Politics - 17 September 2007

2007-09-17 02:52:34 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous

It seems to me that four years is a very long time to wait for bad choice of a President. Most Presidents are active during the first two years anyway, and most people know by then what initiatives would come to fruition and which ones won't. Unlike parliamentary democracies where there can be a vote of no-confidence, the bar is set so high for impeachment in the US that's it's almost impossible to meet it in today's environment.

Please DON'T respond by saying, that's what the Constitution says. I am looking for a different answer.

2007-09-17 02:51:19 · 11 answers · asked by Sincere-Advisor 6

2007-09-17 02:46:46 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Rumor has it she's going to model it on Massachusetts which forces all uninsured people to purchase a health care policy. It's not optional. You aren't given a choice. You buy a policy or they take your money and buy it for you. Low income people will get a subsidy.

1. Will this cause businesses that now cover their employees to drop coverage and let employees fend for themselves?

2. Will illegal aliens be forced into purchasing their own health care coverage and, if so, is it really the job of the US taxpayer to subsidies low income illegal aliens to help them pay?

2007-09-17 02:44:02 · 12 answers · asked by Yak Rider 7

Should we erase the Welfare program that benefits children? Please explain your answer. This question is for serious answers, not a political rant. Thank you.

2007-09-17 02:41:40 · 11 answers · asked by Lisa M 5

Remember OJ said he was going to dedicate his life to finding the real killer after her was found not guilty. Who will search now? Are we all in danger?

2007-09-17 02:40:57 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

What can the USA do to improve Cuba?

2007-09-17 02:35:42 · 7 answers · asked by SHAWN 3

First, Greenspan took interest rates to near historic lows. Millions of marginally qualified people flooded into the home market and purchased property using mortgages with insane terms and conditions. Millions of others got into the market buying up property with the hope of "flipping" it 6 to 12 months down the line for a 30% profit.

Greenspan said he knew about all this speculation and the danger from sub-prime loans.

Then, ever vigilant for non-existent inflation, Greenspan and the Federal Reserve raised interest rates 19 times forcing millions of homes into foreclosure.

2007-09-17 02:34:57 · 11 answers · asked by Yak Rider 7

Hi i would like to know what do british people think about falklands. Im latin american but not Argentinian, i have argentinan friends and i know their version of the history but i think british opinion may differ, Do you think falklands should belong to England or to Argentina? Explain your answer please

2007-09-17 02:30:56 · 24 answers · asked by Peter 2

What do the average Americans have to say for that?

2007-09-17 02:30:01 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/youdecide2008/platforms/

2007-09-17 02:26:49 · 11 answers · asked by Naturescent 4

Any can answer of course, but i'm interested in opinions from american citizens

2007-09-17 02:24:04 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-09-17 02:23:58 · 14 answers · asked by fragglestickcar 2

Everytime I hear the Dems speak, they speak against Bush.

I have no problem with that, being that I don't support most of what Bush is doing either, but Bush is leaving the White House, never to return and so I would like to know what do the Dems gain from 'running against Bush?'

2007-09-17 02:12:58 · 31 answers · asked by Still Beautifully Conservative 5

and not tolerating the murderous activities of FOREIGN bounty hunters.....

Well done Iraq!!!!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Iraq shootout firm loses licence

"Iraq has cancelled the licence of the private security contractor, Blackwater USA, after it was involved in a gunfight that killed eight civilians.
The Iraqi interior ministry said the firm, based in North Carolina, was now banned from operating anywhere in Iraq.

The Blackwater workers, who were contracted by the US state department, apparently opened fire after coming under attack in Baghdad on Sunday.

Thousands of private security guards are employed in lawless Iraq.

They are often heavily armed, but critics say some are not properly trained and are not accountable except to their employers. "

SOURCE: BBC NEWS

2007-09-17 02:05:43 · 8 answers · asked by Dream Realized 2

...Aside from a bunch of Republicans living in la-la land?

"America's elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil.

In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W. Bush’s economic policies."

"However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296938,00.html

2007-09-17 01:52:27 · 36 answers · asked by Anonymous

Have you heard about government controled medicine...?
the left thinks it is sooo grand!!

i can come up with a million reasons to keep the government out of my pockets!
can they think of one?

Europeans are now learning some hard facts of life about socialized medicine: there's no such thing as a free lunch. The question is whether Congress will learn from Europe's mistakes as it takes the next steps in reforming the American health care system.

For many years advocates of government-run health care pointed to Europe as an ideal, noting that America was the "only industrialized country without a national health care system." Now, however, the European welfare states are slashing benefits in the face of rising health care costs.

A recent front-page story in the New York Times detailed the European cutbacks. According to the article, Britain, France and Germany are all being forced to limit access to care. Rationing, already extensive, is increasing.

