My Ideas for American Renewal

[Libsmasher]

Hello, generalization.

Okay, I'm a liberal. You probably know that by now. What you might not know is that my mother suffers from Multiple Sclerosis. She hasn't been able to stand on her own now in about four years, and the last time she walked more than a few feet was ten years before that. It's a horrible disease, and it's been eating away at her ability to function as a human being since before I was born.

I haven't weighed in much on the universal health care vs. privatized health care debate because it's way too personal for me. It's the only thing I can safely and totally say I have no political agenda on. I just want to know what would be the best way to help my mother. If full privatization is the way to go, fine, please sell me on it.

I sincerely wish your mother well, and hopefully she has her family and friends helping and pulling for her. I don't like to personalize political arguments in this way.

 

[Libsmasher]

Oops....about 6 years ago, I looked into it for myself and my disabled husband, and the cost was somewhere between 450 - 700 a month. Now it may depend on what sort of policy you need, and what level of coverage you need. A young healthy person needs very minimal. Someone with a family or an older person with chronic illness' may need more.

Yes, there was a time when there was no prenatal care. What was the infant mortality rate? What was the maternal mortality rate? Hint: look at that of developing countries for a comparison.

I'm all for midwives and home births - but hey, they cost too.

I guess what it comes down to is....what kind of country do you want us to be?

One where only the rich matter?

I had one problem in the past, and pay $600 a month, as I work as a contractor. I am very well aware of the cost. The cost of such private insurance now has nothing to do with what it would cost if they stopped the third party payer system and cost shifting for illegal aliens and medicaid.

 

[vyo476]

I sincerely wish your mother well, and hopefully she has her family and friends helping and pulling for her.

Thanks. We all do what we can, which is a lot and not nearly enough.

I don't like to personalize political arguments in this way.

Nor do I, usually, but every now and then it feels appropriate to bring up. Ah, well, moving on...

 

[BigRob]

I guess what it comes down to is....what kind of country do you want us to be?

One where you get what you earn.

 

[ilikeboobs]

Libsmasher, I consider all of your points to be excellent ideas. Nicely done.
I'd vote for these changes.

In fact, if Osama Obama really wants to push for "CHANGE", he should fight to enact all of these common-sense ideas.

I especially love making education unions illegal. SCORE!

 

[Libsmasher]

Libsmasher, I consider all of your points to be excellent ideas. Nicely done.
I'd vote for these changes.

In fact, if Osama Obama really wants to push for "CHANGE", he should fight to enact all of these common-sense ideas.

I especially love making education unions illegal. SCORE!

Thank you. The things I advocate are REAL change. What Obama advocates is nothing more in essence than the same formula offered by dems since the days of Franklin Roosevelt: big taxation, racial privileges for non-whites, ecofascism, appeasement, eroding of US sovereignty, abortion, health care rationing etc etc etc etc

 

[Coyote]

I had one problem in the past, and pay $600 a month, as I work as a contractor. I am very well aware of the cost. The cost of such private insurance now has nothing to do with what it would cost if they stopped the third party payer system and cost shifting for illegal aliens and medicaid.

Not sure what you mean?

 

[Andy]

Oops....about 6 years ago, I looked into it for myself and my disabled husband, and the cost was somewhere between 450 - 700 a month. Now it may depend on what sort of policy you need, and what level of coverage you need. A young healthy person needs very minimal. Someone with a family or an older person with chronic illness' may need more.

Yes, there was a time when there was no prenatal care. What was the infant mortality rate? What was the maternal mortality rate? Hint: look at that of developing countries for a comparison.

I'm all for midwives and home births - but hey, they cost too.

I guess what it comes down to is....what kind of country do you want us to be?

One where only the rich matter?

Well you have two options. Bad free health care, or you get what you pay for. Those are the only two options. Universal health is alright as long as I can opt-out and pay for my own..

BTW, I absolutely love your avatar.

 

[Andy]

And then what....what do you propose for educating them? Or nothing? What will the impact be on the public? Bigger prison population?

That's pretty unrealistic. Homeschooling is time consuming and intensive and not everyone has the level of education or ability.

I've known many home schooled children. An amazing thing happens when parents follow designed educational packages... they learn too. Is this a bad thing? No I do not think it is an end-all perfect solution, but it's better than the STDs, drugs, violence, and more that happens in public schools.

I propose that if they wish to be educated, they should pursue it. I do not believe that a lack of education leads to bigger prison populations because we currently have forced education and we have bigger prison populations. There was an article posted on this forum detailing the record break level of incarcerations.

As for public impact, maybe if we stop funding these people, they'll go get a job (economic benefit) and realize how important and education is, and pay for it themselves.

 

[Andy]

There might not be a "right to education," it might not be in the Constitution, but free public education exists in every state in this country. By federal design? No. By accident? No.

