Melissa threw out the challenge and I do enjoy discussing/sharing views without name calling and general bashing (i.e. that is stupid, could you instead tell me why you do not agree???). The thing that bothers me most about those conversations is usually the person has inaccurate or no facts. They are just going off what they think they heard someone say one time...
So, not as in depth as Melissa's analysis, but here it goes.
Abortion
I do not feel it is my job to tell other woman what they can and cannot do, but I do question at what point it becomes murder. There has to be some point that a woman has to live with the situation and choose adoption if she does not want the baby. I have heard from some people that yes it is awful, but what if the parents find out at 20 weeks that there is a major problem and it takes them awhile to decide what to do. Sometimes life is not what we would like, but you had quite some time up until this point to decide and personally other then something that would make the baby unable to survive birth I do not think that is a good reason to abort a child. Partial birth abortion is the most disgusting, vile act. EVER. I do not know how anyone who has had one or performed one can live with themselves. While I may not be sure when abortion becomes murder, partial birth abortion is murder. Side note: before you criticize me for such a strong stance I encourage you to find out exactly what a partial birth abortion is. McCain comes much closer to this then Obama. He would like make abortion a State issue (which in general I believe more in individual State rights then large national government).
Taxes
This is probably not the day to get me started on this esp since it is so tangled up in other issues, but I will try to stay clear and on topic. McCain will leave things alone and not increase taxes on people making over 250k (or 200k or 150k depending on if it is him or Biden talking and on what day). People over 250k already pay more then the rest of the tax brackets. We do not have a flat rate tax system as it is, meaning these people already pay more and you are just going to knock them up for more flat out with the federal tax. This is in addition to the fact that they do not receive any extra breaks, anywhere. Obama wants to "redistribute" and cut checks to people just because they work or go to college. Something that other people already working and going to college will not be eligible for because they make too much money. While I understand it can be hard to decide to work and not be on welfare anymore, it is not fair to make people who are on call 24/7 and miss events and are forced to travel at a moments notice pay more to encourage others to go in and work 9-5 every day. As much as it may not be fair to not "help" people make a change, it is not fair to punish people just because they already work hard.
I would also like to point out that rarely (if ever) will taxes stay what they are. They almost always increase and while 250k may sound like a lot today you never know when you will make that amount. Or when those "rich" people are taxed so high and they no longer pay for everything the government wants so now it is all the "rich" people over 200k, then 150k, until they are at 75k or 50k.
The Economy
This is what happened today that has me really irritated. The bailout was necessary. The economy was grinding to a halt. When banks do not have money to lend companies (or people) companies go out of business (people stop buying anything) and more people become unemployed, people spend less, companies still cannot borrow money and it just spirals. The mortgage group is the ones that should be in trouble - not everyone. Some people have made the banks literally millions in fees working on call 24/7 and now the government thinks that they should not be compensated? Salary for bankers is not very much (more then half is annual bonus), but on the bright side I guess they will be able to pay less in taxes and perhaps qualify for more government programs. Of course, if people do not make as much and pay less in taxes, how will the government fund all the programs? Hopefully only those really rich people over 250k will just get their taxes raised.
Redistribution of wealth will only encourage mediocrity. Why work really hard to make more when you are just going to give it to the government and they are more then willing to take car of you? When no one wants to work hard then our country will have definitely taken a turn for the worse. What makes everyone want to come to America? The ability to do anything and become anything if you work hard. I think most of these policies will basically encourage people to not work as hard.
Do not necessarily agree with either on how they will handle getting things in the right direction, but believe McCain will have better long term solutions. Oh, and many of these problems were years in the making (10 - 15% appreciation on your home every year? sounds inflated) and will take time to work themselves out. Our country was founded as a capitalist country and I would like it to stay that way. It is one of the few left.
