Posted by the912project on March 30, 2009 · 856 Comments
… about the 12th Principle of Liberty and the difference between a Democratic Society and a Republic. If not, this 10 minute video explains it all for you.
While we believe in the First Amendment, individuals posting to this website agree to maintain a civil tone in keeping with the 9 Principles and 12 Values on which the site is based. Moderators may choose to remove comments that do otherwise and/or restrict future posting.
856 Responses to “If you’ve read the 5000 Year Leap then you know …”
Click here to find an event near you.
 |
There's apparently been a lively debate here that I missed.
With respect to the video itself, while I would argue this video is not 100% correct in all the details, it's close enough. I've been saying we have a republic not a democracy for 30 years, since I taught political science. In 1916 we came one step closer to mob rule with the direct election of senators. Now the left wants to do away with the Electoral College and rely totally on majority rule. Very bad idea!
Makes you realize what a rip-off social security is! You get so little for depositing so much.
It sounds very much like our government is taking us the way of the Romans that lead them to the rule of the Caesars.
Clay, Try this website.
http://www.nccs.net
I bought several books including this one and it took about 2 weeks to get them all.
p { margin: 0; }
I got it. I read it in 3 days. I couldn't put it down. This book should be required reading in our schools
kgeorge152,
I am no expert on things of this nature, but I appreciate the way you are thinking and your easy-to-understand explanation. This is exactly the type of approach we need to take in addressing our many issues. This furthers the point that we need to remove ALL of the current representatives from office and elect representatives that are For The People, By The People, and…Of The People.
Resding The Miracle at Philadelphia, on the first pages of The 5000 Year Leap, I couldn't help but think there has been a fundamental breakdown of the government with regard to the Constitution. I believe it's time we the peolpe take all of the current laws, the government, and the agencies and programs and check them against the Constitution. Then we must eliminate all that do not agree with the Constitution. I know that many if not most of the beauracracies would be eliminated. The cuts would save billions of dollars. More important than the money savings it would make America much greater than it is today. It would release the creative entrapenurial spirit that made America the world's leader. Nobody would have to suffer from the cuts. If there is a real need for the program, private industry will step in and create a business providing the service the government used to provide, but private industry will do it much better.
Write your comment here…
I love the idea, doen't matter which party we pick to run the candidates either, it's the voice of the people that will be talking about, the real issues, and yes, maybe a new "Contract with America", and I like the Newt idea as well. The concept bears real merit kgeorge152. Although, I think we need to possibly form a new party to run this platform, Perhaps Newt G. would assist us in this area, outlining the party assembly, provide him with and the rest of us the true goals we want to center ourselves on.
HistoryBA, even after having viewed the video twice, it is apparent that you are still misunderstanding the fundamentals of a republic. It's not defined as a government that has laws; it's defined as a system where the rule of law is the governing force. You may say that tyrants enact laws that govern the people too, but the difference is that in a republic, laws and government exist to protect and enhance the rights and freedoms of the people. Oligarchical government serve the interests of those in charge before the interests of the people.
Then you weren't paying attention in class Einstein! Propoganda is like smelly underwear – addicting.
I graduated in the top 5% of my HS Class, and my IQ is comfortably above idiocy. However, I was always taught that a Republic was simply a representative-form of Democracy, and that the US was indeed founded as a Democracy. I've since "self-educated" myself. I was simply comparing the starkly clear points from that video with the PC filtered mish-mash I was taught in public school.
The first person who claims to be a teacher and doesn't proof read their posts loses all credibility as an educator. I've had teachers like you, and you're as close-minded as a skin head.
These are writings that were found inaccurate in college texts….which explains why you (as a highschool teacher) wouldn't have read them.
Texts??? Could you be more specific? I teach AP US History and use an variety of college texts.
One of the texts is called "Unfinished Nation" written by Alan Brinkley. Mr. Brinkley is also a college professor at Columbia University.
Thank you all for the great feed back. I agree with you about Rush, but my thinking was that we wouldn't be electing personalities we would be electing principles,values, and ideas. We really don't need to know the person as much as we have to verify and be assured he or she has those values and really believes them. The other great benefit is that it wouldn't take $300,000,000 to create the image that we all hope is what we are looking for, because all of us 912ers have been looking for these values for a long time. This approach would be simple, basic, and honest. No attack adds required.
