Bush addresses the nation on the economy and the stock market tanks. Irony

[drunkle]

i dont get it. a guy labels another as naive for thinking the president can truly affect the economy, the guy resorts to Argument by Definition in order to vainly support his ideology… and then turns around demanding critical thought from others… how does that work?

just… wow.

[sdnativeson]

“It’s naive to think ” I don’t see where I labeled anything but a specific opinion or statement.

If I meant to call Alex naive I would have said “Alex, you are naive”. I didn’t do that, did I? What do you get out of distorting what was said?

As I spoke directly to the context of Alexs statement -of which was Wall streets “reaction”, I resorted to producing nothing more than a basic fact of how our government works, which I believe, is pertinent. I also said market, not economy. Vanity? Ideology? Please.

Shall I assume you are telling me Wall Street and foreign markets wait with baited breath for the President to speak? LOL. Yeah, Greenspan, Bernancke(?) and the Fed are/were irrelevent. You don’t get it because you don’t think about it. At least not far enough.

I also fail to see where I demanded anything of anyone. You are totally misrepresenting anything that I opined.

An afterthought, there has/had been alot of growth in the markets and US economy during the last seven years (regardless of the cause that isn’t my point) and alot of people smarter (well, supposedly) than either you or I were saying things like “unprecedented growth” “robust economy” blah blah… who gave little if any credit to GW.

My point is, if he isn’t (and he isn’t imho) responsible for the “boom” for want of a better word he isn’t responsible for the “bust” either.

The fact that you don’t get it, well that is your problem.

[sdnativeson]

“It’s naive to think ” I don’t see where I labeled anything but a specific opinion or statement.

If I meant to call Alex naive I would have said “Alex, you are naive”. I didn’t do that, did I? What do you get out of distorting what was said?

As I spoke directly to the context of Alexs statement -of which was Wall streets “reaction”, I resorted to producing nothing more than a basic fact of how our government works, which I believe, is pertinent. I also said market, not economy. Vanity? Ideology? Please.

Shall I assume you are telling me Wall Street and foreign markets wait with baited breath for the President to speak? LOL. Yeah, Greenspan, Bernancke(?) and the Fed are/were irrelevent. You don’t get it because you don’t think about it. At least not far enough.

I also fail to see where I demanded anything of anyone. You are totally misrepresenting anything that I opined.

An afterthought, there has/had been alot of growth in the markets and US economy during the last seven years (regardless of the cause that isn’t my point) and alot of people smarter (well, supposedly) than either you or I were saying things like “unprecedented growth” “robust economy” blah blah… who gave little if any credit to GW.

My point is, if he isn’t (and he isn’t imho) responsible for the “boom” for want of a better word he isn’t responsible for the “bust” either.

The fact that you don’t get it, well that is your problem.

[sdnativeson]

“It’s naive to think ” I don’t see where I labeled anything but a specific opinion or statement.

If I meant to call Alex naive I would have said “Alex, you are naive”. I didn’t do that, did I? What do you get out of distorting what was said?

As I spoke directly to the context of Alexs statement -of which was Wall streets “reaction”, I resorted to producing nothing more than a basic fact of how our government works, which I believe, is pertinent. I also said market, not economy. Vanity? Ideology? Please.

Shall I assume you are telling me Wall Street and foreign markets wait with baited breath for the President to speak? LOL. Yeah, Greenspan, Bernancke(?) and the Fed are/were irrelevent. You don’t get it because you don’t think about it. At least not far enough.

I also fail to see where I demanded anything of anyone. You are totally misrepresenting anything that I opined.

An afterthought, there has/had been alot of growth in the markets and US economy during the last seven years (regardless of the cause that isn’t my point) and alot of people smarter (well, supposedly) than either you or I were saying things like “unprecedented growth” “robust economy” blah blah… who gave little if any credit to GW.

My point is, if he isn’t (and he isn’t imho) responsible for the “boom” for want of a better word he isn’t responsible for the “bust” either.

The fact that you don’t get it, well that is your problem.

[PerryChase]

sdnativeson, I agree that’s important to be intellectually open to different ideas.

