35 Years: Why Havent Dems Gone For The Jugular?

[eniwetok]

ACA isn't prefect... in fact I have real problems when the government fines American for not buying a product from a private company. There should have been a public option. ACA is corporate welfare.

And the ACA perpetuates much the inefficiency and waste in the health care system because it leaves intact all the parasitic health insurance companies that divert money into corporate overhead...

But ACA set the precedent that the US could finally tackle health care... even if it wasn't prefect. After all, we do have an antidemocratic system which made it easy for small minorities could block even the most desirable reforms.

The GOP wants to destroy that precedent. I don't believe they have any intention of keeping the parts of ACA people like. The GOP talks about choice... but choice IS EXPENSIVE. It's expensive to administer and bill all these different plans requiring more administration on the part of providers. Money is diverted to such nonsense instead of care.

So what has the GOP proposed so far... limiting the rights of people hurt in medical procedures, HSAs which are another subsidy to those with money and do nothing to those without, selling insurance across state lines which means all the companies will flock to the state that offers the fewest patient protections. It's all the same bullshit the GOP has offered since the GOP dropped support for national health care in 94. Before that 80% of GOP Senators were cosponsors to plan with an individual mandate. Yes that's true!

Canada spends about 50% of what the US does in constant dollars and covers everyone. We spend 100% of what Canada does to leave 20-30 million un- and under insured. What's wrong with this picture?

If we just look at the facts, we'd have to conclude the GOP are idiots. But what if they're "smart" for evil purposes? When the GOP gave up fiscal responsibility and adopted the destructive Starve The Beast strategy back in the 80's they proved they didn't care how much they stole from future generations or how much money was pissed away on interest... now about 430 billion a year. https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm Some goes to Social Security but just for comparison... NASA gets only about 20 billion a year. What does the GOP care... AS LONG AS THAT MONEY ISN'T SPENT TO BENEFIT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

35 years have passed. Deficits and increasing debt pose an existential threat to Dem programs... just as the GOP intended. I will never understand why the Dems haven't gone for the jugular to educate the People and expose these traitors who are stealing trillions from future generations, undermining the fiscal health of the US and our ability to deal with emergencies.

[angstlessk]

1. SOMEONE convinced us we are the greatest country on earth (sorta like the greatest show on earth)

And we don't need no other country tellin us we ain't!

Like they say...one is born every minute!

[Initech]

2. No money that benefits someone, but plenty of money for the war machine!

I think we need to make this our mantra - the republicans want all war, all the time. And we need to put a stop to this bullshit.

[eniwetok]

7. How Did The US Go Fiscally Insane?

The GOP could not have gotten away with its fiscally insane, if not traitorous, Starve The Beast strategy without some help from the Dems who never offered any resistance to it. That's not to say they could have stopped this irresponsible political strategy of sabotaging government through massive deficits and crushing debt. But they could have EXPOSED THE GOPs MOTIVES. In politics if one isn't always on the offensive, they're losing ground... and that goes for building resistance to specific policies. After all, there had to be some in the GOP base who worried that the GOP's Free Lunch attitude of stealing money from future generations to provide money to buy votes today was irresponsible. Yes, Clinton did try to reverse these growing deficits, but never went after the GOPs motives. But Obama just gave into to the temptation to keep most of Bush's irresponsible tax cuts even when Bush on-budget deficit was -342 billion for FY07 (ending Sept07).

So how did the Dems go from wanting to pay down debt in election 2000 when there was a true on-budget surplus to wanting to keep irresponsible tax cuts in election 2008 when there was 6 trillion more in debt and 340 billion deficits? Just as Bush people comforted themselves that deficits were shrinking in 04-05 as if that meant debt wasn't growing... so did Obama supporters. Curiously, the issue was dropped when the deficit rose a whopping by 150 billion between FY15 and FY16. And now we have Trump who's brought into the old trickle down bullshit that irresponsible tax cuts will create revenue booms... and solve all our fiscal problems.

[Docreed2003]

3. The GOP's long range goal is to dismantle ever accomplishment from the New Deal to the Great Society

They want nothing more than a total dismantling of social safety nets while ensuring their corporate bosses continue to maximize profits.

[Sherman A1]

6. Precisely

This is exactly what they have been about

[eniwetok]

8. that's certainly the goal of the Far Right...

The most extreme GOPers like Grover Norquist and the Kochs want to take us back to the pre-New Deal era. But I suspect most GOPers just want to continue federal on programs like Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc as backdoor corporate welfare. After all... WTF do they care? If we're running massive deficits... funded with money stolen from future taxpayers... even if they're no Starve The Beast traitors... deficit spending is a real easy choice since those future taxpayers have no say. We can party and they'll just get stuck with the bill.

[elleng]

4. corporate welfare.

[burrowowl]

5. K&R!!!!!!

Repukes and Dinos!

[kairos12]

9. Unless you are one of the Reich Wing, if you are sick you're a taker and a mooch.

[eniwetok]

10. Then why isn't ANYONE talking about the freebies for the rich and corporations?

The right has been able to frame and dominate this debate in large part because of the lack of a counter narrative on the part of Dems. What counter narrative? That perhaps there'd be NO uber rich without freebies from government such as free intellectual property monopolies like patents, copyrights, and trademarks (Doesn't Trump claim his "brand" is worth over 3 billion?). Why does government provide free limited liability protections to corporate owners that protect their private wealth and may screw legitimate creditors in case of bankruptcy? Why isn't this purchased as insurance from the private sector?

Patents and copyrights exists for one purpose... to promote progress in the science and the arts... NOT to make someone rich. There is no constitutional basis for free limited liability protection for corporate owners THOUGH PERHAPS WE SHOULD INVENT ONE: as another tool to promote economic progress... not for corporations to use their wealth to hijack government to suit its needs.