HistoryBA should also include along with his Bias opinion…….
That most U.S. History in books today are innacurate in some aspects. example…"Gorbechav, not Ronald Reagan..was the one who ended the cold war…" and the latest found in texts "Jihad means ones struggle with God…." No meantion of Holy War. SO, for the last 30 years of his teaching of history….one could say that it's baloney as well as this video.
I don't know which history book you've read that claimed, "Gorbechev, not Ronald Reagan..was the one who ended the cold war.." I'm guessing that it had a political bias or was taken out of context The "Jihad" definition is absurd.
I am disturbed by the lack of true research and scholarship contained in "Pass this on" emails. Check out the posting by KOOK on the Forum page entitled History Lesson. It was at least an honest attempt to make sense of the two party system but MANY of the dates and facts were incorrect. I can't BELIEVE that this passes for history!!! I expect better from the 16 and 17 year olds that I teach.
And how do you know genius? Are you the final say on all things reported? How sad to be so blind in a brightening world
Don't just red their writings learn about them especially the signers of the Declaration – some of the stories are heartbreaking and yet not one of them went back on their pledge. They are men of honor and need to be looke dup to.
I don't disagree with anything that you said, Bob. My problem is the presentation of the Video. It has too many inaccuracies. My issues are with the casual way that all of the evil was placed on the Left in the first 1:03 minutes and the definition of a "Republic" as a government that "makes laws".
"I suggest that if you know history, then you might not be so easily fooled ……that history is a protective armor against being misled.” Howard Zinn
History…I think you missed the point of the video. Maybe the spectrum should have been Vertical instead of Horizontal for you to understand that it's Total Government that ristricts freedoms. To the complete RIGHT was anarchy which also wasn't good since it lead to the leadership of the likes of Lenin and Hitler. I am in agreement with whoever said that you only watched the first minute of this video before it ignited an outrage of misunderstanding.
"Man is not free unless Government is limited"
~Ronald Reagan
I will be the first to admit that the message of the video was lost on me. I could not get past the inaccuracies contained in the content. I watched the video twice. I shared it with colleagues. We discussed it. We all concluded we would have been in serious trouble if we tried to "pass it on" as though it were a "lesson".
The history of this country is my avocation and teaching it is my vocation. I would like to see it done correctly. Indeed you are correct that "it's Total Governemnt that restricts freedoms. " Totalitarian governments occur in the EXTREMES of Left (communism) and Right (fascism).
You are right that I am a Linear thinker. I wish the producer of the video had a name. I would LOVE to discuss my concerns with him/her.
Okay then, since you don't disagree you have to accept that some people need a simplified explaination even if there is for the sake of that, that they will then understand some of what the founders considered in the choice for a republic. I would think you can appluad this meager attempt at education dispite it's minor incongruities, then providing the correcting influence as such it teaches the rest of the lesson. Republic's are only as good as the people selected to guide it daily. Thus the requirement to debate issues openly, but which issues, again and again. Rome fell, Germany fell, and so will all who fail to openly debate with honorable intentions and courage of convictions. We will fail altogether or fail apart, the choice is ours. This is the lesson that needs to be taught, and learned each day in a Republic of the people. Debate is key. Simple to say, much harder to accomplish such that freedom is kept for the people and viced is the government.
HistoryBA Said: I've been teaching American History to high school students for over 30 years. I teach along with Government teachers. We all conclude that this is produced for an under educated viewing audience. All of the evil in the world is on the LEFT?? I guess Hitler and the Muslim Extremists are just a little misunderstood. A Republic is a government that has laws? I got news for you……dictatorships have laws. Come on.
Okay, come on now yourself, If you had really studied world history you would already now the brief video does correctly depict the models, simple but correct! No, the people you named are not a little misunderstood. Laws for all the people guided by moral principal, honor, courage, integrity and respect for life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Did you forget that. I'm sure you did. We the People, is a very intentional choice of words. A more perfect Union, does that mean anything to you? It should, your part of it. We all suffer when we forget the footsteps of those who came before us. Think some more about your comment, please. Bob from America said this….
at my college
Don't be impressed. It's mostly baloney. Somethings are not a replacement for scholarship.
