VP Joe Biden - "The man with the cash...."

[Mikeg]

Governor Jennifer Granholm ebulliently introduced Vice President Joe Biden today at NextEnergy in Detroit, during a dog and pony show arranged to announce the awarding of more than $1B in grants from federal stimulus funds that will go to Michigan-based manufacturers for investment in hybrid vehicle battery production [link].

Granholm introduced Biden by shouting, "He's personally a friend of me [[sic). I love this guy! The man with the cash....."

Vice President Biden responded with, "Would the governor love me if I had no money?"

Lost in all the jocularity was the fact that Biden has no cash or money to fund these grants. The money being used to fund these grants comes from the US Treasury and if it is to be attributed as coming from anyone, it should be rightly acknowledged that it is the US taxpayer's money which is being redistributed to Michigan businesses. Of course, it's actually the massive government borrowing that is making the funds available and it is the US taxpayer and their descendants who are on the hook for paying the interest and eventually repaying the principle. But it must be so much fun and quite an ego trip to be able to shamelessly stand in front of the cameras and fawning press and pretend otherwise.

[Olddetroiter]

But it must be so much fun and quite an ego trip to be able to shamelessly stand in front of the cameras and fawning press and pretend otherwise.

Of course. That's what politicians do. But as long as they're giving our money away it's nice to see a little bit of it coming back to Michigan.

[ghettopalmetto]

"Wow." That's all I can say.

[ccbatson]

Robin Hood with OUR cash...what a hero.

[ccbatson]

And let's not forget our own Jenny Granholm for offering him a hero's welcome.

[Gistok]

Mmmmmmm pork!!!

I'll have mine with a side of Freedom Fries.... and the tab is on Ccbatson....

Spending $1.3 billion [[out of $2.6 billion) here for Michigan companies... let's see how does that compare to spending $700 billion on Wall Street....

[gibran]

you know the difference between societies that make it and those that flounder? Those that care about each other and pitch in to help [[ like ours during the great depression) and those that only are protective of what I got [[ Like ours as a result of the Reagan ...Wallstreet years)...

this is a crisis that isn't solved with trickle down economics-only with all of us working together. In reality..we all have a stake in the future...so what if we have to all pay a little more temporary to fix the problem [[as long as the greed is put int check) we should do it . For if our country fails; all those who wag the false flag of pride fail too.

[Mikeg]

Spending $1.3 billion [[out of $2.6 billion) here for Michigan companies... let's see how does that compare to spending $700 billion on Wall Street...

Don't focus on the amounts, consider the terms on which the money was provided. I think there is a huge difference - Wall Street got loans while these are grants, which don't get repaid.

Nonetheless, both are examples of the kind of "corporate welfare" that Democrats have rightly assailed in past years. Now that they are in total control, apparently it is "all good", just because we are in the midst of the worst recession in 70 years and government needs to look like they are doing something about it NOW. So they gin up a "stimulus plan" and let it be spent on anything and everything over the next couple of years - including on Michigan's budget deficit and grants [[not loans) to build factories at a company [[the General Motors Company) that the federal government basically owns [[once upon a time that would have been considered a conflict of interest!). Then the politicians have the gall to joke around and act like they're playing Santa Claus while announcing how they are going to give away stimulus money they don't have on battery factories that won't get built for another couple of years, if ever.

When you're in a deep hole [[see below), the common sense rule it to stop digging, lest you never get out. But common sense is in short supply in Washington DC and Lansing, MI and Jen and Joe's clueless bantering at the podium provides ample evidence of that fact.

Attachment 2645

[Mikeg]

so what if we have to all pay a little more temporary to fix the problem

I'd like to know your definitions of "a little more" and "temporarily". No feel-good platitudes like "we all have a stake in the future", just tell us how much more you are personally willing to pay each year in federal income taxes and for how many years.

as long as the greed is put int check

Does that mean that you agree with me that the greed needing to be put in check includes that of the politicians and government officials who loaded up the federal "stimulus" plan with every conceivable idea, local budget deficit, pet project and private initiative they thought they could get away with under the guise of being "shovel-ready"?

[gibran]

Ok here it is ... I believe we are paying enough in taxes now but much of it goes to the pork on both sides...so in answer to your second we divert spending into projects that have a chance to help our economy [[no bridges to nowhere)....we then look at the priorities and say that our health care system moved away from it's original intent and became a profit motive system. If something is broke you fix it [[tough choices for a tough problem). Our system is Driven by greed and protectionism of a system that is triangulated between large corporates including insurance /adjusters; hospitals and medical professionals that have lost track with their oaths. In saying that we should review all systems, come up with a reason plan and spread the costs out equitable. When the system is identified as one that includes some if not all of the provisions presented by the moderates on this forum, we should enact a system that protects our citizens...here's a clue:

Our laws started out as moral ideals, they then became an agreement between parties, enacted by legislation and laws to enforce them... This debate is moving past the moral stage ..so my feel good platitudes are rightfully placed...because whether you agree with me or not [[your privilege here in our country) it is a moral outrage that our most import component of our lives has been dictated by corporations whose only job is to increase profits for share holders..