Health Care
On the subject of people leaving the workforce of doing something else, doctors! Many will drastically cut back or drop out altogether if they are forced into making less money and seeing more patients. I know several women who only work a couple days a week to stay active in their profession and still be at home with their children. They have already said if things get bad they are just going to quit practicing all together. What would be point - more patients (= more hours), less money, and the ability to be sued for any imaginable amount if something bad happens. In many areas there is already a shortage of doctors. The WSJ had an article not long ago about internist and general practitioners being the least desired among med students. It went on to say that 97% of speciality residences are filled by US med schools and only 47% of internist residences were filled by US med schools with the remaining being filled by foreign schools. To me that is a very scary stat. I have had foreign doctors before, some great, some not so great (could barely understand). Will doctors from other countries really want to continue coming here? And do we really want our first line of health care to be from foreign med schools?
McCain has a much more realistic view on how to handle health care. It is expensive, but why should the government be paying for it? I may have missed it, but where does the Constitution guarantee the right to medical insurance? It stinks, but it is not a guaranteed right and why should the government be covering it. I do think certain preexisting conditions should be covered. The other problem I have is some people just are not ever going to pay for insurance no matter what. They do not think they will get sick, especially really sick, so why put any money out?
Oh, and health insurance is another way that many companies penalize the people who make more money. They talk all about how affordable it is and they will put money in a health account to offset some of your out of pocket expenses, but only if you are at level abcde, once you are at level f or if you make x amount then you not only do not get the company health account, but also get to pay a higher monthly premium so others do not have to pay as much. So, basically the idea to tax higher earners to pay for a national health care plan is just another shot at getting more and saying "well, it is only this much more" when in reality it all adds up.
By the way, since everyone has either been pregnant or knows someone who has been, in Canada where they have universal health care you do not even see the doctor until you are 5 months along. Hopefully if you have any questions before then you can find it online.
Will try to tackle some more issues later, but the kids are up and this has already taken longer then expected.
7 comments:
You are borderline breaking rules with the sarcasim missy :) I hear you on the partial birth..think that I mentioned that.
Never thought about the mediocre goals of people you "help" I guess it sort of depends on how you look at it....if you don't help some people then you will only have really rich and really poor and that isn't a good balance for a country to survive long term I don't think, but I don't think that we should just hand stuff out to peopole...I think that we should find a better system. I don't feel bad for lazy people and that to me is where the system is broken, for some of the reasons that you mention, but what about kids who are born into poor families and have no opportunity to better themselves without help of some sort from the government? Don' they deserve a chance even though their parents weren't rich? Don't they deserve a chance to go to college and get educated and make something of themselves instead of repeating the same mistakes their parents made? That is where I want my money to go....not to the lazy, I am going to lie about looking for a job, guy....which is why I mentioned the fact that the system needs an overhaul...who knows how.
I have never heard of a company that didn't allow you to participate in a flexible spending account depending on your income and never saw anything about it in tax law either but I will look that up.
As for the bonuses....bonuses are for doing a good job, if you don't do a good job, you don't get it....that is why there is a difference between salaries and bonuses and if you depend on your bonus as part of your income then you don't understand what a bonus is. By definition it is in addition to your regular pay for going above and beyond. Not sure how I feel about lower employees not getting them but the execs should not get them...they do not need 45 million as opposed to 2 million or whatever...especially when it is taxpayers money.
I will also mention the same thing to you as to Terah's reply....I know that people over $250K pay the highest tax rates but I would say to look at their effective tax rates....the tax bracket only tells you so much....normally people who make more have more opportunity for tax shelter items, bigger deductions (though they do get limited so I see the point there) and the ability to hire CPAs to get you around stuff....just a thought, I don't know the answer, just thinking outloud but I would be interested. I know for a fact that I make more than some people I know but they have a higher effective tax rate (meaning they pay a higher actual percentage than I do, even though I am in a higher tax bracket).
