Originally Posted by BRussell
I want to ask trumptman and SDW: in 2010, Republicans took the House campaigning largely on how Obama is going to cut Medicare and ration care. The tea parties were mostly old people, after all.
A few days ago, House Republicans voted to remove the IPAB, which they say will ration care ("death panels!"). From what i can tell, republicans and conservatives all agree on this.
The truth is that Obamacare does cut Medicare, and does institute "panels" like the IPAB that are specifically designed to control health costs. They say that if these cost control mechanisms are given real teeth, it could produce even larger savings than already projected, especially in the out years.
My question is whether you agree with Republicans on their opposition to these parts of Obamacare.
A couple points, first the majority of all tea party folks I've encountered, the majority of the signs in that very pointed picture and the majority of all literature I've read deals largely with strengthening fiscal restraint within the Republican Party. I've said that the Perot Party and Libertarians are largely conservative but don't always vote Republican and that is what I believe the Tea Party mostly represented.
Now the second point is that I've no idea where you get that the main focus of clear push of the Tea Party involved Medicare. I have no doubt there are some parts of the country where it could have played out that way or perhaps where Republicans injected that message into their campaign.
So finally we get to the final point, what is happening with Medicare and who will do what with it. Obama wants to extract savings from Medicare. Now the true point is it needs to be cut PERIOD. However Obama is seeking to cut it while throwing vast sums of money into Medicaid and increasing the eligibility there to 133% of the poverty level.
That makes the case pretty easy to show that it isn't about shared sacrifice and instead is about purchasing votes from different people.
I've not seen a Republican proposal that calls for cuts but at the same creates new entitlements. Could a certain percentage of people still be ticked off about that the proposed cuts like in the Ryan budget? Sure they can but the reality is that we need shared sacrificed to get to a balance. That doesn't preclude anyone from playing politics though and if Obama to make such obvious moves as declaring we are cutting while radically expanding spending to the tune of trillions, then people aren't going to associate him with hope and change and instead will associate him with trickery and deception.
As for my personal position, I've declared that the Laffer curve does indeed work and is sound economic theory but that we aren't on the wrong side of it right now and that Bush and any other Republican are wrong to take people off the tax rolls. Obama could have just let it expire but instead he wanted to tax the rich so he had to extend it to everyone to get more unemployment benefits. Letting it expire, letting folks suffer with only almost two years of unemployment and having everyone pay a bit more would have actually been a very prudent thing. He didn't do it though.
I also said that if he had spent the entire stimulus building safe nuclear power plants he would have easily been reelected (Not sure you were here for that.) Finally I said if he stopped Pax Americana and actually attempted to bring a large number of troops home to create a true peace dividend and spent it on just expanding existing medical programs that service those without that he wouldn't have had much of a problem. He obviously didn't do that either. I say these things because they would have been great positions and would be easy to portray as a third way. Nuclear power in modern reactors is safe and would help get us off oil. Ending America as empire and taking troops out of Europe and parts of Asia can still easily be accomplished. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire would have easily associated him with Clinton in terms of tax rates and also didn't cost any political capital. I mention these also because the claim is that Republicans want the president to fail and that isn't true. I don't want anyone to fail but if they are a hard partisan with hack solutions, and that is what Obama has proven to be, then they will fail regardless of what I want or hope.
Originally Posted by tonton
SDW how can you lie
And say you didn't see anything about energy independence? Alternative energy is the only viable course
Toward Long term energy Independence.
It isn't the only viable course and having the narrow view that anyone who disagrees with you is a liar or stupid is an extreme position.