Motivemagus, eliminating tax breaks for corporations (or anyone else) IS raising revenue. Charging more for the use of public resources IS raising revenue. Those are just two methods of doing it.
Eliminating subsidies is a way of saving money, but I don’t think all the direct subsidies together amount to a very large percentage of the federal budget.
(Why aren’t the GOP hitting hard on corporate, farm and other subsidies, if they really believe in small government, etc.? Attacking corporate and other welfare should be high on their agenda, if they actually believe the principles they espouse.)
Single payer health insurance would save American citizens a great deal of money, but it would not save the Federal Government a great deal. We spend per capita twice as much on our health care as, say, Canada, because we spend so much more out of our own pockets, while the government spends per capita about as much as Canada does just on Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Workers, and Veterans, etc.
The sudden introduction of single payer would throw doctors into a tizzy, and throw insurance industry employees out of their jobs. Major changes always hurt somebody. I think a single-payer insurance system would be great for the country, in the long run, but I think that is a separate issue.
Quite right about foreign aide. People seem to think that the USA forks out trillions just to help a bunch of lazy foreigners. That’s the kind of ignorance that certainly frustrates me.
Have you ever noticed that “personal responsibility” as used in conservative circles really means just the opposite? It means “I am not responsible to, or for the welfare of, anyone but myself.” It means “Every Man for Himself and the Devil Take the Hindmost.” Point to hunger, poverty, ignorance, human suffering, and all you will hear is “Not My Job! Not My Responsibility! Why should I be taxed to help other people?” But don’t get me started on that.
Motivemagus, eliminating tax breaks for corporations (or anyone else) IS raising revenue. Charging more for the use of public resources IS raising revenue. Those are just two methods of doing it.
Eliminating subsidies is a way of saving money, but I don’t think all the direct subsidies together amount to a very large percentage of the federal budget.
(Why aren’t the GOP hitting hard on corporate, farm and other subsidies, if they really believe in small government, etc.? Attacking corporate and other welfare should be high on their agenda, if they actually believe the principles they espouse.)
Single payer health insurance would save American citizens a great deal of money, but it would not save the Federal Government a great deal. We spend per capita twice as much on our health care as, say, Canada, because we spend so much more out of our own pockets, while the government spends per capita about as much as Canada does just on Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Workers, and Veterans, etc.
The sudden introduction of single payer would throw doctors into a tizzy, and throw insurance industry employees out of their jobs. Major changes always hurt somebody. I think a single-payer insurance system would be great for the country, in the long run, but I think that is a separate issue.
Quite right about foreign aide. People seem to think that the USA forks out trillions just to help a bunch of lazy foreigners. That’s the kind of ignorance that certainly frustrates me.
Have you ever noticed that “personal responsibility” as used in conservative circles really means just the opposite? It means “I am not responsible to, or for the welfare of, anyone but myself.” It means “Every Man for Himself and the Devil Take the Hindmost.” Point to hunger, poverty, ignorance, human suffering, and all you will hear is “Not My Job! Not My Responsibility! Why should I be taxed to help other people?” But don’t get me started on that.