Please elaborate.
Now be nice, remember not everyone is going to spend 5 to 10 for education. You have to teach people in small steps some times, it's not an insult, or critique. College is not for everyone, this is a fact which should not effect comments make here in this forum. Some of the smartest people I've met in bisness didn't have an advanced degree. The took hold of them selves and excelled! That is worth merrit, all failure does if you look is teach you what went wrong, then don't do it again. Try, Try and Try Again, the American Motto!
I've been teaching American History to high school students for over 30 years. I teach along with Government teachers. We all conclude that this is produced for an under educated viewing audience. All of the evil in the world is on the LEFT?? I guess Hitler and the Muslim Extremists are just a little misunderstood. A Republic is a government that has laws? I got news for you……dictatorships have laws. Come on.
what a shallow, facile and dismissive critique of this video. i hope you're not STILL teaching anyone's kids. if you're parsing information through a simplistic left-vs-right filter, you need to rethink your own approach. or you only watched about a half-minute of the video before commenting.
I watched this viedo twice. I couldn't believe what I saw the first time. Some things just don't stand up to scholarship. I'm sorry. This is baloney.
BTW, the first person to throw personal insults loses the argument.
HistoryBA,
I have read your response…. the responses to your response… and the responses you have given to the responses…..
I am just wondering what inaccuracies did you find in the video? Never mind the presentation differences you might see since that is a matter of taste. But what FACTUAL inaccuracies are there in this video?
I agree with Coffee_Hound when he stated that the graph of the spectrum of governmental control should have been vertical rather than horizontal. I agree that in the horizontal representation would lead an uneducated (or under-educated) viewer (particularly a far "right" or "left" leaning political viewing person) to equate the totalitarianism regimes represented on the 'left' side of the graph with the current 'left' in the modern definition as viewed in a democratic construct. If one were to mentally 'convert' the graph to a vertial one, and rid one's self of the mental conflict, then the message should be clear.
*****( to be continued next comment)*****
Greg
Wilmot, NH
*****(continuation)*****
No matter the driving force, totalitarianism regimes (olygarchies/dictatorships …. Nazi-ism/Communism), completely control the population by using the LAWS they have instituted to control the population for THEIR personal gain. Those in charge in this scenario are ABOVE the laws!
With the anarchists having NO laws except the "rule of survival" wich is survival of the fitest.
The United States is a representative republic which is designed more towards the middle where their are persons who represent a portion of the population. These representitives make the laws. These LAWS rule the land and NO ONE is above said laws.
***(more to follow)***
Greg,
Wilmot, NH
Your stilted sophomoric blabbering is typical of the wrong direction this country has taken for the last 8 years. Thank God we now have a leader that can see thru the ropaganda those like you spew.
Undereducated?? Who in God's Name do you think were voting for Obama early and often (besides those that haven't left the classroom their whole lives to see how the real world works, aka – teachers)? Uh, that would be the under-educated. Those who can do. Those who can't teach or become community organizers, who organize the under-educated into a mob to use as his leisure.
1. That is a good lead to where we might go as a movement. The two-party system & the primary election of the R & D candidates forces voters into two choices — neither supported by more than 15% of the population in the first place. A third party has little chance. What happened to the "instant runoff" system so that primaries were unnecessary?
2. The other problem is the lack of serious media attention to anyone who isn't R or D.
3. You limited the choices to the R party, but I thought this platform was not ideological.
4. Why did you pick those five interviewers and why do they get the authority to choose?
5. How do we 'demand' anything? The R party isn't beholden to anyone but their own members.
6. I'm back to the third party angle. Isn't that the best route?
7. The real problem, though, is concentration of power at the Federal level. I would like to see the 10th Amendment actually enforced!
Keep up the input, you are on the right track.
This is dedicated to all the America haters!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE45DCRzFOM
You know what they say. LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!!!!!!
No he didn't! What he and I and many more want, is to go back to having A REPUBLIC! That is where we actually follow the constitution!