We have Social Security, and I here no one saying that it should be done away with because of it' costs and it's name. To answer the first part of your question: I am willing to pay my fair share to extend coverage for all Americans, like we do in all aspects of our government [[protection and education)..but I believe that comes with a system with checks and balances and so far private industry and health hasn't mixed well...

when you need portability and coverage for pre-existing conditions ask an HMO-PPO what that means to t hem...
I Can tell what it meant to a young client of mine that called last night worrying about getting her medications for a mental health related issue...no treatment...she had missed her HMO appointment by fifteen minutes and was told she would have to wait three weeks before the next one..and that she wouldn't get her meds refilled. til then...the last time she had this issue I was called to her job and found her bundled up in a corner thinking her boss was spying on her...an dshe couldnt recognize me at first.

when you deal with real people other than statistics get back to me with your solution to this problem.. I would be glad to provide you with multiple cases what No Insurance or limited Insurance means to people...But I really will let it go for now,...maybe I should write my payment check to my Doctor's office since my HMO denied me coverage on a Precancerous Growth because they felt it wasn't cancerous enough to take care of it...the procedure that took about ten minutes to perform has cost me a thousand dollars to remedy...maybe next time I should let it become cancerous, maybe then the HMO might pay for it...if you don't think we need reform then give us an alternative.

[TKshreve]

"Wow." That's all I can say.

You shouldn't have.

[TKshreve]

Gibran......

That was brilliant. You collect and transpose my feelings on this subject into words so well.

[gibran]

Thanks I have enjoyed your post too...

[Mikeg]

To answer the first part of your question: I am willing to pay my fair share to extend coverage for all Americans, like we do in all aspects of our government [[protection and education)..

You did not answer my first question, you just offered another mealy-mouthed platitude and changed the subject. When you write "we have to all pay a little more temporary", I'd like to know how much you consider "a little more" to be and how many years you'd be willing to pay it to fix the problem of the worst recession in 70 years, not health care reform.

so in answer to your second we divert spending into projects that have a chance to help our economy

That might make sense, except that is not what happened. President Obama and the Democrats did not "divert" spending to fund the "stimulus" plan, they continued with existing spending and borrowed/printed the money needed to fund the "stimulus" plan, with the result being a massive increase in the budget deficits [[see the chart in my previous post).

[gibran]

The stimulus plan is still evolving and while there are projects that makes little sense there are signs it is helping in other areas...the jury is still out of the effects..but it is too early to correctly assess the results.

Corporate welfare: Blackwater and Haliburton ring a bell? Anyone who would have let all of our auto industries die would be branded a traitor...you have to ask yourself what would four more years of Bush Like spending gotten us? Someone had to pay for Iraq..they sure haven't..well maybe not in financial terms.

Taxes in Health Care: When I see real figures I will give you real concrete answers...I am not an economist nor are you..so I won't pull an artificial figure out of the air. I would agree to a marginal increase in health-care related dollar taxes in industries that make over a "given" % of profit...

When you spread the taxes out across the board: sales of durable goods etc...and income from Insurance companies, Hospitals etc and income tax for the wealthy, you can take a bite out of the cost..ask yourself why does it cost an ATT employee 25 dollars for their insurance vs other employers? you add more people to pool and the cost are decreased... Personally if they told me a specific percent for ten years would go to jump start healthcare I would buy into it...why [[here's the platitude part)...because my twenty-eight year old son who works with the people who are disabled would afford health care insurance. As a business owner I could afford better health care benefits form my employee and not divert critical funds from other projects that would increase my ability to help others. And , yes it is the right thing to do

However, I feel that when you see the profits from the industry and the salaries [[ that would be a good place to start)...as to not appear to "mealy" I would safely stay within my current thought and would gladly designate funding that is going to foreign countries diverted to our Healthcare system... I know were we can save Billions and change stop foreign aid without strings. I know. you know that this deficit didn't start in the last two quarters...as far as increasing funding

[ccbatson]

It's evolving all right...into a steaming pile of socialist crap. Best of all, people are starting to recognize it [[and them...Obama and company) for what they are.

[gibran]

our health Care system contributes to the deficit : Jonas, Golsteen and Goldsteen [[2007)...there is disparity in healthcare delivery for the poor and minorities: 58 % of African Americans have a higher rate of heart Disease compared to their white counter parts[[ Algrem ,2008) what can be done ; preventive health. A benefit for those with hybred plans...and not for those who struggle to make ends meet.

"there is sufficent evidence that private, profting -making health systems would not achieve the goals of most Amercians-health care quality, equity and efficiency-because of fundamental incompatibilities withthe natureof care derived from companies that put profit and shareholders earnings first [[Pellegrino, 1999)..