That would include giving consideration that universal healthcare would be good for our country, and that Arabs have some legitimate grievences against America. But somehow, I doubt that you would even entertain those possibilities.

[PerryChase]

sdnativeson, I agree that’s important to be intellectually open to different ideas.

That would include giving consideration that universal healthcare would be good for our country, and that Arabs have some legitimate grievences against America. But somehow, I doubt that you would even entertain those possibilities.

[PerryChase]

sdnativeson, I agree that’s important to be intellectually open to different ideas.

That would include giving consideration that universal healthcare would be good for our country, and that Arabs have some legitimate grievences against America. But somehow, I doubt that you would even entertain those possibilities.

[sdnativeson]

PC, I have and will . I will agree that SOME arabs have legitimate grievances against the U.S. (as I am sure individuals of other races or cultures) but every single one? Just like the U.S. citizenry sometimes they are victims of their own leaders, culture and even their own making.

As far as universal healthcare goes I like nobility of the concept, but as far as implementing it I’ve yet to see any proposal that I see as acceptable (for me). The first thing that pops into my mind is “Socialized medicine” and a bloated healthcare system that would be overseen by a bloated government bureaucracy which I have little faith in.
I don’t see more government good for anything or anyone.

Health care would be far more affordable if the Trial Lawyers Assoc. would be reigned in. Lets start there.

I admit I could spend a lot more time thinking about Universal Health care but I have other things I need to deal with, as I am sure you do also.
Give me your argument (meaning proposal), I’ll listen.

[sdnativeson]

PC, I have and will . I will agree that SOME arabs have legitimate grievances against the U.S. (as I am sure individuals of other races or cultures) but every single one? Just like the U.S. citizenry sometimes they are victims of their own leaders, culture and even their own making.

As far as universal healthcare goes I like nobility of the concept, but as far as implementing it I’ve yet to see any proposal that I see as acceptable (for me). The first thing that pops into my mind is “Socialized medicine” and a bloated healthcare system that would be overseen by a bloated government bureaucracy which I have little faith in.
I don’t see more government good for anything or anyone.

Health care would be far more affordable if the Trial Lawyers Assoc. would be reigned in. Lets start there.

I admit I could spend a lot more time thinking about Universal Health care but I have other things I need to deal with, as I am sure you do also.
Give me your argument (meaning proposal), I’ll listen.

[sdnativeson]

PC, I have and will . I will agree that SOME arabs have legitimate grievances against the U.S. (as I am sure individuals of other races or cultures) but every single one? Just like the U.S. citizenry sometimes they are victims of their own leaders, culture and even their own making.

As far as universal healthcare goes I like nobility of the concept, but as far as implementing it I’ve yet to see any proposal that I see as acceptable (for me). The first thing that pops into my mind is “Socialized medicine” and a bloated healthcare system that would be overseen by a bloated government bureaucracy which I have little faith in.
I don’t see more government good for anything or anyone.

Health care would be far more affordable if the Trial Lawyers Assoc. would be reigned in. Lets start there.

I admit I could spend a lot more time thinking about Universal Health care but I have other things I need to deal with, as I am sure you do also.
Give me your argument (meaning proposal), I’ll listen.

[cyphire]

Actually sdnativeson we have a government program for medical care… It’s called Medicare. It has something like 2% administration costs – operates very efficiently. Our current system has about a 25-30% administration cost (pays for the Bentleys, etc. for the healthcare execs) – and it also delights in keeping our health care system below the other first world countries.

We could easily just add all the population to medicare. Almost all doctors take medicare and those who don’t can. Problem is that the healthcare companies have lobbyists. Medicare doesn’t.

Funny how you poke fun at ‘socialized medicine’ and a ‘bloated healthcare’ system… what we have now sucks, is anarchy, and is the reason that we are ranked 34th in the world for healthcare.

Luckily for me, I have a PPO, and a health savings plan which pays pre-tax money for my deductables, non-covered, ect. Unfortunately for the rest of America, the ones with HMO’s which deny everything, etc.

