Greetings from RNC

[August]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

That's what worries me. Both parties are poloraized. Compromise, a word that in my opinion is the very core of statecraft, is now considered weakness. I fear our country will crumble into ruins all around us, and both parties will still be standing there, pointing fingers at each other, with neither having done anything to prevent it.

On the other hand if either party controls the entire enchilada you get runaway spending and gobs of social engineering.

I'd much rather have the gridlock.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by August

On the other hand if either party controls the entire enchilada you get runaway spending and gobs of social engineering.

I'd much rather have the gridlock.

That also is true. Mind you, i'm not excited about the prospect of one party, or the other being in total control. However, one could argue, that if one party got the whole enchilada, at least something would be done. The way things are going this day and age, Something, anything, is better then nothing.

Now, I don't wish for any one party to have total control, what I do wish, is this extreme left or right BS stop. All the hyperbole, jingoism, and rhetoric. It ALL needs to stop. I think that would be the first step away from polarism, and more towards the middle of the road where we need to be. Everyone, left, or right, needs to get off this "my way or the highway" kick and start meeting their fellow countrymen in the middle.
(edit: but sad to say, I don't think that will ever happen. If I was to jump on the "doomsday prepping" bandwagon, governmental and financial collapse would be my rational. )

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by August

It's not really an improvement at least to anyone who has to pay for it.

While coverage has increased significantly the quality of health care has remained unchanged and in spite of being billed as an antidote to run away health care costs, the price of insurance premiums have jumped 5-10% every year since Romneycare was enacted, way above the national inflation rate.

doesn't look as rosy as Romney paints it. Well we have a similar problems with rising premiums and less service here, for the same reasons why Obamacare turned out to be a failure: too few efforts to stand up against the insurance and pharma lobby. Just a minor example: we pay about as much in Germany for a 10 pack of Aspirin as you guys pay for a container of 250

[Penguin]

Regarding the gridlock between Congress and POTUS:
I know many Americans see it as a kind of counter-balance, to keep one team from too much influence, however it can turn out to be a gridlock in the truest meaning:

This is what a congressman from team R says about the current state of affairs:

So far, the House of Representatives this year has taken over 1,000 separate votes which has surpassed the most recorded votes ever in the history of Congress. We also have been "in session" voting for 146 days so far, which is also headed to a record number of days in Washington, DC. So, that's the input.

But what about the output? So far, only 107 bills have been signed into law. Over half of these were either naming something (like a post office) or extending an existing law that was scheduled to expire. several more were simple land transfers from government to government. National Review has suggested that has been only one piece of legislation of any significance that has passed and been signed into law which was the increase in the minimum wage. This Congress is on track to pass the fewest bills since electronic records have been kept. Furthermore, Congress has failed to send a single appropriations (budget/spending) bill to the President after a full month into the fiscal year. The is the first time Congress has failed to do so since 1987.

(source:http://www.campbell.house.gov/index....rticle&id=2090)

USA Today confirms his stance:Congress churns out fewest laws since 1947

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Penguin

USA Today confirms his stance:Congress churns out fewest laws since 1947

These statistics make the 112th Congress, covering 2011-12, the least productive two-year gathering on Capitol Hill since the end of World War II. Not even the 80th Congress, which President Harry S. Truman called the "do-nothing Congress" in 1948, passed as few laws as the current one, records show.

Like i said, the country could crumble all around them. And they'll still be standing their pointing fingers at each other, with neither having done anything to prevent it.

[August]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Regarding the gridlock between Congress and POTUS:
I know many Americans see it as a kind of counter-balance, to keep one team from too much influence, however it can turn out to be a gridlock in the truest meaning

But a divided Congress is a very different situation than one between Congress and POTUS.

As I understand it, with a divided Congress each party can block the other by simple inaction. The POTUS on the other hand can veto any congressional legislation that is sent to his desk for signature but they can override his veto if they have a 2/3rds majority of congress willing to vote to override the veto

The idea is that legislative branch only gets it's way if their bill enjoys very wide and usually bipartisan support. That's the limit to their power.

