What the hell were they thinking?

DarqueKnight

It all depends on the type of leadership you have and what their motivations are. The Charity Hospital System in Louisiana was implemented with a sincere desire to provide quality health care to those who could not afford it.

I am curious to see how the national healthcare plan will be implemented in Louisiana since there is no actual need for it. I am thinking (hoping) there would be provisions for states to opt-out if they can demonstrate the ability to provide healthcare at a standard equal to or greater than the federal plan.

DarqueKnight

Sabers are rattling:

"We don't think it makes any sense to implement Obamacare in Louisiana. We're going to do what we can to fight it."-Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal


"Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal Refuses to Implement Obamacare Despite Supreme Court Ruling

nooshinjohn

Bobby J for VEEP!:cool:

markmarc

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Bobby J for VEEP!:cool:

No way, it's a dead-end. He needs to do two terms as Gov. then spend some time in the Senate. Then go for the big prize.

tonyb

bsoko2 wrote: »

Same arguents were said when social security was made a law. How many of you are glad you have social security?

Tell ya what my friend, they could write me a check right now for all the money I put into it plus a small interest, and we can call it even. I won't ask anything of them when I retire, and they won't have to send me a nickel.

Truth be told, most think that money is set aside with your name on it for the day you retire. Nope, that money is long spent elsewhere. A big piggy bank for greedy little hands. Now the cookie jar is empty and they owe all these baby boomers retirement money.....so, lets rob Peter to pay Paul as the story goes.

Cathy,
I know it's easy to demonize corporate america, but there are worse demons in the branches of government. Free markets can work for alot of people, except the lazy, and all I see today that demonize free markets, like the OWS crowd, fall into that lazy catagory in my opinion anyway. Giving something for free to anyone means you must first take it away from someone else. I take it your pissed off at being that someone else ?

Timothy Smith

I want to thank the "powers that be" or the mysterious entity known as "he who closes the threads", for keeping this one open.

Here we are at 159 replies and still going (and I had my doubts around the early teens mark).

Lots of smart people on this blog, and it is interesting to see opinions discussed on controversial subjects.

tonyb

There's absolutely no reason why we can't have these discussions. As long as they are civil and conducted in an adult manner. Healthcare is an important part of all of our lives, if we are to reform it, lets make an effort to get it more right than not.

Interesting what Louisiana is doing, I never knew they had taken those steps. I hope it works out for them. At least they are trying different approaches to a difficult problem and thats all anyone could ask of their leadership.

BTW DK,

All states are required to have a balanced budget ? Have you taken a look at states deficits lately ? How about my own, Illinois. Also, congress is by law required to pass a budget every year, yet we haven't had one for 3 years now and I'm pretty sure nobody has one in mind for next year either. Laws are for the little people, I thought you knew that.:cheesygrin:

exalted512

nooshinjohn

^that's signature material right there!

txcoastal1

exalted512 wrote: »

Classic "exhalted"

Also, if you’re not a citizen you don’t have to prove you are insured, but you still get free health care......

I’m moving to Mexico and sneaking back.

DarqueKnight

tonyb wrote: »

BTW DK,

All states are required to have a balanced budget ? Have you taken a look at states deficits lately ? How about my own, Illinois. Also, congress is by law required to pass a budget every year, yet we haven't had one for 3 years now and I'm pretty sure nobody has one in mind for next year either. Laws are for the little people, I thought you knew that.:cheesygrin:

I knew that. It's good to be king, or at least very closely associated with him.

What I didn't know was that states have the legislatively authority l to "suspend" the requirement under certain conditions (war, recession, personal preference, etc). They also have the authority to define what "balanced" means.

Rather than a formal rule, Vermont relies on a "tradition" of not spending more than they take in:

"Gov. Peter Shumlin, a newly elected Democrat, said Vermont was so innately frugal that it had no use for a balanced-budget law.

"Vermont has more common sense than the 49 other states," Mr. Shumlin said in a recent interview. "We pay our bills, live within our means and hold firm to the tradition of not spending more than we take in."

