Home | About | Donate

Obama Shows Why Wall Street Has Two Parties And We Have None

…and seemingly always was.

2 Likes

Old Sen. Ted Stevens (R AK) was solidly middle class when he was appointed to his position in the US Senate after the death of Nick Begich (D AK) in a plane crash with Hale Boggs (D LA) in 1972. When Stevens died in a plane crash a few years ago, he was a multi-millionaire. My question has always been: How do you become a millionaire working as a public servant for the government? I think the answer is that clearly you are a corrupt a-hole. Stevens was tried and convicted of corruption, but the conviction was later overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct. That doesn’t mean he was innocent, but rather that the prosecution overstepped. People in Alaska tend to like to believe he was railroaded. Never-the-less the Anchorage International Airport is, I believe, the only airport in the US that has been named after a convicted felon (even if the conviction was subsequently dismissed).

8 Likes

This author inexplicably offers this…

“What Obama, Hillary and the corporate Democrats have never grasped and may never grasp is that Wall Street’s riches come from strip mining of the rest of us. As hedge funds press companies for lucrative stock buybacks, workers suffer as wages and benefits are cut, and jobs shifted around the globe. Communities suffer as Wall Street helps the rich stash their wealth abroad, shifting the tax base to tapped out workers. States suffer as Wall Street firms extract enormous fees to mismanage pension funds and provide high fee financing for badly need infrastructure projects. Students and their families suffer as Wall Street gouges the young through student loans. Those trapped in the prison system suffer as Wall Street backed firms set up private prisons for profit.”

What do you mean they don’t understand?

Of course they do!

Did Max Baucus and Obama understand that promising the Big Insurers and Big Pharma that the “public option” would not be an option in the final bill would enrich those corporations more as a result? Would deny millions of US citizens a way to both benefit, AND shift political power toward a broader single payer system? Well of course they understood this.

Did Obama, Baucus, and other corporate Democrats understand that most of the ACA bill was being written by former top executives of the Big Insurers inside Baucus’s Senate Office, and in doing so had sided WITH corporate interests over the obvious interests of millions of US citizens?

Well of course they did. That’s the clucking point.

As long as writers on “the left” continue to ultimately apologize for these corporate suck-ups known as lawmakers, any political movement to counter such will get absolutely nowhere.

15 Likes

Maybe you should give them a call. They may just not know the you-are-a-sellout-for-not-supporting-cooperatives litmus test yet.

Actually, I think “serving the public” is a spell check error. It should be “servicing the public,” like a bull services a dairy herd.:wink:
;-})

6 Likes

Add to the litmus test:

  • Obama’s bailout of banks, the financial industry, and private corporations while abandoning low income and underwater folk to be impoverished by those sectors he bailed out.
  • Obama’s creation of a insurance company friendly health reform package.
  • Obama’s promotion of an environmentally destructive / fossil fuel industry friendly “All of the Above” approach towards energy.
  • Obama’s promotion of the espionage industry and Universal Surveillance.
  • Obama’s prosecution of whistle blowers.
  • Obama’s promotion of the war industry including: drone killing, crowd killing, and lethal autonomous weapons programs.
  • Obama’s allocation of $ 1 trillion for the US nuclear weapons programs.
  • Obama’s continuation of the practice of US sponsored imperialist overthrow of foreign leaders
  • Quaddafi.
  • etc. etc. etc.
11 Likes

Yeah! A top Researcher gets < $500,000 from university or small company, an MBA gets $5,500,000 from a corporation! For that, the Corporation should give the Government $1,000,000 AS WELL AS paying him! (That’s 20% of inflated salary.)
And computer stock trading is reaping large rewards from superfast transactions. Tobin tax them, make the holder hold the stock for a week or something.
We can all hate government but that’s because the thieves and polluters have been selling that to us, just like ‘tobacco won’t hurt you!’
what we need is the rich paying a high percentage, ALL corporate profits taxed (even moneys kept abroad). Then funding SS and SSI and expanding basic Medicare to younger folk would be easy, as would infrastructure repair.

2 Likes

Nothing I love more than slanted, baloney lists. You should actually read about the ACA, it’s quality of care provisions, limiting tax exemptions for insurance company executives, and all the supposedly “sold out” elements of the bill. You might actually learn something. I don’t expect you to though, you’ve got your predispositions and litmus tests.

Accurate assessment by Les Leopold of the failures of the DP elites in flaunting their obscene wealth to the rest of us 98%. And those elites then wondering how to connect with the peons to win elections.

Six months of Obama was all most of us needed to see the fraudster who had misled so many. That’s when I took my walk away from the Dems.

Fitting that DJT succeed him.

