Grateful Dead

This is an interesting thread. The beauty about politics is that everyone has a choice and everyone wants everyone else to vote for their choice, Gotta love it. Now, this nation is in dire need of universal health care. Also, this country needs to shore up it's borders and keep jobs here in the country instead of outsourcing. Greed--both corporate and personal--has ruined this country. I, for one, have a very good job, with benefits and a pension to boot, I earn a very good wage which enables me to provide for my family. My life views have changed as I have gotten older and I do not want to be taxed more in order to provide for others. That is how universal health care will work. That all being said, whomever is the Democratic nominee will be receiving my vote in November. I do believe that both parties have forgotten the common man, but I can live with Obama, Edwards, or Clinton.

the only 'higher' education I ever had was when I went to Psychotic State University for half a semester. and I even flunked out of that... ) -; http://people.howstuffworks.com/electoral-college1.htm http://www.howstuffworks.com/electoral-college.htm check these (and other links) out. but my take on the whole system is that the founding father's and the framers and writers of the constitution, basically didn't trust the masses. so if-- for example, a nutter like CCj somehow got enough popular votes, he would not actually get to be president because the other politicians (senators and house members) can still decide who they will vote for in the electoral college regardless of what the popular vote in that state was. so, heavily populated states like Cali, for the same reason they have more house members because they have a higher population (every state has 2 senators regardless of population) they have more electoral votes. is this fair? another debate. we all saw what happened with the Florida fuck-up and the other bullshit. when Bobby did his 'register to vote' raps on The Dead tour, I remember him saying stuff like "if every deadhead had voted in Florida..." oh, hey, for the dude who met Al Gore at a show, what year roughly? what was the way the conversation went? he actually said he wanted to be 'Vice' president? what was he wearing? was he already involved in politics? did he inhale? ( -: peace.

The only way that anything that has been discussed here will change, is if more of the population gets involved and vote. The good news is that there was a record turnout in Iowa, with more young people getting involved in the process. My daughter is turning 18 soon and is eligble to vote in this election. I was very encouraged while talking with her and some of her friends, that they are all planning on voting, and they actually are talking about it! There seems to be many intelligent and positive voices on here. Don't be afraid to put your ideas out there in other mediums. This country is ready for change. Finally, now that I live in Florida, I found a way to try and make a difference. I sighned up to be a poll worker. I thought that since I still had some brain cells left, I could help prevent another debacle like in 2000. Thanks

Where was I during Gov't/Economics Class back in Highschool?Maybe I didn't pay enough attention back then, but I just don't get the Electoral College. What's the point of MY vote, with this system in place? To get into the higher ups of politics, it seems to me you'd have to be shady somewhere along the line, but damn, I'd vote for the lesser of the evils if I thought it counted. A good number of people in my state- SC- don't have the same views as myself- which is fine and most of our elected officals act like "good ol' boys", so should I even try to find out about Platforms? * and the whole world full of petty wars singing I got mine & you got yours while the current fashions set the pace loose your step, fall out of grace the radical he rants & rage(raves?) singing someone got to turn the page the rich man in his summer home singing just leave well enough alone but his pants are down, his cover's blown & the politicians throwing stones so the kids they dance & shake their bones 'cause it's all too clear we're on our own...... Picture a bright blue ball spinning spinning free... * * Sorry If I was rude '71, I find it gets me nowhere in life PEACE

Hal, I completely agree that the heathcare system needs a very fundamental overhaul. My great grandfather was a country doctor in central Maine, one of the only doctors in the county. When people in need called him, he would come and tend to them. If they couldn't pay in cash, then they would offer what they could. Pigs, eggs, potatoes, firewood, maple syrup, lobsters, whatever. And if they truly had nothing, well, that was fine too. They'd square up as best they could when things were going better for them. And how did that approach work out for him? Well, my parent's generation is still reinvesting his money, and I suspect that one day I will be doing so as well. So what's changed between then and now? The prevalence of insurance. The basic problem with creating large pools of available capital as the fundamental revenue model in a business system is that the focus of the business changes from effectively delivering the product to effectively extracting the revenue. And healthcare, like it or lump it, is a business system. I believe that by permanently embedding the insurance based revenue model, by means of a universal and mandatory government administrated system, that this problem will only be exacerbated. Instead, I think it makes more sense to have employer provided health care benefits liquidated and distributed into employee owned and controlled health care accounts. People should also be able to contribute to those accounts directly themselves. Gains earned on those accounts should be able to accumulate without tax liability. Disbursements from those accounts should be made only to registered health care providers. Accounts should only be transferable to another upon the death of the account owner, free of tax consequence. And the amount a person has in their account should not be the only source of payment available to the providers. A person in need of service who claims hardship or inability to pay should have to be prepared to be very transparent about the truth of their economic circumstances. Likewise, providers should not be able to deny reasonably necessary services to a person based on their ability to pay in a timely fashion, or at all. By decentralizing the revenue source available to the healthcare industry, it will refocus the business back towards the provisioning of the services rather than the efficiency in collecting the payment for those services. It will also reintroduce the notion of competition in delivering those services. Perhaps it's just me, but I happen to believe quite strongly in the power of markets. A marketplace is a brutally efficient and effective means of discovering relative value. They are the ultimate democracy. If something offered in a marketplace doesn't appear to be a value to you, you are free to not buy it. As far as I'm concerned, markets are the third most powerful force in the universe. As a concept, they've been around for a very long time. And that's because they work. I think they should be put to work to solve this particular issue. Conversation is always more interesting than recitation, so speak your mind and not someone else's.