I'm too busy buying ammo to buy popcorn! Got to get it before the federal excise tax goes up 500%! That is what Obamanation wants!
Write your comment here…
It means your really pushing it!
This is a great video. This needs to be viewed by every American (in my opinion) so that we all can understand the true gift our founding fathers gave us. Now if only we can expose every group behind the curtain that gives millions of dollars to campaign their wizard of Oz.
This is a rediculous video. Anyone who believes this is has any validity would not be able to pass citizenship examination.
Here I go again!!! I spent some time creating a spread sheet for a possible long term solution for social security. Its not two complex so I'll try to explain it. A 17 year old entering the work force is required to put 4% of his income into a 401K type vehicle. (It would be more like a CD than a 401K). This would be in addition to his normal social security and medicare contributions. I used two scenarios: the first assumes the 17 year old would start his work life at $6.00/hour, have 3% annual raises, earn 6% return and work until 67. The second scenario assumes that he starts at $8.00/hour, has 3% annual raises, earns 7.5% return and works until 67.
The crux of this plan is that social security will not be used for this 17 year old at 67, only his personal account. So since the social security trust fund will not be needed for him or his contemporaries, in 12 years, enough people will have died, that of the 12.5% he pays into socal security, 5% of the 12.5 % can now go into his personal account. when 10 more years pass enough more will have died that an additional 3.5% of the remaining 7.5% can go into his personal account. After 10 more years an additional 2%, leaving 2% in the social security system to take care of disabled people. The periods come from a demographic study I did concerning life expectancy and how the population is made up.
When you do all the math the 17 year old in the first scenario ends up with $689,000 if he does nothing else. The draw down starts at $48,000 with 1.7% increases each year untill age 95 when the money runs out. In the second scenario the 17 year old ends up at 67 with $1,330,000. The draw down starts at $90,000 with the money running out at age 100. Again this assumes the person does nothing else in his life to save money. But the draw down starts almost with what he was earning at 66. The plan would have to be mandatory with no possible reason to draw or take it out. This would insure some security and no further need for social security when this young person retires. It will take 50 years to undo social security because its taken 70 years to create the dependency.
I really didn't address if social security has enough to take care of the 18 and ups when they retire, because thats another issue, but this plan will at least make the future a little more secure for our children.
Here are a few of the benefits that arise from this plan: 1) A person erning $6-8.00/hour earns between $12-16,000/year The 4% amount is about $3-500/year in the first few years. Its just not a lot of money and it will be easier if one starts early. To watch the account grow will be a great life experience. 2) eventually this will be a great burden lifted off our backs and our economy, not to mention to our industry and businesses. 3) In 50 years when this young man retires, his son will no longer have 6.25% plus the 4% deducted from his pay. Only the 4% and maybe 1% for the disabled. His ex-employer will also save the 6.25% it contributes, replaced with a 1% contribution for the disabled. And 4) No more abuse of the system by illegal aliens. If they want an account, please give me your real name and real social security number and we will be glad to divert 4% of their pay as well.
People, these are the type of long term solutions we have got to have. The fools in Congress think only about the next election and how they can fool us long enough to maintain their office. They can ride out almost any presidency, so even the president has to think short term. I firmly believe if we look at our problems with a long view, the pain we will feel in the short term will have some meaning. Lets get people into office that will think in these terms. Comments welcome, more solutions coming
This is a great idea! In theory it probable would work. The only problem I see with a government ran self funded retirement system to replace and bailout the social security system is this.
Currently, NO elected official has the intestinal fortitude to propose a solution such as this and gain enough backing from both parties to get it passed. Even if they did, it would be regulated or taxed to death or worse at some point they would not be able to keep their hands off the money and spend 250 million individuals retirement accounts as was done with the social security trust fund. Your idea is a realistic solution if implemented and left alone it could work.
Don't make the same mistake everyone else makes. Read the statutes and you will find out there is no such thing as the Social Security Trust Fund. The law never created one. Social security is nothing more than a payroll tax which goes into the general fund to be spent. The entire plan was just a big Ponzie scheme. The average life expectancy when the law was passed was below 65. The government never expected to have to pay out any funds, and if they did it would only be half because women, who normally didn't work lived longer than the men. The Supreme Court has reviewed the law and has ruled that the government has no obligation to return any of these taxes back to the people.