3 Likes

Despite your unsubstantiated personal attack, I have direct knowledge of the shortcomings of the the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act ensured that treatment, for a rare disease, that had previously been covered, was no longer covered since it was considered ‘experimental’. This despite that the physician/researcher prescribing the treatment is the only one doing the research on this aspect of the condition. My individual premiums went up so high that I have been forced to neglect medical treatment on a few occasions when I was sick.

Of course, my personal experiences are just anecdotal, but research indicates that, in general, premiums and out of pocket spending has gone up.

http://mediatrackers.org/assets/uploads/2013/10/Exponential-PHE-Growth-Irfan.png

It is true, that more people are covered, under the ACA, which is great, but it is a stretch to claim that the ACA comes anything close to what could have been achieved through a single payer system. Despite the hope for change, President Obama’s approach to health care reform excluded those pushing for single payer health care and incorporated the voices of advocates for insurance companies.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/19692-obamacare-the-biggest-insurance-scam-in-history

I challenge you to prove any of the items that I have identified as ‘baloney’. If you are a person of integrity, you will apologize for you offensive denigration of my factual observations.

5 Likes

Good points, Steve_Fernandez, ignore the DNC Damage Control.

2 Likes

Great list, Steve_Fernandez, the etc.'s could go on and on, i.e." Deporter-in-Chief."

Ignore the DNC Damage Control.

3 Likes

Great comment, great links, thanks.

1 Like

Um, with respect to those cancellation notices, I wonder if people would get similar notices under single payer? I wonder what such a system would entail for the 64,000 employees of Aetna, or the 100,000 employed by Kaiser in Northern California alone? What about those mutual funds in healthcare and the retirees with money in them? I wonder if these issues were considered by members of Congress when they were developing the ACA or thinking about it? I only ask these questions because, well, depending on the form of single payer, especially as price controls take effect, I suspect a great many more articles like the one you point to will be printed affecting a great deal more of the population. Nah–everyone’s sold out.

By the way, I am a single payer supporter. I’m just one who believes in facts, history, and knows that there are real constraints to implementing it.

So are you saying that we can’t have Medicare for all because it would put the people in the insurance industry out of business - if so, it should be no wonder that Trump won - based on your stats and the thousands of brokers and people that profit from the insurance industry - all those people voted for Trump. So basically, the system will never change - oil, coal etc, etc - because too many people depend on those industries for their livelihoods. Well then you better put everyone to work for them so that they can pay the premiums and you might as well forget about the planet - because believe me too many capitalists depend on exploiting the hell out of it for profit. Something has to give - because it’s going to come down to the have and the have nots fighting it out for survival - and those with the big money know it and are planning accordingly. So either we care about our fellow man and the well being of the planet - or it won’t matter if you have a job or not - because there will be nothing to go home to on a dead planet with the sick and dying and poor coming for what they need from those that have it.

4 Likes

Excellent post, Steve_Fernandez!

2 Likes

You keep making that claim, that you are a single payer supporter. I, for one, do not believe you. It’s part of your act. I think I’ve seen you act before. Was it on the Democratic Underground?

1 Like

I don’t go to the Democratic Underground, actually never been there. My only point is that this snap-your-fingers-single-payer-will-work is obviously soaked in tunnel vision. I watched single payer fail in 1992 in California (Brown supported it initially too), I watched it fail in Colorado this last election. It went down in Bernie’s home state of Vermont too. The universal sentiment of progressives here is always someone sold us out. However, there are real and clear problems that, when you use tunnel vision, you miss.

Financing is the big one, for example. In 1992, single payer as an idea started off well in California, but once discussions of financing started in reality, increasing payroll and income taxes, plus a host of other complicated ways to raise revenues, support dropped. Voters became skeptical, and legitimately so, of the claims of its proponents versus the money it would take to transition away from employer provided health insurance. This is nothing to say of price controls, which would make the system work, and were never fully addressed by its supporters at the time, which made them look cagey. Supporters knew they’d lose the support of physicians, a super important constituency. In the end, it went down to massive defeat, just like Colorado Care did this last election.

I’m supportive of California’s attempts now to implement single payer, but I already see concerns over financing starting to arise. In the committee vote, legislators basically left financing for SB 562 a blank slate. Why do you think that is? Until this is dealt with straight up, and a clear understanding of how we transition from what we have to single payer is articulated, I see it crashing on the same shoals as always. At some point, funds have to be allocated for the workforce in private insurance and related fields to transition out of it; for doctors and other professionals to absorb the costs of price reductions; and, of course, the general funding for healthcare expansion. This is just reality and includes very tough waters to wade through politically. Most policy folks who have studied single payer know this–just read some literature–and it’s why the world contains a variety of systems that have evolved (and continue to evolve) over time.

Obama has no shame. Hillary lost partly due to Obama’s 8 do-nothing years – the status quo was not palatable to many. Now he’s out cashin’ in.

3 Likes

You’re always for it but it always fails and it will fail the next time too?

We will never, ever have single payer.

Sorry, I just don’t believe you.