Third Presidential Debate
- Thread starter Bill3000
- Start date
Thank you for demonstrating that America really does have a fundamental problem with education.
I agree with AZ. If the benefits are taxed, and the employee is being steadily asked to pay a higher share, than you will both get people dropping out of the program because they can't afford it any longer, and you'll get businesses dropping it because it will no longer make as much financial sense for them.
Meanwhile McCain would give $5000 to the health insurers, but will that overcome what the people are losing in the other ways? Will that be indexed to the skyrocketing cost of healthcare? Or will it just serve as more corporate welfare and leave consumers out in the cold?
Meanwhile McCain would give $5000 to the health insurers, but will that overcome what the people are losing in the other ways? Will that be indexed to the skyrocketing cost of healthcare? Or will it just serve as more corporate welfare and leave consumers out in the cold?
The employer still isn't being taxed, and so is not suffering a disincentive.
The employee is being taxed on the benefits, and so may be tempted to shop elsewhere. However, with a $5000 tax credit, it's unlikely that he'll actually be taxed on his employer's health plan.
edit: holy crap. McCain's tax credit is a refundable tax credit. Sheesh. That's weird. He's basically just giving everyone $2500 bucks and then taxing their healthcare plan. Gods, that's were the attack should focus.
For what it's worth, McCain said that if you liked Obama's plan, you would love the Canadian or British system.
Well I happen to prefer the system here. Not by any means the best in the world (hello, France) but it's preferable to down south.
And the system in the UK is fundamentally different from what Canada does. Too bad McCain hasn't even looked into how other governments have done health care, he might have seen a few wise ideas.
Well I happen to prefer the system here. Not by any means the best in the world (hello, France) but it's preferable to down south.
And the system in the UK is fundamentally different from what Canada does. Too bad McCain hasn't even looked into how other governments have done health care, he might have seen a few wise ideas.
knowltok2
Deity
Is there really a point in discussing McCain's plan? He isn't going to have the congress to pull it off. The debate should really be between the status quo and Obama's plan.
I realize that the House can change quite a bit in 2 years, but I doubt the Dems loose the Senate in two years.
So why bother talking about McCain's plan? IF he's elected, any heathcare reform to come out of Congress with his signature on it will only barely resemble what he's talking about now.
I realize that the House can change quite a bit in 2 years, but I doubt the Dems loose the Senate in two years.
So why bother talking about McCain's plan? IF he's elected, any heathcare reform to come out of Congress with his signature on it will only barely resemble what he's talking about now.
I think if you had a single payer with an "opt out" for all those who got employer benefits or provided their own, most employers would drop coverage. So it would morph into a real single payer except for those wealthy enough to opt out on their own.
But I don't really see a downside to that compared to the current system. The current system is a bureaucratic nightmare. Deliberately so.
But I don't really see a downside to that compared to the current system. The current system is a bureaucratic nightmare. Deliberately so.
That's not automatically true. Not if a president is willing to throw his weight around and the opposition party does not have 67 votes in the Senate. Vetoes, the treat of vetoes, and the fact that it takes 60/100 Senators to accomplish anything in the first place means that the balance of power in Washington has shifted from the Congress to the executive.
Not what the Founding Fathers intended.
knowltok2
Deity
That's not automatically true. Not if a president is willing to throw his weight around and the opposition party does not have 67 votes in the Senate. Vetoes, the treat of vetoes, and the fact that it takes 60/100 Senators to accomplish anything in the first place means that the balance of power in Washington has shifted from the Congress to the executive.
Not what the Founding Fathers intended.
Yeah, but tou don't need 67 votes to stop something. You just need 40. And the dems are going to have a lot more than that for the next two years, and almost certainly for the two after that. So how is he going to get his healthcare package passed in anything resembling its current form?
I suppose he could try tying it to funding the troops, that's always good for getting people to not think clearly.
Reagan wasn't totally handicapped by Democrats controlling Congress.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
From the Horse's mouth.
If we can't even trust Joe any more ...
And anyone who reads the part on the next page:
In a video interview with the Toledo Blade newspaper after the debate, Wurzelbacher described himself as a man of modest means.
"You see my house. I don't have a lot of bells and whistles in here, really. My truck's a couple of years old and I'm going to have it for the next 10 years, probably. So I don't see him (Obama) helping me out."
He said he wasn't swayed by Obama's health-care pitch, either, describing it as "just one more step toward socialism." (me:)
Wurzelbacher said he was pleased with McCain's performance. "McCain came across with some solid points, and I was real happy about that," he said.
If we can't even trust Joe any more ...
Joe the Plumber's also a registered Republican who voted in the Republican primary. Not that Obama shouldn't be reaching across the aisle (my friends) and seeking the support of Republicans, but he's not exactly the middle-of-the-road undecided voter who pundits pretend is going to decide the election.
Edit: He's also not a plumber.
Can the McCain campaign do anything right?
Cleo
Edit: He's also not a plumber.
Can the McCain campaign do anything right?
Cleo
Ayers got brought up in the context of the negative attacks, and Obama was able to mention Warren Buffet's support while discussing Ayers. Very clever.
Murky
Deity
McSame looked pretty desperate to me.
But then he said his campaign was about the economy not more than a few seconds after going down that road with ayers. McCain just doesn't have a grip on anything.
I find it interesting that in the first and third debates, pundits said McCain won or drew, and then the public absolutely disagreed. I think they've really underestimated Obama's ability to connect. On specifics, McCain didn't lose handily each debate, but he's been unable to close the deal. That's why he 'lost' the debates and that's why he's losing the election.
Joe the Plumber's also a registered Republican who voted in the Republican primary. Not that Obama shouldn't be reaching across the aisle (my friends) and seeking the support of Republicans, but he's not exactly the middle-of-the-road undecided voter who pundits pretend is going to decide the election.
Edit: He's also not a plumber.
Can the McCain campaign do anything right?
Cleo
By GOP voter suppression standards, he should also have to vote provisionally since his information (spelling of his last name) does not match perfectly with what is in the voter registration database.
