Presidential candidates

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Republicans will vote for the Republican, and the Democrats will vote for the Democrat. In my opinion, as long as health care is run on a for profit basis where insurance companies make decisions and answer to share holders, it's doomed to suck. Sure if you are "normal" and don't have a chronic degenerative illness and only occasionally need a rare prescription or check up, it works fine, but if not, it (as you all know) can be a real nightmare for the others. Nothing is free, goods and services have to be paid for somehow. We need a system that we pay a very reasonable amount into individually (based on income?), and receive the care and medicines that our doctor orders for us, without all the BS associated with our current healthcare model.

I was actually removed from the hospital by my insurance and put on home care against my doctors orders. Why? It was much cheaper to do so. That is a very sad reality. And why is it that way? Due to them trying to keep costs low so they remain as highly profitable as possible. Sorry, our current model needs to change. As it is now, it's flat out broken.

As I have said before I feel both candidates would be a HUGE upgrade to the person we have in the White House now, and i'm not crazy for either of them...But McCain has stated he wants to basically let our health care continue to be controlled by insurance companies/the private sector. That is essentially doing nothing. I'd rather take the chance on the new young guy with radical ideas to alter our current broken model than remain with someone who wants to essentially do nothing.

I'm an Independent, and I share political ideals from both parties, but on healthcare, continuing to adhere to the same beyond broken model is stupid. If we can send hordes of robot controlled robots to another solar planet, split the atom for energy and weapons, decode the human genome, and peer back in time to the very beginning of the universe nearly 14 billion years ago, we should be able to have an affordable, quality health care for EVERYONE in this country. The only reason we haven't is due to flat out greed, and dirty lobbyists.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Republicans will vote for the Republican, and the Democrats will vote for the Democrat. In my opinion, as long as health care is run on a for profit basis where insurance companies make decisions and answer to share holders, it's doomed to suck. Sure if you are "normal" and don't have a chronic degenerative illness and only occasionally need a rare prescription or check up, it works fine, but if not, it (as you all know) can be a real nightmare for the others. Nothing is free, goods and services have to be paid for somehow. We need a system that we pay a very reasonable amount into individually (based on income?), and receive the care and medicines that our doctor orders for us, without all the BS associated with our current healthcare model.

I was actually removed from the hospital by my insurance and put on home care against my doctors orders. Why? It was much cheaper to do so. That is a very sad reality. And why is it that way? Due to them trying to keep costs low so they remain as highly profitable as possible. Sorry, our current model needs to change. As it is now, it's flat out broken.

As I have said before I feel both candidates would be a HUGE upgrade to the person we have in the White House now, and i'm not crazy for either of them...But McCain has stated he wants to basically let our health care continue to be controlled by insurance companies/the private sector. That is essentially doing nothing. I'd rather take the chance on the new young guy with radical ideas to alter our current broken model than remain with someone who wants to essentially do nothing.

I'm an Independent, and I share political ideals from both parties, but on healthcare, continuing to adhere to the same beyond broken model is stupid. If we can send hordes of robot controlled robots to another solar planet, split the atom for energy and weapons, decode the human genome, and peer back in time to the very beginning of the universe nearly 14 billion years ago, we should be able to have an affordable, quality health care for EVERYONE in this country. The only reason we haven't is due to flat out greed, and dirty lobbyists.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Republicans will vote for the Republican, and the Democrats will vote for the Democrat. In my opinion, as long as health care is run on a for profit basis where insurance companies make decisions and answer to share holders, it's doomed to suck. Sure if you are "normal" and don't have a chronic degenerative illness and only occasionally need a rare prescription or check up, it works fine, but if not, it (as you all know) can be a real nightmare for the others. Nothing is free, goods and services have to be paid for somehow. We need a system that we pay a very reasonable amount into individually (based on income?), and receive the care and medicines that our doctor orders for us, without all the BS associated with our current healthcare model.

I was actually removed from the hospital by my insurance and put on home care against my doctors orders. Why? It was much cheaper to do so. That is a very sad reality. And why is it that way? Due to them trying to keep costs low so they remain as highly profitable as possible. Sorry, our current model needs to change. As it is now, it's flat out broken.