Not relevant. Social Security is a violation of our constitution too, but that's mandated as well. There is no right to education. If there was, there wouldn't be such a thing as college tuition... after all it's a right? No, it isn't. All government paid for education is just a privilege granted by the government, by confiscating the earned income of it's civilians with or without permission. It can be removed just as easily and no one has any right to it.

Working in retail is the pits. It isn't nearly as stressful as being a teacher.

Both of my parents were teachers. They loved it, and the horrible 3 months off all summer long, and the state paid for trip through Europe was so stressful, and then when they retired, they were rehired by the state and got full retirement pay plus 50% extra for a half day. Essentially 150% of their regular pay for being retired and working 3 days a week. It's incredibly stressful. They had no choice but to buy a cottage along lake Erie to spend 5 weeks a year now, just to work off all that stress.

On a more serious note, I do realize that some schools are worse than others. Both of my parents worked in really good schools, not inner city. But then, that's also why I support removing mandated education. Get rid of the problem kids.

But I do believe that everyone has a right to at least recieve a decent reason for being fired. This needn't be viewed as a legally-enforced right; here in the Information Age, if an employer is firing people for poor reasons, letting consumers know ought to be pretty easy.

Can't. They should, but this is a law suit happy world where people sue for anything, and even if they lose, the company loses tons of money just dealing with it. Instead they just let you go, things are slow, we don't have work right now... when what they really mean is, you suck, you broke too much stuff, your the laziest guy here, you were always late, everyone hates you and so on.

Ah, but what about the pay rate you deserve?

No one deserves pay. You earn it, by doing the work you agree to do for the pay you agree to do it for. If you can get them to agree to pay you $20/hr to cashier at walmart, great. But I don't buy the idea that you agree to work for $7.25 and work for a month and think 'I deserve $11/hr!'. No you earn what you agreed to work for, that's it. If management thinks you are worth more to them, and gives you a pay raise, that's their deal, not yours.

Do not assume that only horrible teachers are part of teachers' unions. The good teachers often have the same low salaries and unfortunate working conditions that the bad teachers do.

When unions speak out against underpaying teachers, I support unions. When unions speak out against allowing poor working conditions for teachers to persist, I support unions. When unions protect bad teachers from getting fired, I don't support unions. I've witnessed more of the first two than the last.

Well that's part of being in a Union. If you are in a union, the union decides how much everyone is paid. You can't reward good teachers with more pay, or give bad teachers less pay, because they are unionized. The union contract dictates what everyone is paid. Just as you can't give one teacher a better room or stuff than another, it's all dictated by the contract.

This is one reason private schools have better teachers. Better teachers know they can get better pay for being a good teacher at a private school where the union doesn't control everything. On the other hand, if they become lazy or do not teach well, then they can lose their jobs right quick because a private school will lose students if they do a bad job, and there is no Union to save you there. So lame teachers do not normally go to private schools. They know they will not survive.

Yeah of course you have not noticed much of the last. The management doesn't even try to get rid of bad teachers anymore. I remember a story, I wish I could find it, about a new principal (in NY I think) who spent 2 years just to get rid of one bad teacher. You think he did that again? I doubt it.

 

[Andy]

Wind power isn't the expensive. Generating costs in a wind-driven turbine are about 4-5 cents per kilowatt-hour, about the same as the generating costs in coal and natural gas plants. Only geothermal energy, at 3-8 cents per kilowatt-hour, is potentially cheaper.

Advances in wind energy have been quite remarkable over the last thirty years or so. In 1980, yeah, wind power was ridiculously expensive - however, larger, more efficient turbines and a greater understanding of where and how to place wind farms has made wind power much more financially feasible.

Double check your wind power source. If you are reading the same sites I am, there is one key statement you missed. It's subsidized. The government is taxing people like you and me, to make wind power economically tenable. Without them blowing our taxed money on it, wind power isn't even remotely cheap.

But not only is wind power subsidized, it's also cost shifted. The renewable energy credit system requires that your electric company purchase renewable energy credits, which are paid to the source, even if the electricity from the source goes elsewhere. That cost, of course, is past on to us. So we actually pay for Wind Power and any renewable energy source, twice over. Through taxes, and increased electric bills.

The biggest issue with wind power is, even if it were cheap, it still can not replace a conventional power generation. Let's say that the wind is blowing hard, and the mills are spinning. Can the coal power plant, or gas power plant shut down? Even for a second? No. Because if they did, and the wind died for even a moment, the state would have a black out. Conventional power plants take 15 minutes to an hour to come up to full power. Wind on the other hand can go from full to zero in seconds.

So even when the wind generators are at full bore, the conventional power plant must remain in running standby, resulting in no saved 'fossil' fuel at all.