I have read your solutions,very impressive and well informed. What else?
To kgeorge,
I want to thank you for taking the time and doing your homework on this issue. Your solution is well thought out and practical. In fact we would have almost no poor elderly if people were taught by our schools and also their families to 'pay themselves first' as your solution suggests. I have 2 children and am teaching them these same sound financial ideas myself. The road to real fiscal success is not a hard one if we start young. What a shame that the road to financial success and security is never even mentioned in the first 12 years of a persons education.
Thank you again for an excellent post.
Don't think this is arrogance, just an observation! I made a post a few days ago offering up a real researched solution for health care. It received 2 replies, yet a knucklehead liberal like "chuckflynn" makes a post criticizing conservatives and it gets 133 replies. If we continue reacting with mere emotion we are destined to fail. If we can't offer real solutions then we will get what we are getting. In 1994 Newt offered solutions but we didn't get behind him in the right way. All he guarenteed us was they would vote on the solutions. Of course they nearly all failed. The solutions need to come from us and then we find candidates that will support those solutions.
I remember several years ago when our school board here in Cleveland was corrupt. The mayor put forth an entire slate of candidates to replace the entire board, instead of going after each incumbant individually. It was fairly effective at the time, except that the mayor was corrupt as well. I had this idea that we do the same thing in 2010 with the senate. There are about 33 senate seats up for election. We have the Tea Party organizers form a commitee in that state to interview anyone in that state that wants to run for the senate. That commitee chooses the top five candidates that will honestly support the principles and values of the people. Then we ask Glenn, Rush, Sean, Laura, Newt and Anne to interview the 165 choices and pick the 33 candidates Then we demand that the republican party run these candidates as a slate in the various primaries. If they won't then we run them as independents in the primaries. There would be tremendous publicity for this approach and we would become a dominate voting block. This is how we take our country back. Your thoughts please.
I think that is a fantastic idea –great thinking!
we are held captive by a primary system that has chosen it's candidates before the majority has a chance to vote
Man, I'd love to, but we'd never catch the end of "Rush hand-picked our candidates" and all the bullfeces that would entail. The "Newt" idea has a ton of merit. If we had another "Contract with America" then this would at least be back to issues versus personalities. The idea of pushing concepts would give the base something to hold and would bring the debate back to world view terms. It is difficult to compete with demogoguery.
This is a very good post and a very good idea – it is out of these ideas and counter ideas that we will find the right solution. My solution – enforce the Constitution and it's amendments. Enforce our laws, teach subjects in school correctly and not to a particular ideology. Quit being babies and acting like we are entitled to the world. take responsibility for your actions. Get involved and speak up not matter how politically incorrect it may be because not only do our future generations deserve the opportunity to live in freedom but the men who signed the Declaration and fought in the Revolution deserved to be honored.
And don't forget all those who's fathers and now sons are still fighting the good fight for us right now! The cost of not acting on this issue could cost future generations much or all of their liberty and freedoms. I wonder if Newt is listening to us? Anyone at Fox going to pass this along? let us know.
I like it.
Awesome! If this ever came to fruition, then we would have to make sure that we support their campaign with our monetary contributions or they will fail, because as we all know, there are some very powerful wealthy progressives who will surely come to the aid of the Democratic candidate. May God Bless America and our Constitution.
chuckflynn…Ahh you are back again. If you are feeling so empowered why do you find joy in further bashing those you feel are lost? But are we surprised? You embody your left wing platform of heartlessness for the unborn, the quiet majority, the humble worshipper of God and those who refuse to defile the principles that have made our country great. You apparently take pleasure in worming in. Stay with your left-wing bloggers who enjoy laughing at their own corruption and seeing our country fall to its knees. In a few months Mr. Obama has taken away, given away and sold all that we had with the help of a misled Congress and power-hungry entities. You are pathetic….but we will pray all the more that you come to your senses.
I'm sure you thought that the 90s were 10 years of peace right? While we were none the wiser, our enemies abroad were arming up and ready to attack and did quite a few times under Clinton. Remember any of that? 1993 World Trade Center attack, USS Kohl, US embassies bombed, 9/11/2001 … You just don't think about these things do you? You are here merely to post inflammatory crap. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it!