As I have said before I feel both candidates would be a HUGE upgrade to the person we have in the White House now, and i'm not crazy for either of them...But McCain has stated he wants to basically let our health care continue to be controlled by insurance companies/the private sector. That is essentially doing nothing. I'd rather take the chance on the new young guy with radical ideas to alter our current broken model than remain with someone who wants to essentially do nothing.

I'm an Independent, and I share political ideals from both parties, but on healthcare, continuing to adhere to the same beyond broken model is stupid. If we can send hordes of robot controlled robots to another solar planet, split the atom for energy and weapons, decode the human genome, and peer back in time to the very beginning of the universe nearly 14 billion years ago, we should be able to have an affordable, quality health care for EVERYONE in this country. The only reason we haven't is due to flat out greed, and dirty lobbyists.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Republicans will vote for the Republican, and the Democrats will vote for the Democrat. In my opinion, as long as health care is run on a for profit basis where insurance companies make decisions and answer to share holders, it's doomed to suck. Sure if you are "normal" and don't have a chronic degenerative illness and only occasionally need a rare prescription or check up, it works fine, but if not, it (as you all know) can be a real nightmare for the others. Nothing is free, goods and services have to be paid for somehow. We need a system that we pay a very reasonable amount into individually (based on income?), and receive the care and medicines that our doctor orders for us, without all the BS associated with our current healthcare model.

I was actually removed from the hospital by my insurance and put on home care against my doctors orders. Why? It was much cheaper to do so. That is a very sad reality. And why is it that way? Due to them trying to keep costs low so they remain as highly profitable as possible. Sorry, our current model needs to change. As it is now, it's flat out broken.

As I have said before I feel both candidates would be a HUGE upgrade to the person we have in the White House now, and i'm not crazy for either of them...But McCain has stated he wants to basically let our health care continue to be controlled by insurance companies/the private sector. That is essentially doing nothing. I'd rather take the chance on the new young guy with radical ideas to alter our current broken model than remain with someone who wants to essentially do nothing.

I'm an Independent, and I share political ideals from both parties, but on healthcare, continuing to adhere to the same beyond broken model is stupid. If we can send hordes of robot controlled robots to another solar planet, split the atom for energy and weapons, decode the human genome, and peer back in time to the very beginning of the universe nearly 14 billion years ago, we should be able to have an affordable, quality health care for EVERYONE in this country. The only reason we haven't is due to flat out greed, and dirty lobbyists.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Republicans will vote for the Republican, and the Democrats will vote for the Democrat. In my opinion, as long as health care is run on a for profit basis where insurance companies make decisions and answer to share holders, it's doomed to suck. Sure if you are "normal" and don't have a chronic degenerative illness and only occasionally need a rare prescription or check up, it works fine, but if not, it (as you all know) can be a real nightmare for the others. Nothing is free, goods and services have to be paid for somehow. We need a system that we pay a very reasonable amount into individually (based on income?), and receive the care and medicines that our doctor orders for us, without all the BS associated with our current healthcare model.
 
 I was actually removed from the hospital by my insurance and put on home care against my doctors orders. Why? It was much cheaper to do so. That is a very sad reality. And why is it that way? Due to them trying to keep costs low so they remain as highly profitable as possible. Sorry, our current model needs to change. As it is now, it's flat out broken.
 
 As I have said before I feel both candidates would be a HUGE upgrade to the person we have in the White House now, and i'm not crazy for either of them...But McCain has stated he wants to basically let our health care continue to be controlled by insurance companies/the private sector. That is essentially doing nothing. I'd rather take the chance on the new young guy with radical ideas to alter our current broken model than remain with someone who wants to essentially do nothing.
 
