GDP

[markberwyn]

Eno,

You used to present coherent arguments.

What happened?

OPS:

I find no difficulty understanding President Obama; I should have been more clear in my explanation.

The premise of the video I posted was abundantly clear: a 99 year-old lady's doctor agreed to prescribe her a pacemaker which allowed her to live well (good quality of life) for another 6 years; no government intervention, no Obama/Sebelius/ Bureaucrat over-riding the decision!

Obama's response was abundantly clear as well:

"..At least we can let doctors know, and your mom know that, you know what, this [the pacemaker mom's doctor prescribed for her] isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain-killer." - Barack Obama

My position on the stated premise/response: Obama is a dangerous, frightening, ignorant, "government trumps individuality and freedom" collectivist.

I apologize for my initial lack of clarity and cogency. What comes off as hyperbole is genuine, heart-felt fright and repulsion of President Obama's philosophy and policies re: healthcare.

eno

How have your personal freedoms been restricted since the president took office?

The question's for anybody.

[eno]

Incidentally, OPS, Buzz, Lumis:

How would substituting palliative care for a pacemaker benefit the 99 year-old mother of the lady in the video? Speaking of "coherence" recall that Dr. Obama did not suggest "palliative care" instead of the pace-maker, but rather a "pain-killer".

[eno]

Eno,

You used to present coherent arguments.

What happened?

OPS:

I find no difficulty understanding President Obama; I should have been more clear in my explanation.

The premise of the video I posted was abundantly clear: a 99 year-old lady's doctor agreed to prescribe her a pacemaker which allowed her to live well (good quality of life) for another 6 years; no government intervention, no Obama/Sebelius/ Bureaucrat over-riding the decision!

Obama's response was abundantly clear as well:

"..At least we can let doctors know, and your mom know that, you know what, this [the pacemaker mom's doctor prescribed for her] isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain-killer." - Barack Obama

My position on the stated premise/response: Obama is a dangerous, frightening, ignorant, "government trumps individuality and freedom" collectivist.

I apologize for my initial lack of clarity and cogency. What comes off as hyperbole is genuine, heart-felt fright and repulsion of President Obama's philosophy and policies re: healthcare.

eno

How have your personal freedoms been restricted since the president took office?

The question's for anybody.

Let's just start here:

Anybody and everybody who owned GM Bonds in 2009 had their personal freedoms restricted (though what Obama did to bond-holders' property rights was to abrogate them, not merely restrict them).

[markberwyn]

Eno,

You used to present coherent arguments.

What happened?

OPS:

I find no difficulty understanding President Obama; I should have been more clear in my explanation.

The premise of the video I posted was abundantly clear: a 99 year-old lady's doctor agreed to prescribe her a pacemaker which allowed her to live well (good quality of life) for another 6 years; no government intervention, no Obama/Sebelius/ Bureaucrat over-riding the decision!

Obama's response was abundantly clear as well:

"..At least we can let doctors know, and your mom know that, you know what, this [the pacemaker mom's doctor prescribed for her] isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain-killer." - Barack Obama

My position on the stated premise/response: Obama is a dangerous, frightening, ignorant, "government trumps individuality and freedom" collectivist.

I apologize for my initial lack of clarity and cogency. What comes off as hyperbole is genuine, heart-felt fright and repulsion of President Obama's philosophy and policies re: healthcare.

eno

How have your personal freedoms been restricted since the president took office?

The question's for anybody.

Let's just start here:

Anybody and everybody who owned GM Bonds in 2009 had their personal freedoms restricted (though what Obama did to bond-holders' property rights was to abrogate them, not merely restrict them).

Interesting. What can these bondholders no longer do that they were once free to do?

[eno]

I did not want to suggest that your question was a typical, Liberal shell-game, but I did smell it  coming. I am still willing to play with you, but let's get the parameters and our definitions straight...

Simple question: property rights are a personal freedom; agree or disagree?

eno

[watcher]

Simple question: property rights are a personal freedom; agree or disagree?
eno

zoning and building codes.

[markberwyn]

I did not want to suggest that your question was a typical, Liberal shell-game, but I did smell it  coming. I am still willing to play with you, but let's get the parameters and our definitions straight...