So yes I would be willing to pay for healthcare reform, becuase in the end it will drive costs down: and provide equality in care. How long ..as along as it takes to fix it.. Kennedy said we will put a man on the moon in a decade and it became a rallying point for many..the byproducts were advances in all fields...real monies going to research and delivery will improve the quality of life for all Americans..and save us monies in the immediate future everytime a sick person shows up at the ER for something that could have been treated earlier at a Doctor's office.

Give us another option to consider vs "deficit bogeymen" it costs to run a viable country.Profitability and lower costs in Health Care can bring about change.

[gibran]

compared to what CC..self centered Greedy Corporate Ex's..or like you so wisely posted greedy sociopaths in New Jersey/Israel...monies for body parts and false charities...yes I agree greed has no party affiliation

[ccbatson]

Liberals and socialists...not capitalists...check the backgrounds of the people committing [[allegedly, I suppose, until convicted at least) the crimes first Gibran.

[gibran]

[yes I agree greed has no party affiliation[/quote]

agreed with you on this principle...

[ccbatson]

Capitalistic greed is a good thing...Socialistic power greed where control/ownership of an individual's freedom is the goal, not just mere money [[fairly traded for as in proper capitalism) is pure evil.

[Mikeg]

In his attempt to respond to my questions, Gibran unwittingly demonstrates why so many people are against President Obama's version of health care reform and the many different bills being formulated by the Democrat-controlled Congress to meet his objective.

In trying to explain himself, Gibran changed the subject from the use of "stimulus" funds to health care, kind of like the way President Obama has changed the subject from "health care reform" to "health insurance reform."

The public is beginning to see through the smokescreens and are spotting the inconsistencies. They are getting the larger picture and their support for the Democrat's brand of health care/insurance reform is slipping.

In one breath, President Obama is telling us that "the status quo is untenable" and that it produces too many specialists and not enough primary-care physicians. Yet five minutes later he is telling us that if we are happy with our plan and we are happy with our doctor, then the federal government won't make us have to change. Also, if these reforms are so urgently needed that President Obama wanted a bill from Congress before their August recess, why are so many of the reforms in their draft bills not scheduled to take effect until 2013? Thinking people hear and read these kind of things and recognize the contradictions and a warning flag starts to go up in the back of their minds.

Then they see old video clips of Obama as a state senator speaking before an AFL-CIO group where he tells them that he is proponent of a "single payer universal health care plan".

Then they hear and see Rep. Barney Frank saying last month that "if we get a good public option, it could lead to single payer and that is the best way to reach single payer".

Even the liberal press is embracing the Democrat's Trojan Horse strategy of enacting a partial reform of the existing system and then gradually evolving to a single payer system.

Just as Gibran refuses to say in dollars how much more he is personally willing to pay in additional taxes [["so what if we have to all pay a little more temporary to fix the problem"), the Democrats are unwilling to tell the public how much more health care/insurance reform is going to cost them in actual dollars and many folks are suspicious of any politician who claims it will be paid for by "bending the cost curve" [[or any other vague and mealy-mouthed explanation).

Small wonder that many people are showing up to their Congressperson's "health care town hall" meetings to tell them they need to "Just Say NO". And in response to the rising opposition, all the Democrats are doing is denouncing those who are doing the protesting instead of trying to make a convincing argument for their reform plans and proposed legislation. That approach is very telling and it is bound to contribute to further erosion in public support for the President's health care/insurance reform plans.

[vetalalumni]

Nice presentations Mikeg. This thread I'll watch. Your responses to Gibran would hold more weight without the ridicule. Who are you trying to convince? Gibran only? Targeted arguments miss when they stray beyond the target, and that reveals argument flaws.

[Mikeg]

Nice presentations Mikeg. This thread I'll watch. Your responses to Gibran would hold more weight without the ridicule. Who are you trying to convince? Gibran only? Targeted arguments miss when they stray beyond the target, and that reveals argument flaws.

Gibran threadjacked the subject from the stimulus plan grants to health care reform. Therefore, I took the opportunity to challenge him on his preferred subject matter and his glib statement that "so what if we have to all pay a little more temporary to fix the problem". Upon further reflection, I guess that maybe there is a connection between the two because there is no "man with the cash" to pay for either of them without massive borrowing or massive tax increases. Maybe I'll post a revised version of my post #22 over on one of the health care threads.

[vetalalumni]

Gibran threadjacked the subject from the stimulus plan grants to health care reform. Therefore, I took the opportunity to challenge him on his preferred subject matter and his glib statement that "so what if we have to all pay a little more temporary to fix the problem". Upon further reflection, I guess that maybe there is a connection between the two because there is no "man with the cash" to pay for either of them without massive borrowing or massive tax increases. Maybe I'll post a revised version of my post #132 over on one of the health care threads.

That would be your post # 22 in this thread?

"# 22" in the top right-hand corner of a post is the total post count of all posts in that specific thread.

Two lines below that, under the join date, "posts: 132" is a post count of all posts by that specific poster, regardless of thread.