We Cant' Afford It! (Obamacare)

[SIZE=+1]We simply can't afford it (Our country can't afford anything)[/SIZE]
Miami Herald ^ | 9/3/2009 | Pat Buchanan


`We just can't afford it!''
Not long ago, every America child heard that, at one time or another, in the home in which he or she was raised. ``We just can't afford it!'' It may have been a new car, or two weeks at the beach, or the new flat-panel TV screen. Every family knew there were times you had to do without. Every father and mother has had to disappoint their kids with those words. Why is it that what parents do many times a year politicians seem incapable of doing: saying no.
How many times in the last decade have the political leaders of either party stood up and declared, ``No, we cannot afford this.''
The White House has conceded that the deficits over the next 10 years will total $2 trillion more than they had reported just months ago. Instead of $7.1 trillion, we will run $9 trillion in deficits.
Dollar might collapse
Meanwhile, the White House demands a new entitlement -- healthcare coverage for 47 million uninsured who can't afford it or refuse to buy it -- that will cost at least $1 trillion over 10 years. Can we afford this -- now?
``We can't afford not to,'' comes the retort. This is ``a core ethical and moral obligation,'' says President Obama.
But is it not a core ethical and moral obligation not to debauch the currency in which most of the hard-earned wealth of the American people is invested? Yet, as Warren Buffett writes in The New York Times, collapse of the dollar and the end of its days as the world's reserve currency is what we are risking.
Government expenditures are running at 185 percent of revenue, which is like the lone family breadwinner earning $50,000 a year, while the family spends $92,500 a year. With families that do that, it is not too long before the credit cards are cut off, the mortgage is called in and the family Chevy is repossessed.
According to those same White House figures, this year's deficit will be closer to $1.6 trillion than the $1.8 trillion previously projected. Now, there are only three basic ways to finance that deficit.
• The first is by borrowing the savings of one's own citizens, thus consuming the seed corn of the private economy.
• The second is by borrowing from abroad.
• The third is by having the Fed, ``through a roundabout process,'' writes Buffett, ``printing money.''
Assume the Treasury borrows most of the savings of the American people this year, say, $500 billion. Then Uncle Sam is able to persuade Beijing to buy another $500 billion in Treasury bonds. The Fed must still run the printing presses to create another $600 billion.
How long before our Chinese, Japanese and OPEC creditors conclude that the Americans are depreciating their currency and dump their U.S. Treasury bonds -- or demand a higher rate of interest to cover the risks of their dollar-denominated assets sinking in value?
But how do we cut spending when the five largest items in the budget -- Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, interest on the debt and national defense -- are untouchables and growing faster then the 3 percent to 4 percent a year a full-employment economy can manage?
Are we going to cut veterans benefits, spending on our crumbling infrastructure or education, when Obama is promising every kid a college degree? Are we going to cut funds for Afghanistan and Iraq, and risk losing both wars? Are we going to cut foreign aid after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been touring Africa telling one and all that America is here to stay?
No plan to cut spending
How about cutting funds for food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit? Good luck. How about PBS and the National Endowment for the Arts? Just try it.
Does either party have any plan to cut federal spending from today's near 28 percent of GDP to the more traditional 21 percent? George W. Bush didn't even try, and Obama is making that Great Society Republican president look like Ron Paul.
When a democracy reaches a point where the politicians cannot say no to the people, and both parties are competing for votes by promising even more spending or even lower taxes, or both, the experiment is about over.
``Remember,'' said John Adams, ``democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.''




When the Looters are in control and dishing out the achiever's money to the moochers, no doubt the Republic as we have known it is well on its way down.

 

Youser, youser, Pat Buchanan has such a well formed and enlightened view of the world and history.

See:

Did Hitler Want War? « Patrick J. Buchanan – Official Website

I certainly believe every word of wisdom that drops from his jowls.

 

Besides your ad hominem argument,( also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person" or "argument against the person" is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of a person advocating the premise) ) against Pat, do you think the US can afford such a government heathcare plan as favored by the Obama administration? If yes, where are the $$ coming from?

Do you really believe Obama and the Democrats when thay say the new plan will be deficit neutral and won't raise taxes?

To me, its a blatant attempt to seize control of a large share of our economy by the federal government, to redistribute the (dwindling) wealth, and to screw the seniors of this country who had helped build up this nation.

Other than that, its a fine fantastic plan that every old Bolshevik would have loved.

yes, I agree Pat's "analysis" of WWII is certainly lacking...but what about Obamacae (Even a blind sow finds an acorn in a field once and a while)

 

I do not believe anything any politician says nowadays. The people need to take back the government and vote every one of them out of office. It is so easy yet the people complain but do nothing. Americans are getting their just desserts.