So, you point at old bad behavior to justify new bad behavior? What is wrong with you?! You did however get ONE thing right … Republicans failed … Not because of corruption but because they lost their roots. Until they understand freedom, liberty and small non-intrusive government, they will continue to lose.
Please watch the video. The USA is a REPUBLIC. I know, I used to get this wrong myself. Maybe everybody should read the 9 Principles and 12 Values and see whether they can agree (at least mostly agree). Is that not what this site is all about being a (mostly conservative) US American first governed by those principals? After reading the comments on this site I realize that it is very difficult to set aside the "two party" mentality and concentrate on being an American first. I am including myself in this statement. But we have to keep in mind that our Founding Fathers did not agree on everything either but I believe they found the common ground and created this great nation (though they did not have to fight the pull of a one world order). You are right, maybe revolution is what we are heading for, though I shudder to think so, as America is now divided in so many ways that it would be a calamity for our country. Fundamentally we are divided into so called progressives and conservatives. However, we the People must try to come together and agree on THE main issue: Do WE THE PEOPLE want to be a free Republic ruled by law and the Constitution or one of many countries governed by the UN and other one world bodies and laws? If we cannot find the common ground (and I doubt there is a common ground to be found between progressives and conservatives) that is exactly what we will end up being, one of many without individual freedom.
We have started a book giving program with The 5000 Year Leap, and challenge others out there to do the same. My wife and I have purchased large quantities of The 5000 Year Leap to give as gifts to our friends, family, and customers. We have set it up in a way that we give the books out as gifts and include a note in the book about what we are doing, why we liked the book, what it means to us, and that the recipient might read the book and then pass it along to someone else, or join in and start their own book giving program. In this way, it is a gift that can keep on giving and also promote the values our country was founded upon. Basically a book version of a chain letter where if each person bought 10 or 20 books, and each recipient thought it was a good idea and bought 10 or 20 books to distribute, and so on, and so on. With enough participation we could really get some distribution and increased awareness. The books, if ordered directly from NCCS, and you agree not to resell them, are only $5 each with an order of 10 or more.
I am going to send them to family and friends, too. But, what about sending a copy to our senators? What if several of us sent The 5000 Year Leap to our senators with a suggestion that they read it? Sending one probably would not get the same response as getting one from every American who has read it and wants them to read it.
Can you imagine what would happen if every senator suddenly started getting these books from Amazon or any other online book order from their constituents? The teabag labels are going to get ignored. What if we included a note to the effect that we thought their education was incomplete and while they didn't get to read the bill they signed, this book was shorter and would be more effective in helping them live by principles and values of our Founding Fathers.
I want to make a difference in the future for my children and grandchildren. You have sparked an idea that I think can be expanded to include the senate and representatives. I'm going to leave this site and order them right now. We need to be doers not just talkers. Thanks for the inspiration.
I am going to send them to family and friends, too. But, what about sending a copy to our senators? What if several of us sent The 5000 Year Leap to our senators with a suggestion that they read it? Sending one probably would not get the same response as getting one from every American who has read it and wants them to read it.
I am returning to let you know that I just mailed each Kansas senator and my representative a copy with the following message for a little over $30 using Amazon.com.
I included the following note: To understand those participating in the tea parties, and who no longer believe that Congress members remotely relate to their constituents any more. Please read this to reform Congress and return us to our roots.
Great idea. We will also send them to our Senators and to our Congressman. We are including blank lines inside the cover for readers to write in their name and email address. A history of readers and their contact info. Let's get this book giveaway going and see how many people we can reach.
Great idea! I had the same one! Keep some on hand to drop in open windows of parked cars with Obama stickers on them too. Is that legal? How about leaving it on the hood or roof? No offense to them really, but they are the ones who need that information most! They obviously weren't taught that stuff in school.
Maybe stick a note inside each book to "please read it and pass it along to others who may find that they have an appreciation for our founding principles".
My regards Mr. Flynn, but you do seem to be blinded as to works in your own party. I would give 2 cents for either party. Both corrupt, both lie and to say one over another is just naive. Best wishes.