Direct solar energy is expensive (especially photovoltaic cells), but I'm given to understand that research into solar thermal electric generation has been promising.

True. Israel has had huge success in this area. But then, there are some key differences. Solar Thermal Power requires a huge area covered with reflective mirrors... like say a country that's mostly desert... not the US. Second, it requires tons of direct sunlight with little obstruction, like a desert country near the equator, not most of the US with cloud cover. Third, it still is more costly, unless you live in a country with very few natural resources, like Israel, not the US.

Effectively, there are only a few places where power generation could happen with good long term efficiency. New Mexico, Nevada, Texas, and even then, it would only produce a fraction of the US usage.

The amount of electricity produced by current techniques is small, yes. However, scientists estimate that 1% of the heat contained in the uppermost ten kilometeres of the Earth's crust is equivalent to 500 times the energy contained in all of Earth's oil and natural gas resources. That's a massive amount of energy, yet geothermal energy accounts for less than 1% of the world's energy generation. Clearly the problem doesn't lie in whether or not the energy is there - it lies in our ability to effectively harvest it. We rely on geysers and other underground water sources to produce electricity using geothermal energy. The discovery/development of a way to extract energy from dry, hot rocks in the crust would revolutionize geothermal energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot-Dry-Rock#Enhanced_geothermal_systems

Personally, it's my pick for the energy of the future. At least, the forseeable future.

It's ironic really, that my position on this, reverses to the eco-nut crowd. Eco-nuts are scared because CO2 is going to cause global warming and wipe out the planet. I've looked at that so many times and each time I think it's a fruity theory completely unsupportable based on scientific evidence.

Yet on this, eco-nut (not specifically you, just in general) think it's cool, but this system... concerns me. I'm not sure I like the idea of messing with the thermal workings of the Earths crust. On your link, it mentioned that the largest EGS system in Aussieland, caused repeated earthquakes, which seems to validate my hesitancy.

Using a pre-existing geothermal vent, like near geysers, is one thing, because it already existed naturally. Which ironically is banned since building the power plant will tap the energy powering the natural geysers, and causes them to stop.

But I am not so hot on the idea of drilling down to the earths crust to artificially cool tectonic plates for power generation purposes. Could there be a long term effect of doing this? Could it cause a break in the plate resulting in a new volcano? Could it cause huge earth quakes if the steam vented sideways? Could it cause thermal stress in the plate, possibly, God forbid, causing the plate to crack or break? I don't know enough about this topic really, but I am concerned.

 

[Bunz]

Well apparently, I misread Libsmasher's post on healthcare, but I will say that the only good answer to health care as far as im concerned is a tax payer funded system that provides the basic services and has a focus on preventative measures and general public health. It will also be needed for those who would like to/can afford thier own health care through whatever means they would like, they can get thier braces, face lifts, tummy tucks etc

Also, the notion of privitizing schools I dont care for. I would like to focus of the education system to teach people, whereas privitazation, the focus is on making a profit.

 

[Andy]

Well apparently, I misread Libsmasher's post on healthcare, but I will say that the only good answer to health care as far as im concerned is a tax payer funded system that provides the basic services and has a focus on preventative measures and general public health. It will also be needed for those who would like to/can afford thier own health care through whatever means they would like, they can get thier braces, face lifts, tummy tucks etc

Also, the notion of privitizing schools I dont care for. I would like to focus of the education system to teach people, whereas privitazation, the focus is on making a profit.

You have got to be kidding. Have you not read up on the problems with tax payer funded systems that consistently fail to provide the basic services you claim to want?

Yeah and it is amazing how much better at educating those profit focused schools do over public schools. I can see how motivating it must be to know that whether a kid is educated or not, has no bearing on how much collected tax money you get. Or how motivated a teacher is to do the very best job possible given there is no chance of a raise for doing well, and no chance for a cut because of unions. As opposed to those profit focused schools which make absolutely sure they educate every student since their pay checks are on the line if they do not.

 

[Bunz]

You have got to be kidding. Have you not read up on the problems with tax payer funded systems that consistently fail to provide the basic services you claim to want?

Yeah and it is amazing how much better at educating those profit focused schools do over public schools. I can see how motivating it must be to know that whether a kid is educated or not, has no bearing on how much collected tax money you get. Or how motivated a teacher is to do the very best job possible given there is no chance of a raise for doing well, and no chance for a cut because of unions. As opposed to those profit focused schools which make absolutely sure they educate every student since their pay checks are on the line if they do not.

Andy, I look at the current level of care provided at what expense to those in America that do not have medical insurance. Then I look at what other countries such as France, Australia, the UK, Canada among others that provide for a safety net for those who would otherwise not be able to afford or aquire medical insurance and it makes sense to me to have that available to the citizens of the wealthiest country in the world. Surely none of those systems are perfect and I dont think any system will be perfect. But the current system we have is deplorable.

