Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Enlightenment wrote:But let's not let the get in the way of every Americans' right to be an greedy and ignorant fuckwit.
What part of this do you dispute? Dispite Asscroft's best efforts the US is still a relatively free country. Every American has just as much of a right to be a greedy and ignorant fuckwit as they have a right to be intelligent and philanthropic. Of course, many more Americans are taking up the former right rather than the latter...
Enlightenment wrote:In the last US elections I seem to recall that the majority voted to sweep a party comprised entirely of right-wing, ignorant, selfish, greedy, mercantilist self-aggrandizing fuckwits into power in both houses of Congress. If you don't like the idea of your country being regarded in the international community as a haven for right-wing morons, then find some way to keep right-wing morons out of public office.
Enlightenment making his thesis that I and every other American is a "greedy and ignorant fucktwit" if we do not try and start a revolution to force the Republican party out of power even if we DO disagree with them.
Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote. Like it or not, the government represents its people on the world stage and if you do not like the idea of being regarded as a nation of right-wing morons then you shouldn't elect them into public oiffice. Revolution is not implied here; in a nominally democratic country the simple act of
not voting for lunatics is quite sufficient to keep them from holding public office.
Enlightenment wrote:a2. wants to adjust the ratio of taxes paid on investment income vs real work such that people who don't work for a living--i.e. the rich--pay less taxes.
*snip*
b3. Is responding to siginificant lobbying from the medical business to reduce patient rights to sue for gross malpractice.
We all know Enlightenment knows doctors and is aware of the situation of the Northeast. The average doctor's income in my area dropped 25% LAST YEAR due to exorbant insurance. Doctors in W. Virginia have had to go on strike because they cannot afford to practice. In other word, he's a knee jerking fool who doesn't know what he's talking about.
There is no relation or connection between point a2 (which is regarding the capital gains tax) and point b3. There is no implication or statement that 'doctors' are rich.
The US polity does not act for the benefit of individuals; it acts for the benefit of significant concentrations of capital. The polity would not impose limits on malpractice liability simply because some doctors could not afford to work; it would only impose limits because the medical industry forked over enough bribes to win the right to maim people at minimal financial risk to itself.
Furthermore, if the doctors in West Virginia cannot afford to work due to insurance costs then there is a very simple solution: ensure that their self-regulatory system is strong enough to eject the grossly negligent within their profession.
In an ideal capitalist system, insurance rates depend entirely on payout. In turn, payout depends not only on the size of individual awards but also on the number of awards granted. If there is an exceptional problem with insurance rates then one must look both at the size of the awards granted and at the number of awards granted. In the latter case at least some of the blame for the number of awards granted for medical malpractice must rest with the (self-regulating) doctors themselves for failing to keep the incompetent out of the medical profession.