I liked some of your comments previously, but you have just parroted what the healthcare cartel has sold you…. All while supporting one of the worst health care systems.

By the way – don’t try going to an emergency room. It is filled with all the uninsured. If you do go (because it’s an emergency – or that the US healthcare system is only Mon-Fri 9am-4:30pm – oh and by the way your doctor can’t see you for 11 days (unless you are in big trouble) – oh yeah and you should go to an emergency room if you need an appointment that badly, good luck to you!

It’s a shame that our system is the laughingstock of the rest of the world….

[cyphire]

Actually sdnativeson we have a government program for medical care… It’s called Medicare. It has something like 2% administration costs – operates very efficiently. Our current system has about a 25-30% administration cost (pays for the Bentleys, etc. for the healthcare execs) – and it also delights in keeping our health care system below the other first world countries.

We could easily just add all the population to medicare. Almost all doctors take medicare and those who don’t can. Problem is that the healthcare companies have lobbyists. Medicare doesn’t.

Funny how you poke fun at ‘socialized medicine’ and a ‘bloated healthcare’ system… what we have now sucks, is anarchy, and is the reason that we are ranked 34th in the world for healthcare.

Luckily for me, I have a PPO, and a health savings plan which pays pre-tax money for my deductables, non-covered, ect. Unfortunately for the rest of America, the ones with HMO’s which deny everything, etc.

I liked some of your comments previously, but you have just parroted what the healthcare cartel has sold you…. All while supporting one of the worst health care systems.

By the way – don’t try going to an emergency room. It is filled with all the uninsured. If you do go (because it’s an emergency – or that the US healthcare system is only Mon-Fri 9am-4:30pm – oh and by the way your doctor can’t see you for 11 days (unless you are in big trouble) – oh yeah and you should go to an emergency room if you need an appointment that badly, good luck to you!

It’s a shame that our system is the laughingstock of the rest of the world….

[cyphire]

Actually sdnativeson we have a government program for medical care… It’s called Medicare. It has something like 2% administration costs – operates very efficiently. Our current system has about a 25-30% administration cost (pays for the Bentleys, etc. for the healthcare execs) – and it also delights in keeping our health care system below the other first world countries.

We could easily just add all the population to medicare. Almost all doctors take medicare and those who don’t can. Problem is that the healthcare companies have lobbyists. Medicare doesn’t.

Funny how you poke fun at ‘socialized medicine’ and a ‘bloated healthcare’ system… what we have now sucks, is anarchy, and is the reason that we are ranked 34th in the world for healthcare.

Luckily for me, I have a PPO, and a health savings plan which pays pre-tax money for my deductables, non-covered, ect. Unfortunately for the rest of America, the ones with HMO’s which deny everything, etc.

I liked some of your comments previously, but you have just parroted what the healthcare cartel has sold you…. All while supporting one of the worst health care systems.

By the way – don’t try going to an emergency room. It is filled with all the uninsured. If you do go (because it’s an emergency – or that the US healthcare system is only Mon-Fri 9am-4:30pm – oh and by the way your doctor can’t see you for 11 days (unless you are in big trouble) – oh yeah and you should go to an emergency room if you need an appointment that badly, good luck to you!

It’s a shame that our system is the laughingstock of the rest of the world….

[sdnativeson]

Cyphire, medicare? efficient? I seriously have a hard time accepting that- it’s been a pretty hot topic for quite a while. I haven’t heard much, if anything positive.

I only “parroted” what I read in the news and other blogs etc, as I said to PC – I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about healthcare programs, I admit I’m not the most well informed.

Heres an excerpt from an interview with David Walker our comptroller (Hey! this is just a sample before I get jumped on with my earlier opinion about his latest talk)

“What would happen in 2040 if nothing changes?

“If nothing changes, the federal government’s not gonna be able to do much more than pay interest on the mounting debt and some entitlement benefits. It won’t have money left for anything else – national defense, homeland security, education, you name it,” Walker warns.

Walker says you could eliminate all waste and fraud and the entire Pentagon budget and the long-range financial problem still wouldn’t go away, in what’s shaping up as an actuarial nightmare.