As for public schools, you know it is interesting because the privitization you dream of is not only impractical but not a good idea in my book. Firstly, name me a single company that can provide education on the scale that is being discussed here. There are none. Who is going to pay for it? Also we have local school boards that set policy. Will we be giving that power of policy setting to a corporate board whose responsibility is not to voters or our students, but instead to thier share holders?

The priority in schools in my opinion should be the balanced education of the students. This entails academic, social, and physical education realms. People wonder why we have a shortage of teachers or at least quality ones, and then there is all this hate towards thier respective unions. Is anyone complaining about the various other unions, even those that are otherwise public employees? Where are the calls for privitizing our police and fire protection to get rid of thier nasty unions.

The fact of the matter is that it is very difficult to be a teacher most places in America. They are beholden to federal laws that are not always applicable on a local level, they must continue thier education and maintain thier certification, and are subject to funding flucuations that border on a criminal level. We ask more and more out of our teachers and are giving them less and less. We hold them accountable to teach students to pass a test, but put none of the responsibility of passing those tests onto the parents or the students themselves.

 

[Libsmasher]

Andy, I look at the current level of care provided at what expense to those in America that do not have medical insurance. Then I look at what other countries such as France, Australia, the UK, Canada among others that provide for a safety net for those who would otherwise not be able to afford or aquire medical insurance and it makes sense to me to have that available to the citizens of the wealthiest country in the world. Surely none of those systems are perfect and I dont think any system will be perfect. But the current system we have is deplorable.

You need to read up. People in Canada who need an MRI have up to an eight month wait. In the UK's NHS, "rules" are established based on that year's budget. Eg, in a given year, a 55 year old who needs a heart transplant will be told to go home (and die) because "nothing can be done". Ie, nothing WILL be done - because of that fiscal year's "rules". There is a growing phenomenon of "medical tourism" in the UK - some of its citizens take holidays to other countries, eg India, to get medical treatment they need because they'd prefer not to die for only NHS budgetary reasons. The canadian system exists on pararsitism off the US system. People who need surgery and need it now head for the US border. Heard of the cheap medicines in Canada? That's because the Canadian health system demands and get steep discounts from US phamaceutical companies. The US citizens who pay high prices are subsidizing the Canadian system. Socialized systems result in only one thing - rationing - no ifs buts or maybes. The cure for the US system is as I broadly outlined.

As for public schools, you know it is interesting because the privitization you dream of is not only impractical but not a good idea in my book.

Still waiting to hear why. The only "arguments" I've heard so far are propaganda bits from the teacher' union playbooks; confused remarks from people who irrationally think there is a conflict between profit-driven companies and doing a good job, when precisely the opposite is true; and invalid extrapolations of the tiny private school systems that exist now to the nature of a universal private system.

Firstly, name me a single company that can provide education on the scale that is being discussed here. There are none.

Whaaaaaattt??? There are none NOW because there's no point in having one NOW - Now the government has a near monopoly.

Who is going to pay for it?

Parents. The education of poor children would be paid for by the taxpayers.

Also we have local school boards that set policy. Will we be giving that power of policy setting to a corporate board whose responsibility is not to voters or our students, but instead to thier share holders?

No, effectively we are giving it to the parents. What does a parent do if he doesn't like his present school's policy? Same thing you do if you decide you don't like a restaurant - go t the one down the street. Parents will have strong control, by their "votes" in the marketplace, instead of how things are now - policy controlled by arrogant bureaucrats.

The priority in schools in my opinion should be the balanced education of the students. This entails academic, social, and physical education realms.

If enough people agree with your conception, the market will provide a school of that kind.

People wonder why we have a shortage of teachers or at least quality ones, and then there is all this hate towards thier respective unions.

Why do you THINK people have hate towards teacher unions? They've seen to it that incompetent teachers are almost impossible to fire.

Is anyone complaining about the various other unions, even those that are otherwise public employees? Where are the calls for privitizing our police and fire protection to get rid of thier nasty unions.

You got my vote - the sweeheart retirement deals negotiated by their unions have almost bankrupted the county where I live - they can retire after 20 years with a pension 90% of their salary. Are you going to get that deal???

The fact of the matter is that it is very difficult to be a teacher most places in America. They are beholden to federal laws that are not always applicable on a local level, they must continue thier education and maintain thier certification,

Just like damn near EVERY professional person nowadays.

and are subject to funding flucuations that border on a criminal level. We ask more and more out of our teachers and are giving them less and less. We hold them accountable to teach students to pass a test, but put none of the responsibility of passing those tests onto the parents or the students themselves.

Oh, I see.

Blade's boss: "Got that sw done?"

Blade: "Uh, no. It was someone else's fault."

Blade's boss: "Pick up your last check and hit the bricks."