 

The people ARE acting by getting off the couch and speaking out loudly and in great numbers. The government response is to call them racists and extremists.

Good question, I haven't heard anyone who actually believes them. That's their problem; lack of trust.

 

I want pics of texsons blind sow.. Prove it.. And thir sow would not be blind with free health care.. Obama just wants to bring the bacon home.. Surely a sandwich worth packing..

 

For all it's unpopularity the 'ad hominem' isn't an entirely terrible piece of logic, 'this guy is a bit of a nutter, why should we blindly believe anything he says?'

I might also suggest that what with the US being the wealthiest nation in the world, if tin pot islands off western Europe can afford public funded healthcare why can't the US?

 

I think the point is: people want to have the freedom to make their own decisions. The US government wants to control, direct, and manage people and their choices in regards to health care (for a start...after all Moscow wasnt built in a day). Liberty versus totalianism.

Barry has already looted the US Treasury for paying off his union and banking bosses, and his need to control GM and Chrysler. 9 trillion $$ is just the start! barry is spending faster than the IRS can collect!

As for wealthiest nation, well, the national debt here in the states is now astronomical in costs per person. The US is living on borrowed time before China pulls the economic rug out from under the dollar. The only thing stopping China is the number of WallyWorld customers would be greatly reduced or eliminated if they did it.

Obama is apparently trying to ruin the US through his rather transparent schemes of wealth redistribution....things will get very hot here if he persists.

 

Is the intention to remove the choice and ban private care? As over here surely more choice is a good thing and private health here is a massive industry still.. Freedom to spend as much on your families health still exists, i doubt many in the city are not covered by employers schemes. I once had forces hospitals, nhs, and employers scheme to choose from.. Im all for choice..

 

Nobody know what the plan will be, it doesn't yet exist.

One version has made it out of the House, the one from the Senate is still in the works, and then they have to be "combined" in the Conferrence Committee stage, then that bill that emerges from committee has to be voted on in both chambers (and pass), and then, and ONLY THEN can it be sent to the President for a signature. It is a LONG LONG way from existence by any stretch of the imaination or the imaginative.

Calling anything "Obamacare" is simply wrong, he hasn't put forward any concrete concept, only asked Congress (his job BTW) to form/shape a bill for his signature.

 

That is not acting, that is just still complaining.......loudly if anything. Let's actually do something and take it to the polls. I hear people complain about incumbents yet those incumbents are re-elected. At least I know I'm voting for the other guy......we just need more.

 

So everybody should just shut up, bend over and grab the ankles until 2010? By the time the people get a chance to vote it will be too late. All they can do at the moment is speak out.

 

How can there be bills in congress if there is no plan? This is why this whole thing is going to turn into one huge Charlie Foxtrot.

 

Blimey.. I should have read clints pdf after all.. Do you mean all these threads are ongoing, all tv progs, interviews n all, and no one even knows just what they are objecting too apart from it will cost money? Pwww...

 

The members of congress don't even know what they are supposed to vote on. They just repeat the mantra that it won't raise the deficit because of "all the money it will save" and new taxes on the rich, which is laughable. No details though on just how they will reduce costs by covering everbody for everything without rationing.

 

Exactly Walpole! Not to mention where do we find additional doctors to cover the 40-50 million extra folks?

 

What is also interesting to note is that Health-care by in large makes about an 18% profit margin industry wide. Now, it's still making that in this economic recession/depression. Why would we want to cut the legs out of under the sector that is actaully doing alright in the economy?

Stefan: The UK may be able to afford public health care. Yeepeey, that is wonderful for the UK and I hope you chaps can keep it up forever. I just disagree with the entire idea of 'nationalizing 20% of the American economy.' Also, I would not like the guy who was issuing my drivers license to be in charge of my health care.

Again, Health care is the issue being presented when its actaully our liberty that is at stake. Do you wish to make choices regarding your health care? Or do you want some paper-pusher doing it for you? (Who does not care about how long his choice takes, what type of service he/she provides(as they wont get fired/customer cant take his business elsewhere).


Yours,

Bill

 

Why do you seem to think we dont have a choice over here? Im suddenly surprised to find we have more choice than americans do. And my families care has never gone thru drivers clerks. Just health professionals.. But each to their own i suppose.

 

Texson mate, maybe train some of those 50m into the healthcare industry. Create more teaching jobs.. More taxes input by them both.. Medical drugs indusry benefits with higher gross sales and insurance industry still thrives as it still does massivly over here.

 

But as i say each to their own