[URL=" [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/us/24vermont.html[/url] "]
[/url]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/us/24vermont.html

txcoastal1

Thats great DK but you live in a state with low poverty%, and on the upper scale of average income, and don't live on a border state

and plagued with illegal immigrants.

DarqueKnight

I don't live in Vermont.

txcoastal1

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I don't live in Vermont.

Well lets move there lol...would love to cut unnecessary services, but the money grabbing politicians and the hound dog lobbyist won't let it be

DarqueKnight

No.

The day after I close on my new Vermont residence there will be some natural disaster or other calamity that causes Vermont to run deficits until the end of the century.

The travel shows seem to indicate that Panama is real nice.

txcoastal1

DarqueKnight wrote: »

No.

The day after I close on my new Vermont residence there will be some natural disaster or other calamity that causes Vermont to run deficits until the end of the century.

The travel shows seem to indicate that Panama is real nice.

LOL.... I was looking at Panama Saturday night talking to the wife....time to save the nickels

gdb

"The travel shows seem to indicate that Panama is real nice."

Yeah....until you get kidnapped and held for ransom ! Might be a teenie bit better off in Costa Rica, IMO.

txcoastal1

All this talk makes me reflect on:

VR3

That's freaking priceless

DarqueKnight

gdb wrote: »

"The travel shows seem to indicate that Panama is real nice."

Yeah....until you get kidnapped and held for ransom ! Might be a teenie bit better off in Costa Rica, IMO.

If anyone kidnapped me they would soon send me back...with a generous payment if I promise not to bother them again.

gdb

DarqueKnight wrote: »

If anyone kidnapped me they would soon send me back...with a generous payment if I promise not to bother them again.

:eek:

mhardy6647

Probably worth mentioning that Vermont is a "border state"...

gdb

I think the border actually bisects a library in VT

txcoastal1

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Probably worth mentioning that Vermont is a "border state"...

Wrong border...Southern border....I stand corrected

I don't think the French Canadians are a threat to American economy...just a little stuck up

newrival

DarqueKnight wrote: »

What I didn't know was that states have the legislatively authority l to "suspend" the requirement under certain conditions (war, recession, personal preference, etc). They also have the authority to define what "balanced" means.

I'm joining a little late, as I've been away, but you're right. For example, in Illinois, the state senate is not obliged to count outstanding pensions, payments, or contracts in the budget. Even on years when it is said to be balanced, we are running a few billion in the red.

I'll take a little time and read though the thread, as I have comments, but don't want to just repeat what may have likely been said.

tonyb

Wow what a concept.....don't spend more than you take in. Kudo's to Vermont. So what happened when those Vermont congressmen/woman hit the big time ? They vote to spend more than they take in ? I guess whats good for Vermont doesn't jive with the rest of the country ? Granted, Vermont doesn't have some issues that other states may have.

The problem comes in with those who may look at that and say "so lets take more in." Tax more, regulate more, create legislation that gets donors opening wallets. Then they spend all that and keep looking for other ways to raise revenue or cutting services, but never cutting spending. Oh, they may cut the rate of increased spending and call that a cut, but we all know that game.

I love a state that lives within it's means, but lets face it, the poor/homeless/illegals aren't exactly beating down Vermonts door to go live there nor are there cheddar cheese pushers on every corner. Every state has unique needs, why not let them best decide whats good for that particular state instead of a bigger pile of doggie dodo hundreds or thousands of miles away.

Conradicles

txcoastal1 wrote: »

All this talk makes me reflect on:

Ha! I am Cherokee Indian and I feel that!

Conradicles

oops

Polkersince85

Thomas Jefferson, who penned the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, wrote roughly 40 years later, in 1816, to Samuel Kercheval:

"We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers."

nooshinjohn

Polkersince85 wrote: »

Thomas Jefferson, who penned the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, wrote roughly 40 years later, in 1816, to Samuel Kercheval:

"We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers."

Thomas Jeffferson was a prophet. To bad we failed to heed his words.