Points well taken!! I am not into politics, alls I know is that the wife and I work way to hard to be going backwards. Corporate greed, and the downright lazy are running this country and it's time for change. That's all I'm saying!!!!

IMO, Wolfe DID cover American politics - with one sentiment. If that makes me a pessimist, then I guess I have to accept that label. The reason I don't see any hope for American politics is illuminated by the plain fact that I still don't hear anyone, from any of the camps of front runners for office of presidency, asking for ideas to solve our current range of social and economic problems. In addition, those folks and businesses that will be hurt the most financially, in terms of lost income, and profits, if we follow the current trends and policies, also stand to gain the most from any solutions we find in the future. I've often said that in America (I can't speak for anywhere else) greed exists from the very poor to the very rich, in terms of mentality and I suppose the same applies to ignorance. Strike one! "Smokey, you're entering a world of pain... a world of PAIN!" "Ask not what your country can do for you, but rather, what you can do for your country!" Now that's "liberalism" folks! Or is it? My idea is that we've not seen true "liberalism" since JFK nor real "conservative" leadership since George H W Bush (# 41), which is ironic on many levels. Presidents Carter, Regan, Bush (41) and Clinton all have worked to achieve line item veto for the office of presidency, on a bipartisan basis, which was achieved then ultimately found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto). Imo, this was the last hope for fiscal conservatism in the federal government. It certainly dashed the idea that voting for one person could have the effect most voters fantasize. Strike two! "Am I the only one who cares about the rules?" For the record folks, I'm not saying to NOT vote for Obama or anyone else, for that matter. I've said how and for whom I'd vote, given the circumstances, in another thread here @ dead.net but I'm not endorsing any politician, ever. I feel totally betrayed by both parties, at this point in time, and I would encourage the idea of abolishing the political party system, altogether. The Constitution exists to uphold balance in government, not to be used as a weapon against opponents, or to inhibit necessary and positive change by the "opposition party", while problems fester that could be solved or abated, at the very least. Health care is a HUGE issue in this country. Why can't we deduct all of our health care expenses from our taxes, when we complete our returns each year? The current tax law, in this regard, requires a person to spend 7 % of their income on health care BEFORE they can begin to deduct those expenses. WHY? This is simply an outdated law that needs to be changed, NOW. Talk about an incentive for working poor... OK, one problem solved. NEXT! "Am I wrong?" (Casey puts on his engineer's hat... and picks up a baseball bat.) "Will you just take it easy... man." "...calmer than you are..." (Casey walks towards home plate) As a change of pace to this thread, I say we think of "fantasy" politicians we'd love to run the country as President. At this point, I'm leaning toward Lesh/Molo in '08! "You're not wrong Walter, you're just an asshole!"

Steve -O. I work in a non-profit health agency and much of our clientele is poor, working and non-working. What I generally see is that there are more benefits for the unemployed or unemployable than for the working poor. I see families trying to dig themselves out of economic despair and lose benefits from the government when they go to work and then have to spend a large portion of income on insurance or go without. I would like our society to provide more protection and incentive for the working poor. That is why I am for universal health care for all in this country. I know it is socialistic, so I guess I am on this point. Medical costs for all of us have gone up in the past years with much of the privatization of the medical industry and non-profits becoming for profit and the rise of a whole batch of high paid legitimate scoundrels with masters degrees in Hospital Administration and business who cut jobs of lab technicians, nurses etc. and then give themselves a raise for doing so. Health care in this country has to change. If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. William Blake

hmm this could get interesting just remember “Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he will sit in the boat and drink beer all day.” :-)

That's not a popular view in these parts. You start talkin' about earning your own way, personal responsibility and not wanting the government to hold your hand, and you're looking to upset alot of folks around here. Give a man a fish, he eats for a day - TEACH him to fish, he eats for a lifetime. It's always interesting and a bit sad how divisive political talk can be. It seems curious to me that a site deadicated to something as positive as the GD, with everyone here drawn together by the MUSIC, would even have have a political debate topic. I used to look forward to the shows because there was no politics, no skin color, etc..., just MUSIC. The shows and tours were an oasis from the BS. I know - I don't have to read it if I don't want to - this is just an observation. I tend to agree with the train comparison, that the train rolls on the same tracks no matter who is wearing the Casey hat. Watch yer speed! His job is to shed light, not to master...