Im a libertarian and believe in the Republic form of Gov our fore fathers set up. We need to stop the finger pointing to the left and right. Stop letting the Gov separating us with this stupid non issues while behind our backs they are taking away our country and our freedoms.
No excuses for 8 years while Clinton was President and groping girls and getting services (B/J), we had the first World Trade Center attack, two embassy bombings, bombing of the USS Cole and let Osama get away from capture 3 Times and with the policy of FBI and CIA not to exchange information was the prelude to 911. Like it or not under Bush we were not attacked once in 8 years. Only God knows what we are in for under the leadership of the "ONE"
I am still greatful that you can voice your opinion here. We may not have that right at some point in the next 4 years.
I've been following the debate for two weeks now, and although I certainly haven't read every post, I haven't seen any serious solutions. This will cause us to fail. I just left the sight with the 50 issues compiled by Glenn. You got to be kidding! These are all regurgitated media and party talking points. How about some real solutions. I'm no expert, but I certainly have given much thought to problems. We have the internet, we can research things and learn. This is what Glenn is trying to do. Get us educated about the problems. But even Glenn, Rush and Shaun don't offer much in the form of solutions.
My son is an ER doctor and he says that a full 30% of patients never pay. This drives up the cost for everyone else. For profit insurance companies,like it or not, would not pay for customers that went to the ER for non-emergent treatment. This would drastically reduce one large cost of health care. I'm sure this would not be fair to all, but it really is a good,sound, American solution. It puts the responsibility for health care on individuals, not eployers or gov't. ( oh, by the way, don't tell me employers would drop their coverage. The employee would have to pay not the gov't, they could do that now if they thought that it was practicle. In fact , from what I've read,it is actually cheaper,now, for an individual without existing conditions to buy insurance than it is for that same person to be in a group. The employer might want to drop his group, and just let everyone buy there own and pay their premiums. Might be cheaper,depending on your work force.)
For example: I looked up on the net what the federal government and the states pay for medicaid and medicare. It approaches $600 billion. Then I found out how many people are on medicaid and medicare. That number is 86 million . If you do the math thats $6,000 a year per person or $500/month. Why not just make it mandatory that everone have private health care. Then just create a sliding scale to help people with the premiums based on income. Such as 0-10,000 gov'tpays 95% of the premium; 10,000-15,000, gov't pays 90% and so forth up to that magic number of $250,000 and the gov't pays 0. Here are some of the advantages of this approach. 1) everyone is covered and buy what they need or can afford. 2) everyone pays something. 3) No gov't control what so ever. 4) We don't need any more money to create a gov't health system, what we already spend should be more than enough. 5) All Americans and illegals would have to have there own insurance. The gov't would have to decide if we cover illegals (could be a huge savings to tax payers if we don't) 6) With 86 million new customers, insurance companies would be created and competion for all those customers should reduce premiums. Insurance companies could pick and choose who to cover dropping rates for most, even lower. Those with existing conditions would pay high premiums, but could be subsidized at a special rate, no different than medicare. 7) By its nature this would be a means tested system unlike medicare. If you got the money you pay for your own insurance. (imagine that, some one that makes 50K doesn't have to subsidize someones medicare that makes 500K.
This is just one solution. Wait to you see my solution for illegal immigration, unemployment, energy, and water supply for the southwest., Yes its a single solution. Later
Ok, Kgeorge, let us know how to make a difference and we will. We are all so angry and frustrated. I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets home from work everyday and hears one more lame-brained thing that our government has done. I'm starting to get heartsick about the whole thing. This web site is so hard to read everything on. We all would like some direction. Glenn is doing a great job and most of us realize that it's just the start. I'm wanting to see what you have for us. You have the beginnings of some good idea bout health coverage. I can tell you what I proposed to my employer to help with their budget. Health coverage isn't as much of a worry if you are healthy, but I can tell you that if you are not, health insurance is a good deal. My employer spits the cost with us, and I told them I would gladly pay more of the percentage of the cost, it's still cheaper than going out and getting my own.