Simple question: property rights are a personal freedom; agree or disagree?

eno

Let's say for the sake of argument that personal freedoms are whatever eno says they are.

Which personal freedoms did these bondholders once have that they now lack because Barack Obama is president?

[OakParkSpartan]

Eno,

You used to present coherent arguments.

What happened?

OPS:

I find no difficulty understanding President Obama; I should have been more clear in my explanation.

The premise of the video I posted was abundantly clear: a 99 year-old lady's doctor agreed to prescribe her a pacemaker which allowed her to live well (good quality of life) for another 6 years; no government intervention, no Obama/Sebelius/ Bureaucrat over-riding the decision!

Obama's response was abundantly clear as well:

"..At least we can let doctors know, and your mom know that, you know what, this [the pacemaker mom's doctor prescribed for her] isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain-killer." - Barack Obama

My position on the stated premise/response: Obama is a dangerous, frightening, ignorant, "government trumps individuality and freedom" collectivist.

I apologize for my initial lack of clarity and cogency. What comes off as hyperbole is genuine, heart-felt fright and repulsion of President Obama's philosophy and policies re: healthcare.

eno

So he was speaking of this specific lady?  Or did you find one heart tugging story and attached it to comments made in a completely different context?

[OakParkSpartan]

Incidentally, OPS, Buzz, Lumis:

How would substituting palliative care for a pacemaker benefit the 99 year-old mother of the lady in the video? Speaking of "coherence" recall that Dr. Obama did not suggest "palliative care" instead of the pace-maker, but rather a "pain-killer".

Oh,  and how is what Obama said ANY different than when an insurance company denies coverage for a treatment???

[Bonster]

Eno,

You used to present coherent arguments.

What happened?

Fuentesitis?

[eno]

Incidentally, OPS, Buzz, Lumis:

How would substituting palliative care for a pacemaker benefit the 99 year-old mother of the lady in the video? Speaking of "coherence" recall that Dr. Obama did not suggest "palliative care" instead of the pace-maker, but rather a "pain-killer".

Oh, and how is what Obama said ANY different than when an insurance company denies coverage for a treatment???

Here is the entire video (context and all); as in his Roanoke "you didn't build that" speech, the more you listen to Obama, in context, the worse it gets, despite his B.S. double-speak.

Obama to Jane Sturm take a pill (long version in context)

As for government dicking you around vs. the private-sector dicking you around, there are HUGE differences, which should be obvious.

First, I reject the premise that if something is imperfect or broken in the private-sector, government should step in or take over; this is especially true because much of the problems with health insurance are the direct result of government regulations imposed over the past several decades.

Secondly, even with government's history of hyper-regulation of the health-insurance market, the consumer still has both choices and recourse now, whereas with government health-care, he will eventually have absolutely no choice and very limited recourse; it is almost impossible to sue the sovereign. Aside from choice and recourse, the hassle of dealing with the fed (or any governmental entity) is infinitely worse than dealing with an insurer!!

I could go on...

[eno]

Eno,

You used to present coherent arguments.

What happened?

Fuentesitis?

I suspect it's Pied Piperitis



It makes anything but Left-Wing propaganda incoherent.

[Boris]

"We're pretty optimistic about the rest of this year and into 2013. There's a shift in the way companies hire. They want to use talent on an on-demand basis, when they need them for projects. I would predict that (temp penetration) number to cross 2 percent and break a record, maybe by the end of the year."
- - Joanie Ruge, chief employment analyst at the U.S. unit of Randstad Holding NV, the world's second-biggest staffing company by revenue



More corporate profit, and more investment than ever before ... with fewer human resources.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-number-of-temps-on-the-job-the-highest-in-5-years-20120803,0,4647596.story

[eno]

I did not want to suggest that your question was a typical, Liberal shell-game, but I did smell it  coming. I am still willing to play with you, but let's get the parameters and our definitions straight...

Simple question: property rights are a personal freedom; agree or disagree?

eno

Let's say for the sake of argument that personal freedoms are whatever eno says they are.

