Your Money: McCain vs Obama

***Jolie77*** · 10-13-2008, 06:54 PM

Your Money: McCain vs. Obama - Issue #1: Election 2008 (1) - CNNMoney.com

This is the information to see where McCain and Obama stands on for these major economic issues.

Jiro · 10-13-2008, 11:32 PM

sorry to hijack you, jolie but this is related to money. this does not sound good at all - Obama's 95% Illusion

However.... this "opinion" reeks of Rupert Murdoch

jillio · 10-14-2008, 09:52 AM

Obama details his 'economic rescue plan' - CNN.com

Another link to the topic. Interesting.

darkdog · 10-15-2008, 01:47 PM

Here's the essence of Obama's plan.

Breitbart.tv » Obama Tells Tax-Burdened Plumber the Plan is to ‘Spread the Wealth Around’

I don't like this idea of "spreading the wealth", or taking from one and giving to another. It may be necessary to some extent, but taxes are already progressive enough.

Jiro · 10-15-2008, 02:08 PM

I read an interesting article from TIME magazine. Anything that reeks of socialism or "spreading wealth" around.... it is violently shot down just simply because it was viewed as un-American. But at this point now.... with out-of-control gas/food price, skyrocketing health insurance cost, failing systems (education, social welfare, etc.), etc.... more and more people are accepting a form of government intervention.

The Obama Surge: Will It Last?

Quote:

Obama began his response with a simple declarative sentence: "I believe that health care is a right for every American." ...... "That is a fundamental difference that I have with Senator McCain. He believes in deregulation in every circumstance. That's what we've been going through for the last eight years. It hasn't worked, and we need fundamental change."

Obama was right. The health-care issue illustrates not only the philosophical differences between the two candidates but also the political difficulties McCain has been having in this election. Obama's gamble is that the public — worried at the beginning of the campaign, terrified now — is ready for greater government support and regulation of the health-insurance system. That assumption has always been a sure loser in American politics. Republicans have perpetually and successfully waved the bloody flag of "socialized medicine." But the employer-provided-health-care system is fraying, costs to average families are rising, and almost everyone has a friend with a horror story. McCain's plan is a half-baked vestige of Reagan-era ideology: it tilts the incentives away from employer-provided health insurance and assumes that people will act in their enlightened self-interest if they are thrust out into a free market. That's absolutely true when it comes to buying refrigerators. But health insurance is complicated and scary; most people don't have the time or expertise necessary to make wise choices. They rely on their employers to make sure they're getting a good deal — and to fight for them if the insurance companies try to cheat them. And with many employers slouching away from that responsibility, the public seems ready to turn to the government for protection. In a collapsing economy, government regulation — forcing insurers to cover everyone at reasonable rates — sounds more comforting than stultifying.

The desire for more government activism is true across the board. All of a sudden, government-provided infrastructure programs — and that's what most of McCain's despised "earmarks" are — don't sound like such a waste of money, especially if they are married to alternative energy sources and conservation (which is why Obama talks constantly about "retrofitting" buildings to conserve energy). All of a sudden, boring bureaucracies like the Securities and Exchange Commission, which have been undermined and underfunded by Republicans, become a crucial bulwark against the rampaging free-market anarchists on Wall Street. This is, as Obama says, a fundamental change — but not a radical one. It is a modulation, a move to preserve the free market by controlling its excesses.

So America... it's your money. vote wisely on who do you trust more with your tax money

jillio · 10-15-2008, 02:16 PM

Obama on pocketbook issues beating Palin pick in battle of 'burbs - CNN.com

Looks like the money issues are crucial in this election.

darkdog · 10-15-2008, 04:00 PM

Somehow, I'm not surprised Time magazine disagrees with me. I don't see how the top 1% of income earners paying only 40% of the tax burden instead of 50% (while earning just 22% of the wealth) is causing all of these problems, nor do I see how changing that will fix them.

I think health care is like global warming, in that nobody really knows what they're talking about unless they've spent a lot of time studying the issue from the source data rather than partisan sources. Since I don't have the time to do that, I can just tell you what my instincts say. It seems to me that rather than taking more money from tax-payers to pay for a costly system, it would be more effective to take actions to lower the costs of health care (note that I say "costs" rather than "prices"). That would include getting rid of silly laws and regulations while keeping or adding those that make sense. That would also involve limiting frivolous lawsuits by phony lawyers. You know- the John Edwards types. The article there talks about artificially lowering prices of insurance, but that does nothing to lower the costs. How long would an insurance company be in business if they're forced to sell insurance at a price less than what it costs them?

Sorry my analysis isn't more robust or specific. Maybe someday, I'll get more time to study the issue in more depth.

By the way, I don't view "spreading the wealth" (i.e. taking money from someone who earned it and giving it to someone who didn't) as un-American necessarily. But that doesn't stop me from disliking it.

10-13-2008, 06:54 PM	#1 (permalink)
*Jolie77* Love all, trust a few. Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Kentucky, USA (The Bluegrass State) Posts: 5,367	Your Money: McCain vs Obama Your Money: McCain vs. Obama - Issue #1: Election 2008 (1) - CNNMoney.com This is the information to see where McCain and Obama stands on for these major economic issues. __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

10-13-2008, 11:32 PM	#2 (permalink)
Jiro YOU DOMESTIC DISSENT! Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 6,683	sorry to hijack you, jolie but this is related to money. this does not sound good at all - Obama's 95% Illusion However.... this "opinion" reeks of Rupert Murdoch

10-14-2008, 09:52 AM	#3 (permalink)
jillio Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 20,809	Obama details his 'economic rescue plan' - CNN.com Another link to the topic. Interesting.

10-15-2008, 01:47 PM	#4 (permalink)
darkdog aka dorkdog Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 144	Here's the essence of Obama's plan. Breitbart.tv » Obama Tells Tax-Burdened Plumber the Plan is to ‘Spread the Wealth Around’ I don't like this idea of "spreading the wealth", or taking from one and giving to another. It may be necessary to some extent, but taxes are already progressive enough.

10-15-2008, 02:16 PM	#6 (permalink)
jillio Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 20,809	Obama on pocketbook issues beating Palin pick in battle of 'burbs - CNN.com Looks like the money issues are crucial in this election.

10-15-2008, 04:00 PM	#7 (permalink)
darkdog aka dorkdog Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 144	Somehow, I'm not surprised Time magazine disagrees with me. I don't see how the top 1% of income earners paying only 40% of the tax burden instead of 50% (while earning just 22% of the wealth) is causing all of these problems, nor do I see how changing that will fix them. I think health care is like global warming, in that nobody really knows what they're talking about unless they've spent a lot of time studying the issue from the source data rather than partisan sources. Since I don't have the time to do that, I can just tell you what my instincts say. It seems to me that rather than taking more money from tax-payers to pay for a costly system, it would be more effective to take actions to lower the costs of health care (note that I say "costs" rather than "prices"). That would include getting rid of silly laws and regulations while keeping or adding those that make sense. That would also involve limiting frivolous lawsuits by phony lawyers. You know- the John Edwards types. The article there talks about artificially lowering prices of insurance, but that does nothing to lower the costs. How long would an insurance company be in business if they're forced to sell insurance at a price less than what it costs them? Sorry my analysis isn't more robust or specific. Maybe someday, I'll get more time to study the issue in more depth. By the way, I don't view "spreading the wealth" (i.e. taking money from someone who earned it and giving it to someone who didn't) as un-American necessarily. But that doesn't stop me from disliking it.