1 - 10 Next
If the unions can't afford the politicians, the politicians will go elsewhere for their campaign money. Thhis would help make the politicians more responsive to the constituents.
I personally am not against unions as far as abuse protection for the worker. The answer to the union in the public sector is this: What ever concessions the unions want should be rebutted by the unions collecting their own dues and benefits. In the IT field their are many associations that I can join. None of which will be paid for by my employer. The administrative costs to the public departments for this administration is an immediate savings. It also translates into less unionized workers. Most of the members would rather have the money in their pockets than given to the union. The unions depend on the Government taking the money and giving it back to their chosen candidates.
In response to:

Eddie Haskell Brooks

bschorp Wrote: Sep 21, 2012 2:00 PM
I am amazed at how many "official" pundits and commentators haven't seen through the guise of the con man. Glowing, even sexual terms describe the youthful manchild and his ineptness is washed away in the discourse. Obama and Axelrod are no more than adult shakedown artists. They are closer to the school mate who tells you to give him your lunch money or else. Their methodology is closer to radical muslim, then Democratic American. It has been said that Obama has a gay past. That maybe part of it. Because like many Romeos the promise is better than the act. Too bad we laud such opinions above our own common sense. and like the schoolhouse shakedown artist, when real trouble finds them, they shrink and hide. BHO is and always be a phony.
The Point was that, I agree with Madison. Charity is personal. Social engineering is also not a function of the Government. Charity as defined by the Bible is not a function of the Government, but by the person. The author uses Scripture to base his alien argument about government policies. The biblical governemntal properties were given to the Levites the priesthood.
here is the difference between, scripture and Law. Law is issued to a Nation from the government. Scripture is issued to instruct the Person. The Government has no obligation for Charity. It has been given to the people of God to be charitable. Today we write a check to a cause, instead of involving ourselves personally.We also expect our government to be charitable for us. when someone cries for the "Safety net" for the needy, they want to absolve themselves of that responsibility. Romney does know that Charity is personal. He has shown it in his life.
The Jews were not conquered and brought to Egypt, Joseph led the way and invited his family to join him. The jews prospered in the land of Egypt, to the point that when the pharoah who loved joseph died, his heir used the jews as slaves because they weren't true egyptians. read Exodus
My feelings are these: The next President should hire an independent investigator to assess if Obama properly qualified for the position. If in fact he did, then yes try him for treason. If he didn't, then prosecute him and all those that helped him along the way. and then repeal every document that he signed. Sieze their money and build a special prison on the furthest Aleutian Island, and house them in it. Let them learn that socialists also have Gulags. The next four years he may sign an executive Order for President for life. also as an added punishment, let him hear each and every speech that he gave starting with the Primary, over and over and over until he dies or bashes his head into a wall.
In response to:

Risky Business

bschorp Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 9:06 AM
and on top of that Tort lawyers win unlimited awards for their clients and that jacks up the insurance the providers pay. These conditions brought about the Government sanctioned HMOs. Of course after that, was the reasonable and customary charge. That brought the Hospitals to let third party companies rewrite the billing. they would use a surgical kit for a procedure and the kit would have a certain cost. these third party companies would break out the items in the kit separately to bill for higher returns. Medicare is another example of how governemt involvement increases costs to the provider.The Gov limits fees, but pays the Drug company not only for the drug , but for the research involved.
In response to:

Risky Business

bschorp Wrote: Aug 28, 2012 8:49 AM
1960 Republican: It was the commercial businesses that offered insurance. they offered Major Medical. I was born in 48, my father paid $46 dollars out of pocket for the hospital and my mother was in the hospital for a week. Doctor visits were $5-6. If you want cheaper healthcare, you can get Major Medical still, and for the normal doctor visits, you can use public health.Health insurance has been a blessing and a curse. Because of the insurance companies issues with paperwork compliance the costs to the provider have increased. Phil Brdesen Started his own company by doing the paperwork for the hospitals. So now you have two levels of administration to get the money out of the insurance companies. Adding Government oversight adds 4 more.
If I may add to the article, in 1974, I was studying COBOL at a local junior college. At that time the mainframe computers were the thing and IBM was the leader. We had a modem that looked like a modified Princess phone. along with that we had a phone book with a number of College IT labs Phone numbers. Our student teachers at the time were playing chess with Duke, Princeton, Stanford, etc.through the computers. The importance of the TCP/IP protocol allowed a common remote connection for a network of mainframes and ultimately PC's. Because of the PC introduction to this unified network, the increase in processor speeds and memory quantity had to increase with the usage. The government was still looking at WANG Mainframes while PC's took ove
1 - 10 Next