The President, mindful of getting reelected in his first term and of his "legacy" in his second, only uses his veto power if he thinks that the bill enjoys only lukewarm support or he knows it'll be overridden and he wants to go on record as having opposed it. That's the limit to his power.

[1480]

Originally Posted by August

But a divided Congress is a very different situation than one between Congress and POTUS.

As I understand it, with a divided Congress each party can block the other by simple inaction. The POTUS on the other hand can veto any congressional legislation that is sent to his desk for signature but they can override his veto if they have a 2/3rds majority of congress willing to vote to override the veto

The idea is that legislative branch only gets it's way if their bill enjoys very wide and usually bipartisan support. That's the limit to their power.

The President, mindful of getting reelected in his first term and of his "legacy" in his second, only uses his veto power if he thinks that the bill enjoys only lukewarm support or he knows it'll be overridden and he wants to go on record as having opposed it. That's the limit to his power.

Nice to hear from you. You did neglect a very liberal use of executive order.

[August]

Originally Posted by 1480

Nice to hear from you. You did neglect a very liberal use of executive order.

Good to hear from you too Stranger. Welcome back!

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

The President, mindful of getting reelected in his first term and of his "legacy" in his second, only uses his veto power if he thinks that the bill enjoys only lukewarm support or he knows it'll be overridden and he wants to go on record as having opposed it. That's the limit to his power.

Interesting factoid: The first six presidents - George Washington through John Quincy Adams - only used the veto on bills they felt were unconstitutional. Andrew Jackson was the first president to veto bills solely because he didn't like them.

[the_tyrant]

Hey, you wanna do a writeup on your opinion of the thing mate?

I wanna see how the "rank and file" feel, not the usual "hardcore republican" blogs, or the "mainstream" media

[1480]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Regarding the gridlock between Congress and POTUS:
I know many Americans see it as a kind of counter-balance, to keep one team from too much influence, however it can turn out to be a gridlock in the truest meaning:

This is what a congressman from team R says about the current state of affairs:


(source:http://www.campbell.house.gov/index....rticle&id=2090)

USA Today confirms his stance:Congress churns out fewest laws since 1947

Ok. Says the House has passed over a thousand bills. House did their job. Probably most of the rest stalled in Senate, which if I remember correctly is held by the Democrats. The last piece of the pie is it being signed into law.

[Kongo Otto]

Originally Posted by Penguin

Just a minor example: we pay about as much in Germany for a 10 pack of Aspirin as you guys pay for a container of 250

Btw Aspirin Price: USA (500mg Pill, 80 each Pack) 9.99 $
+ Postage and package
Aspirin Price Germany: (500mg Pill, 100 each Pack) 9 € (11.28 $)
+ Postage and package
Price per Pill US: 0.12 US cent
Price per Pill Germany: 0.11 US cents

Not really a big price difference if you ask me.




Edit:
Penguin you made me curious, so i searched for the Prices of one of the Medications i have to use daily and i found this one out:

Price Trimipramine Generic (100 Tablets, 50 mg) Germany: 20.28 € (25.41 $)
Price Trimipramine (100 Tabletss, 50 mg) USA: 78 $ (62.24 €)

But we are soooo expensive here in germany! Pfffffffff
Penguin you should not believe the Politicians!!

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Kongo Otto

Btw Aspirin Price: USA (500mg Pill, 80 each Pack) 9.99 $
+ Postage and package
Aspirin Price Germany: (500mg Pill, 100 each Pack) 9 ***8364; (11.28 $)
+ Postage and package
Price per Pill US: 0.12 US cent
Price per Pill Germany: 0.11 US cents

Not really a big price difference if you ask me.

yeah, k, but those web-pharmacies likely offer you those re-imports. This is the sick system: The pills are manufactured here, shipped to Spain or other Euro-countries, then come back to Germany: voilá: only a fraction of the price. In my local pharmacy I pay about 5 Euros for a regular 10 pack by Bayer, for generic about 3.50-4 . If I happen to buy it after 7pm, you can add some extra cash at a "emergency pharmacy" In the US you get a big back for the same money over the counter in regular stores. Random example: http://www.supplylinedirect.com/anal...n-250-tablets/ 250 for $5.25
I don't attempt to defend the US health care system though, it is as sick as ours, just an example how people in Germany get milked.