Which personal freedoms did these bondholders once have that they now lack because Barack Obama is president?

You don't believe in individual property rights, do you?

[markberwyn]

I did not want to suggest that your question was a typical, Liberal shell-game, but I did smell it  coming. I am still willing to play with you, but let's get the parameters and our definitions straight...

Simple question: property rights are a personal freedom; agree or disagree?

eno

Let's say for the sake of argument that personal freedoms are whatever eno says they are.

Which personal freedoms did these bondholders once have that they now lack because Barack Obama is president?

You don't believe in individual property rights, do you?

Again: Which personal freedoms did these bondholders once have that they now lack because Barack Obama is president? Can you name them, perhaps in a bulleted list?

[Ted]

Again: Which personal freedoms did these bondholders once have that they now lack because Barack Obama is president? Can you name them, perhaps in a bulleted list?

The freedom to make a guaranteed profit at no risk. 

  What would have happened to these bond holders if GM had gone belly up and the government had not intervened?  Would they have been better off if GM had gone belly up?

[eno]

I posted the reference to the Pied Piper in jest, but given OPS's perspective on private health-insurance, and Ted's regarding bonds, it is more accurate than I had intended. By such logic, Obama should be made king, and government should control all of our affairs.

Obama and big government saving us from ourselves? What need is there for freedoms (personal or other) in the soft warmth of the cocoon we've allowed our masters to spin around us?

eno

P.S. The only "profit at no risk" which exists in this country is the money government takes with a club in its right hand from Peter, to give with its left hand to Paul; it is there that the effects of the sinister trade-off of freedom for perceived economic security are most obvious: decline, dependence, then dehumanization.
 

[buzz]

Healthcare is broken.  We can fix it with the Affordable Care Act if we ignore the failed policies of the past.  Lack of regulation screwed us big time in mortgage/real estate.  Lack of regulation, self-regulation, they don't work for financial institutions.  It's the same one note samba from the obstructionist Republicans.  It doesn't trickle down.
Now, Rmoney has a budget that even his former financial pundits call crap.  It creates a huge deficit but what does it manage to cut ?  Human Services ?  Entitlements ?
I'm tired of the Republican mantra.  Their failed policies don't work. They cower in fear of the boardroom and the broker, all the while protecting the top earners.  The Affordable Care Act will standardize insurance offerings across the country.  The ACA will help.  Gov't intervention is necessary.     

[markberwyn]

Again: Which personal freedoms did these bondholders once have that they now lack because Barack Obama is president? Can you name them, perhaps in a bulleted list?

The freedom to make a guaranteed profit at no risk. 

Just as the Magna Carta put it!

[eno]

Healthcare is broken.  We can fix it with the Affordable Care Act if we ignore the failed policies of the past. Lack of regulation screwed us big time in mortgage/real estate.  Lack of regulation, self-regulation, they don't work for financial institutions.  It's the same one note samba from the obstructionist Republicans.  It doesn't trickle down.
Now, Rmoney has a budget that even his former financial pundits call crap.  It creates a huge deficit but what does it manage to cut ?  Human Services ?  Entitlements ?
I'm tired of the Republican mantra.  Their failed policies don't work. They cower in fear of the boardroom and the broker, all the while protecting the top earners.  The Affordable Care Act will standardize insurance offerings across the country.  The ACA will help.  Gov't intervention is necessary.   

I agree with the highlighted statement to the degree that you might be referring to the U.S. government (which I'm sure you are not).

It was the rejection by Democrats of increased regulation of government sponsored entities: Fannie/Freddie (which were so heavily mis-leveraged in our housing market, and engaged in accounting fraud) which contributed to the insolvency of those programs and triggered both the bubble in housing prices, and the ensuing burst, which in turn triggered the recession...

The huge problems we are now experiencing are due in large part to too much government intervention in the housing market (and mortgage loans) and too little regulation of government! Obama and the Democrats haven't learned the lesson or stopped; they keep pushing homeowner bail-out programs (the cause of the initial crisis, and the reason why the housing recovery is still so weak) while pointing their crooked fingers at the banks.

It's brilliant populist politics, but horseshit economic policy.