As for you being annoyed when people don't have facts, I agree...however, that is the price you pay for democracy..everyone gets a vote to use how they please....and unfortunately most of them are not educated or are educated but not educated on the issues. That is why I gave my disclaimer :-)
Capitalism..great in theory but I don't believe it can truly exist on its own. Name one civilization since the beginning of time that was purely capitalism and survived.....I couldn't think of one and no one I have asked so far could so you get a prize if you could come up with one.
I definitely don't know everything and everyone who has responded (well, the three) have made good points and have made me consider other sides. Like Terah and I talked about last night...you always have to have people on both sides in order to get an answer in the middle and then you know it is working. So, thanks for responding, I wish I knew even more about everything...I just want the recession fixed :-)
You may not get to see a doctor in Canada until you are 5 months..but you get a year of maternity leave!
Seriously? A year? I don't really know much about this, which is why I didn't respond because I haven't been pregnant and have no idea how often you go to the doctor in the first 5 months. I would be interested on the statistics of whether or not they have a higher death rate or unhealthy babies as a result of not going to the doctor more and if it was everywhere...their providences or whatever they call them are like little mini countries with so many different rules.
I think that national healthcare could work, but we would have to take the best ideas from other countries and combine them, not just pick a plan that isn't working and I don't think that either candidate has a good plan...
A year of maternity leave - sort of. They get up to 50 weeks at 55% of pay - UP to $413 a week. $413 CANADIAN. That's like a nickel here.
Still more than the moms who want to stay home for the first year but make nothing doing it here after the first 3 months or whatever it is :-) Positive side?
Just got back from Canada and maybe currency once was very different but it is now about dead even.
Well done!
My only thing about the abortion issue...just because it gets to me why old men are telling me what to do with my body:
Partial Birth Abortion, as a phrase, was coined by politicians. I have actually met someone who had the procedure, which doctors refer to as Intact Dilation and Extraction, or I-D&E. It was performed because of severe, rare abnormalities to the fetus that would have meant an imminent but slow and painful death once exposed to the outside world.
While I can't say "all", most of these procedures are performed for these very reasons. A friend of mine from Boston also had a sister who had one because it was determined that in addition to her child being most likely to die shortly after birth, she herself was in grave danger by giving birth any other way.
My point in all of this? Yes, it's not pretty, and even discussing the possibility of the procedure is a situation that I hope none of us ever have to end up in. But if we are to outright ban a medical procedure that - although scary and grotesque - can save a woman's life in certain situations, then we are to trust OUR bodies to a bunch of overweight middle-aged men in Washington or whatever state capital we're in.
Banning the procedure will mean that doctors will not be trained in it, will not be allowed to consider it in a patient's care and women will die as a result. Banning the procedure also puts healthy mothers at risk as it is the same procedure used when a baby is determined to have miscarried in the latter half of the pregnancy. As the fetus must be removed, the mother has three options - painful and traumatic vaginal birth, a risky caesarean, or the I-D&E. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather have a doctor and me make that decision rather than some stupid politician. If I am to have a child stillborn, I PRAY that my government doesn't force me to be fully conscious and deliver it as if it were alive - frankly, I don't think I could handle it. If we don't allow doctors to even learn the procedure, we're saying that mothers of stillborns only get those two other options. It's a slippery slope, and getting on it only erodes all of our rights. Pro-life (sic) activists even admit that the ONLY reason they picked up the Partial Birth Abortion thing is because they see it as a way to get a precedent going their way so they could further limit and ban safe and legal abortion. As for states deciding on their own, I see where you're coming from, but on issues that I'd consider to be fundamental civil rights - this being one of them - I think that we owe it to ourselves to make sure that a girl born in West Virginia has the same control over her body as a girl born in New York City. Frequently, women who can not get access to safe and legal first-trimester abortion care are the same ones who will be seeking late-term abortions.
As I've said, I don't think that either candidate can possibly change anything as far as Roe v. Wade goes, but the day John McCain or Barack Obama or hell, my state senator tells me what to do with my Vageezus is the day they get a swift kick in the nuts.
Post a Comment