The Europeans have run into a very simple economic rule. If something is perceived as free, people will consume more of it than they would if they had to pay for it. Think of it this way: if food were free, would you eat hamburger or steak? At the same time, health care is a finite good. There are only so many doctors, so many hospital beds and so much technology. If people overconsume those resources, it drives up the cost of health care.

The same problem is besetting the American health care system. The vast majority of American health care is not directly paid for by the person consuming those goods and services. Instead, a third party, either the government or an insurance company, pays the bill.

Medicare is exhibit one. Medicare beneficiaries pay almost nothing out of their own pockets for health care. Under Medicare Part B, for example, the deductible is an absurdly low $100. (There is, however, a 20 percent copayment.) The deductible under Part A is higher, $716 on the first 60 days of hospital care for each spell of illness. There is also a copayment required for hospitalization of longer than 60 days. However, nearly 70 percent of the elderly have some form of "medigap" insurance that covers all or part of the deductibles and copayments.

Thus, recipients have little incentive to be good consumers and avoid unnecessary expenses or seek the best deal for their dollar. Guy King, former chief actuary for the Health Care Financing Administration, says that third-party payment is one of the primary causes of the rapid growth in Medicare expenditures. As King explains, "When people, either patients or doctors, are spending other people's money, they do not worry about the cost or number of services consumed."

The establishment has responded to this problem by trying to force seniors into managed care, thereby allowing insurance companies to ration care. But managed care does not change the underlying incentive structure created by pervasive third-party payment. Any reduction in costs is achieved by limiting access to treatment.

A report by the Department of Health and Human Services' inspector general found "pervasive" quality problems throughout managed care programs for Medicare, including difficulties in gaining access to care. Managed care programs are significantly less likely to use diagnostic tests, such as MRI and CAT scans, than are fee-for-service plans. Doctors report that managed care organizations pressure them to save money even at the cost of quality. One-third of doctors surveyed by the American Medical Association in 1988 stated that patients were harmed by delays or nontreatment as a result of managed care.

Although the election season has temporarily taken Medicare off the table, the issue will be back to haunt the president and Congress next year. Indeed, the most recent report of the Medicare system's Board of Trustees warns that the program faces bankruptcy in just five years.

The question is whether we will recognize the problems of third-party payment and restore consumer incentives by increasing deductibles and allowing recipients to choose medical savings accounts or follow the European example and ration the health care that our seniors depend on.

2007-09-17 01:51:09 · 17 answers · asked by KittyCatFishApe 3

How are you preparing for the imminent return of pinko, spendthrift, lamebrain left wing/liberal government at the federal level.
I am stocking up on canned food and ammunition and looking for work in Canada.

2007-09-17 01:24:48 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

No one, not Petraeus, not Bush, not McCain, not Hillary, not Obama, not Rudy, thinks we "win" because of any actions our military now can take, regardless of whom you side with. Fact is, WE ARE WAITING for the Iraqi's to get their collective, um, sh*t together, to seek an amicable political solution there.

Our military "won" their goal in a matter of weeks. Now, they are waiting and waiting and waiting...

Is this a lesson learned? Can we expect our military, in the future, to "win" politcal battles in foreign lands?

2007-09-17 01:01:24 · 13 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5

The nazis were big on the patriotism. Hitler was very impressed with american propaganda and said it was their best advantage.
Is patriotism any good for people. what about citizens of other countries, even EVIL countries?
it is great for state power, but of any value to individuals?

2007-09-17 00:53:01 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why is it that people in the UK and US are not politically active?

It could be because it seems impossible to change things on your own, or because politicians make it seem a dull subject to put people off trying to change things.

But if food was more scarce, would we be less likely to just accept the decisions made for us by the state, as we do now?

2007-09-17 00:51:32 · 8 answers · asked by smith.w6079 3

.....are her comments about sending our children "off to be slaughtered" wildly inappropriate?!? I mean it's not like we have the draft or anything.

Did you agree with her acceptance speech remark - if the world was run by mothers, we would have no war?!?

I am a CFO at a large company - and I have one office full of nothing but women and they are ALWAYS at war - backbiting, gossiping, sniping, etc. - God forbid, any of them had the BOMB!!!

I think the exact opposite is true. If women ran the world, we would ALWAYS be at war. Someone's feelings would always be hurt!!

Do you agree???

http://goldderby.latimes.com/

2007-09-17 00:50:14 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

but their accounts do not get deleted?

2007-09-17 00:40:17 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

They were "Why are you a Liberal?", and "Why are you a Conservative?". The Liberal question was the one that was yanked. Why would Y/A do that? What's wrong with that question?

2007-09-17 00:38:06 · 11 answers · asked by Jim C 5

continent

2007-09-17 00:33:30 · 8 answers · asked by swamp cat 1

In the 2004 Presidential care, a total of $4.94 was spent PER VOTE. This translates to a more than 1/2 BILLION dollars for the race. I think this is wholly unnecessary. What do you think?

2007-09-17 00:31:54 · 7 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5