dark if you want to.
  173. If I could remember where I read it, I'd post a link, but one company is offering it's employees a cash (1k) buyout if they get health insurance from somewhere else other than the company.