Originally Posted by Kongo Otto

non-profit health insurance plans The only people who make only few profit are the ones who actually work in healthcare, e.g. nurses

The rest of the explanation is good, but I think our health system is rotten to the core. Just remember since when you know the dreaded word "Gesundheitsreform" - just the same joke phrase as a "Steuereform". Much talk, no change in the fundamental perversions of both our tax and health system since decades.... Every single politician who attempted to change any of those got bombed down by the lobbies, resulting in even more screw-up.

EDIT. to react to the edit :
Yes, the price of medicine people actually need is a whole different chapter

[Kongo Otto]

Originally Posted by Penguin

http://www.supplylinedirect.com/anal...n-250-tablets/ 250 for $5.25

Your link is a generic, i linked original Bayer Products and it's a 325 mg Pill (5 grains) and my link was the 500 mg original. But anyways i think you know what i mean, i think this talk that Prices for medication in germany are so high is part of an Agenda by those who want to opress us into a US Style Health care system and be sure i will fight that to the death!

Originally Posted by Penguin

The rest of the explanation is good, but I think our health system is rotten to the core.

Our Health Care isn't rotten to the core, it has some minor and some major flaws but calling it "rotten to the core" sorry Penguin but that's an utter exaggeration!
Sooner or later there will be a solution for the flaws of our health care system, but this will take years, but it will happen.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Kongo Otto

Your link is a generic, i linked original Bayer Products and it's a 325 mg Pill (5 grains) and my link was the 500 mg original. But anyways i think you know what i mean, i think this talk that Prices for medication in germany are so high is part of an Agenda by those who want to opress us into a US Style Health care system and be sure i will fight that to the death!

Our Health Care isn't rotten to the core, it has some minor and some major flaws but calling it "rotten to the core" sorry Penguin but that's an utter exaggeration!
Sooner or later there will be a solution for the flaws of our health care system, but this will take years, but it will happen.

About the aspirin-link:That's why I wrote down the price fopr generic Aspirin, too.

Anyway, the agenda for affordable medication is a whole different thing than the "every-man-for-himself" agenda like those FDP-wankers want to do.
The latter is going on since years. Just look at all the privatization of hospitals, nursery homes,etc. It happened in a massive scale during the past 20,25 years. It didn't raise the standard of health care, nor lowered the costs for the patient, it only lowered the staff costs and their work conditions. The profit goes to those private companies.

Another example: It is an open secret that most people who take care of their elder relatives can only do so because they rely on illegal caretakers (who do a great job btw, and are the ones who keep the wheels spinning of a humane care for old people at home) Is anyone addressing this problem, that the so called "care insurance"(Pflegeversicherung) is nothing but a sad joke? No, Augen zu und durch. Pay more and more into any pocket but for the ones who need it the most and are the weakest members of society. Old and poor: a fatal combination...

The last "health reform": Several hundred insurance companies who all offer the same? And of course our premiums raised and also the subsides from taxes, who would have thought so?
No, man, our system needs a radical reform, not baby steps. This would mean
showing the middle finger to big pharma and all the other profiters from our health costs.
I am in favor of a tax based system, like in the Nordic countries. This is a thing where taxes do really make sense, the "tax ideal" so to say: invested into the common need. Better some money gets down the drain by some government screw-up, than feeding people who life off basic human needs. However this would directly be antagonistic to the very core of our corrupt banana republic. So: no hope for any change in Germany...