If you have not already been to the Caucus web site, they have some good information and are also working with the 9.12 project and people who have read the 5000 year leap.
http://www.ourcaucus.com
http://www.ourcaucus.com
Here is an idea how about taking down the barriers. I read a paper a young college guy did that I twitter with – he advocated the idea of letting people cross state lines to obtain insurance. For example a policy in NJ cost 5K that same policy in KY cost 1K. By eliminating barriers free market competition takes over thus lowering the cost for everyone. This way government does not have to be involved in providing or paying for healthcare. You figures are pretty dead on – in TX where I live part of the year they spend about 12 billion dollars on services for illegal aliens. Think how much money we would have in the system or our pockets if we did not have to foot the bill for people whether illegal or not. Let the free market take over.
I also like free markets and embrace any solution that moves us in that direction. Can I give you an example of how the "supposedly free market" is functioning now. I recently spent 3 days in the hosp. The bill was 14,000 dollars. My insurance company has a negotiated percentage that they will pay for this hospital stay and all the test etc. They pain 6,000. The rest of that bill is written off by the Hospital. My co-pay was 250. Not a bad deal for me right. Well here is the problem. If I didn't have insurance the hospital would be coming after me for not 6,000 but for the whole 15,000. They would ruin my credit, sue me for it, etc. This happens to hardworking middle class Americans all of the time. This is criminal. Obviously the 'free market' cost was 6,000 not 15,000. The cost is "jacked up" by the hospital so it can write off these huge losses from these inflated bills and avoid taxes on profits. Your thoughts?
I also like free markets and embrace any solution that moves us in that direction. Can I give you an example of how the "supposedly free market" is functioning now. I recently spent 3 days in the hosp. The bill was 14,000 dollars. My insurance company has a negotiated percentage that they will pay for this hospital stay and all the tests, etc. They paid 6,000. The rest of that bill is written off by the Hospital. My co-pay was 250. Not a bad deal for me right. Well here is the problem. If I didn't have insurance the hospital would be coming after me for not 6,000 but for the whole 14,000. They would ruin my credit, sue me for it, etc. This happens to hardworking middle class Americans all of the time. This is criminal. Obviously the 'free market' cost was 6,000 not 15,000. The cost is "jacked up" by the hospital so it can write off these huge losses from these inflated bills and avoid taxes on profits. Your thoughts?
hello kgeorge152
i do see the value in the plan you have proposed and it does have merit. I also believe that the open market system that patriot1775 posted could also work hand and hand with that in furthering the idea. but i must knock the word mandatory on only a personal level as i will explain. My company does pay my health care at the moment and i am greatful for that in essence but for 9 years they have paid $400.00 a month for me personally which is $43200.00 over the 9 year period that i have worded for them. Now i have only gone to the doctor 1 time for a physical in that time and got an excellent bill of health. Maybe i am a minority in my health care needs but on that argument i cant see making it mandatory for myself or any other indivdual to have to put that amount of money up on my behalf
just a consideration
Thank you kgeorge, I like your reasoning.
Thank you sir for a very well thought out solution. I kind of like your sliding scale approach to distributing the cost of insuring everyone. At least everyone would contribute something if not equally. In a sense it is an equal contribution in as much as it is an equal burden on each persons ability to pay. It also is small enough to not diminish a persons drive to succeed and work hard to improve their income, like a highly progressive income tax does. Thank you again for your thoughtful posts and try not to be discouraged by the lack of response. I also get frustrated with our seemingly obsessive desire to name call and vent and focus on ideological debate, rather than create solutions to problems.
Her husband leaked that she worked for the CIA before Scooter Libby ever mentioned it, and covert operative what a joke!. Maybe a glorified secretary….like bugs bunny used to say "That's All Folks"
Republicans failed because they were corrupt???? Did Reid, Pelosi, Rangel, Dodd, Frank and most of Obama's cabinet become Republican? Really, you need to step back and look at the bigger picture. None of them…Republican and Democrat …. can be trusted. We really need to replace them completely and move towards term limits.
Listen to the true Conservatives out there, they are not for George w bush. Or John McCain……. The Republican party is not what a true Conservative wants. Oh yea and thanks Obama for continuing George's spending spree. Boy am I glad I don't have kids……