Liberal Supermajority

By the way on NFL network the 1991 Redskins are on...

Imagine that, a company from a socialist country having (http://www.autoweek.com/article/20050401/FREE/504010702) the upper hand. Hopefully the democrats will be able to duplicate their (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Democratic_Party_%28Japan%29) success politically, socially, and commercially (without the mistakes of course ;)). I haven't done my homework on the details of Japan's health care system, but it sure sounds something like a program we already have in the U.S., Medicare. The legacy health costs the US automakers are/were shouldering are a result of stupidity/greed on the part of their boards and the leadership of the IAW.

If the Democrat party in the U.S. held these ideals, I would certainly have no problem with supporting them:
The LDP traditionally identified itself with a number of general goals: rapid, export-based economic growth; close cooperation with the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) in foreign and defense policies; and several newer issues, such as administrative reform. Administrative reform encompassed several themes: simplification and streamlining of government bureaucracy; privatization of state owned enterprises (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_public_corporations); and adoption of measures, including tax reform, needed to prepare for the strain on the economy posed by an aging society. Other priorities in the early 1990s included promoting a more active and positive role for Japan in the rapidly developing Asia-Pacific region, internationalizing Japan's economy by liberalizing and promoting domestic demand, creating a high technology information society, and promoting scientific research. A business-inspired commitment to free enterprise was tempered by the insistence of important small business and agricultural constituencies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture,_forestry,_and_fishing_in_Japan) on some form of protectionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism) and subsidies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidies).

As for 8588's posts, they're nothing more than dickish rants. There's nothing correct about calling them under-worked and overpaid.As far as the "rant" part, that's between you guys. I agree with points made by both of you, the end result in most union shops is that the workers are less-worked and paid higher compared to their non-union counterparts. But also, the rank and file of the unions shoulder only a small portion of the blame (as do GM/Chrysler/Ford stockholders) for the current state-of-affairs. The rank and file are mostly hard-working folks just trying to do the best they can for their families.

Yes, FUD. Our current system does not work:
NEJM -- The Quality of Health Care Delivered to Adults in the United States (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/348/26/2635)

Your response is typical of the "I'm in the pocket of a lobbyist" movement attempting to stifle true healthcare reform that is good for everyone - "I can't really refute the facts or the polls, so I'll call it socialism" (or maybe even fascism!).
Political Irony › Like a jealous lover, the insurance industry doesn’t want you to be able to get health insurance from anyone, even if they turned you down (http://politicalirony.com/2009/06/27/insurance-industry-jealous-lover/)

Most polls support the public option:
FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Public Support for the Public Option (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/public-support-for-public-option.html)

But many Rs and Dems are beholden to special interests:
FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Special Interest Money Means Longer Odds for Public Option (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/special-interest-money-means-longer.html?2ndtry)

So, yes - FUD.A NEJM poll, Nate Silver from 538, and an accusation that anyone against Obama's plan of healthcare reform must be on the take, WOW you came with both guns fully loaded and blazin'. The Obam-Aid must be real good. Put on your Air Jordans and wait for the Reid/Pelosi-bop comet to wisk you away to a Marxist worker's paradise.

When the national debt is + $20T in 2017, when crap & trade increases the average family's energy costs (taxes) by over $ 1,500 / yr., when SS & Medicare are closing in on being insolvent, when the employee cost of private health insurance has doubled and quality/access to care is significantly reduced.....I'll blame you.....and saden.....and the homosexuals.


Note: Before I get the homophobe response, the last part is a running joke from the Guard at Holocaust Museum thread.

Yes, FUD. Our current system does not work:
NEJM -- The Quality of Health Care Delivered to Adults in the United States (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/348/26/2635)

Your response is typical of the "I'm in the pocket of a lobbyist" movement attempting to stifle true healthcare reform that is good for everyone - "I can't really refute the facts or the polls, so I'll call it socialism" (or maybe even fascism!).
Political Irony › Like a jealous lover, the insurance industry doesn’t want you to be able to get health insurance from anyone, even if they turned you down (http://politicalirony.com/2009/06/27/insurance-industry-jealous-lover/)

Most polls support the public option:
FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Public Support for the Public Option (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/public-support-for-public-option.html)

But many Rs and Dems are beholden to special interests:
FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Special Interest Money Means Longer Odds for Public Option (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/special-interest-money-means-longer.html?2ndtry)

So, yes - FUD.
This ia a clip from one of your 538 links:A major, though by no means the only, substantive point of debate regarding health care reform is whether the plan considered by Congress will include a "public option" -- a government-run insurance program that would compete with private plans. Barack Obama's plan on the campaign trail included a public option: "any American will have the opportunity to enroll in the new public plan or an approved private plan," it said.

So what will be these approved private plan's. I'd bet they will be the expensive ones forcing everyone to the goverment run health care. For the plan to even work they have to get a large number of healthy americans to join the plan to offset the cost of all the people with health issues. Look at what is happening with the state run health ins in Massachusetts and now the state run ins is more expensive then private coverage. Its the same old thing. The goverment has this great idea on how to run something and make it cheaper and before its said and done it drives up the cost instead of driving them down. Here is a clip from an article and a link to the article.

The proponents of the Massachusetts reforms
also promised that those reforms would
reduce health care costs. Governor Romney
said that “the cost of health care would be reduced”
and the plan would make health insurance
“affordable” for every Massachusetts citizen.

27
Supporters suggested that the reforms

would reduce the price of individual insurance
policies by 25–40 percent.



28

In reality, insurance premiums rose by 7.4
percent in 2007, 8–12 percent in 2008, and are
expected to rise 9 percent this year.



29 By comparison,

nationwide insurance costs rose by
6.1 percent in 2007, just 4.7 percent in 2008,
and are projected to increase 6.4 percent this
year.



30 On average, health insurance costs

$16,897 for a family of four in Massachusetts,


compared to $12,700 nationally.
31


Boy that sounds just like what the Dems and Obama are saying right now.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp112.pdf


Oh, your first link was a study done over 6 years ago.

the people of mn that voted for franken have to be,HAVE TO BE the most retarded people in the entire world.

Well, they also voted in Jesse Ventura, so they can't be that bad.

I think the election of Al Franken says more about Norm Coleman than it does about the voters.

Well, they also voted in Jesse Ventura, so they can't be that bad.

I think the election of Al Franken says more about Norm Coleman than it does about the voters.
you beat me to it. good post

Well, they also voted in Jesse Ventura, so they can't be that bad.

I think the election of Al Franken says more about Norm Coleman than it does about the voters.


you might be on to something there. i really don't know to much about norm coleman, i just think frankin is a total idiot.