Part of the problem, Walker acknowledges, is that there won’t be enough wage earners to support the benefits of the baby boomers. “But the real problem, Steve, is health care costs. Our health care problem is much more significant than Social Security,” he says.

Asked what he means by that, Walker tells Kroft, “By that I mean that the Medicare problem is five times greater than the Social Security problem.”

The problem with Medicare, Walker says, is people keep living longer, and medical costs keep rising at twice the rate of inflation. But instead of dealing with the problem, he says, the president and the Congress made things much worse in Dec. 2003, when they expanded the Medicare program to include prescription drug coverage.

“The prescription drug bill was probably the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s,” Walker argues.

Asked why, Walker says, “Well, because we promise way more than we can afford to keep. Eight trillion dollars added to what was already a 15 to $20 trillion under-funding. We’re not being realistic. We can’t afford the promises we’ve already made, much less to be able, piling on top of ’em.”

With one stroke of the pen, Walker says, the federal government increased existing Medicare obligations nearly 40 percent over the next 75 years. ”

I agree it’s a serious issue. I admitted I am not all over the topic so it is entirely possible that I am talking out my ass but, I don’t think I am that far off base.

I’ve only had first hand experience with emergency rooms three times in the U.S. Once the wait was two and a half hours (at 2 in the morning!) the other times pretty quick response, the staff did a good job. But I know the point you are making.

I do not believe that our health care system is the laughing stock of the world. Don’t construe that statement as meaning there isn’t room for serious improvment. As I said earlier lets reign in the TLA first.

I still equate it to Socialized medicine. Bureaucracy, the governmental version of anarchy.

[sdnativeson]

Cyphire, medicare? efficient? I seriously have a hard time accepting that- it’s been a pretty hot topic for quite a while. I haven’t heard much, if anything positive.

I only “parroted” what I read in the news and other blogs etc, as I said to PC – I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about healthcare programs, I admit I’m not the most well informed.

Heres an excerpt from an interview with David Walker our comptroller (Hey! this is just a sample before I get jumped on with my earlier opinion about his latest talk)

“What would happen in 2040 if nothing changes?

“If nothing changes, the federal government’s not gonna be able to do much more than pay interest on the mounting debt and some entitlement benefits. It won’t have money left for anything else – national defense, homeland security, education, you name it,” Walker warns.

Walker says you could eliminate all waste and fraud and the entire Pentagon budget and the long-range financial problem still wouldn’t go away, in what’s shaping up as an actuarial nightmare.

Part of the problem, Walker acknowledges, is that there won’t be enough wage earners to support the benefits of the baby boomers. “But the real problem, Steve, is health care costs. Our health care problem is much more significant than Social Security,” he says.

Asked what he means by that, Walker tells Kroft, “By that I mean that the Medicare problem is five times greater than the Social Security problem.”

The problem with Medicare, Walker says, is people keep living longer, and medical costs keep rising at twice the rate of inflation. But instead of dealing with the problem, he says, the president and the Congress made things much worse in Dec. 2003, when they expanded the Medicare program to include prescription drug coverage.

“The prescription drug bill was probably the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s,” Walker argues.

Asked why, Walker says, “Well, because we promise way more than we can afford to keep. Eight trillion dollars added to what was already a 15 to $20 trillion under-funding. We’re not being realistic. We can’t afford the promises we’ve already made, much less to be able, piling on top of ’em.”

With one stroke of the pen, Walker says, the federal government increased existing Medicare obligations nearly 40 percent over the next 75 years. ”

I agree it’s a serious issue. I admitted I am not all over the topic so it is entirely possible that I am talking out my ass but, I don’t think I am that far off base.

I’ve only had first hand experience with emergency rooms three times in the U.S. Once the wait was two and a half hours (at 2 in the morning!) the other times pretty quick response, the staff did a good job. But I know the point you are making.

I do not believe that our health care system is the laughing stock of the world. Don’t construe that statement as meaning there isn’t room for serious improvment. As I said earlier lets reign in the TLA first.

I still equate it to Socialized medicine. Bureaucracy, the governmental version of anarchy.

[Author]

Posts