 I'm an Independent, and I share political ideals from both parties, but on healthcare, continuing to adhere to the same beyond broken model is stupid. If we can send hordes of robot controlled robots to another solar planet, split the atom for energy and weapons, decode the human genome, and peer back in time to the very beginning of the universe nearly 14 billion years ago, we should be able to have an affordable, quality health care for EVERYONE in this country. The only reason we haven't is due to flat out greed, and dirty lobbyists.

kayleesgrandma · Jun 24, 2008

I agree in part with you, though somewhere we have to have a profit or there would be no new medical discoveries, or good hospitals. I wish we could have a non-partician focus group similar to what Hillary originally tried to do--surely we could find some kind of compromise...like you said, if we can split the atom, and decode the human genome--not to mention make better stealth bombers...then surely we can solve this dilema! No one will touch this problem, all they do is talk...

kayleesgrandma · Jun 24, 2008

I agree in part with you, though somewhere we have to have a profit or there would be no new medical discoveries, or good hospitals. I wish we could have a non-partician focus group similar to what Hillary originally tried to do--surely we could find some kind of compromise...like you said, if we can split the atom, and decode the human genome--not to mention make better stealth bombers...then surely we can solve this dilema! No one will touch this problem, all they do is talk...

kayleesgrandma · Jun 24, 2008

I agree in part with you, though somewhere we have to have a profit or there would be no new medical discoveries, or good hospitals. I wish we could have a non-partician focus group similar to what Hillary originally tried to do--surely we could find some kind of compromise...like you said, if we can split the atom, and decode the human genome--not to mention make better stealth bombers...then surely we can solve this dilema! No one will touch this problem, all they do is talk...

kayleesgrandma · Jun 24, 2008

I agree in part with you, though somewhere we have to have a profit or there would be no new medical discoveries, or good hospitals. I wish we could have a non-partician focus group similar to what Hillary originally tried to do--surely we could find some kind of compromise...like you said, if we can split the atom, and decode the human genome--not to mention make better stealth bombers...then surely we can solve this dilema! No one will touch this problem, all they do is talk...

kayleesgrandma · Jun 24, 2008

I agree in part with you, though somewhere we have to have a profit or there would be no new medical discoveries, or good hospitals. I wish we could have a non-partician focus group similar to what Hillary originally tried to do--surely we could find some kind of compromise...like you said, if we can split the atom, and decode the human genome--not to mention make better stealth bombers...then surely we can solve this dilema! No one will touch this problem, all they do is talk...

Lance2020x · Jun 24, 2008

THANK You dbtoo!

I'm voting McCain simply because there are things Obama stands for that I can't back. And because I'm republican.

Honestly I have no expectations of healthcare changing after the elections.

PLUS, from what I know most of the healthcare problems we are facing right now are the products of what CLINTON put into play while in office. *expects a hail of fiery messages*

Okay there is my two cents worth, I'm going to go back to my box in the corner now.

Lance2020x · Jun 24, 2008

THANK You dbtoo!

I'm voting McCain simply because there are things Obama stands for that I can't back. And because I'm republican.

Honestly I have no expectations of healthcare changing after the elections.

PLUS, from what I know most of the healthcare problems we are facing right now are the products of what CLINTON put into play while in office. *expects a hail of fiery messages*

Okay there is my two cents worth, I'm going to go back to my box in the corner now.

Lance2020x · Jun 24, 2008

THANK You dbtoo!

I'm voting McCain simply because there are things Obama stands for that I can't back. And because I'm republican.

Honestly I have no expectations of healthcare changing after the elections.

PLUS, from what I know most of the healthcare problems we are facing right now are the products of what CLINTON put into play while in office. *expects a hail of fiery messages*

Okay there is my two cents worth, I'm going to go back to my box in the corner now.

Lance2020x · Jun 24, 2008

THANK You dbtoo!

I'm voting McCain simply because there are things Obama stands for that I can't back. And because I'm republican.

Honestly I have no expectations of healthcare changing after the elections.

PLUS, from what I know most of the healthcare problems we are facing right now are the products of what CLINTON put into play while in office. *expects a hail of fiery messages*

Okay there is my two cents worth, I'm going to go back to my box in the corner now.

Lance2020x · Jun 24, 2008

THANK You dbtoo!
 
 I'm voting McCain simply because there are things Obama stands for that I can't back. And because I'm republican.
 
 Honestly I have no expectations of healthcare changing after the elections.
 
 PLUS, from what I know most of the healthcare problems we are facing right now are the products of what CLINTON put into play while in office. *expects a hail of fiery messages*
 
 Okay there is my two cents worth, I'm going to go back to my box in the corner now.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Well Kayleesgrandma, I see what you are saying. But there is no reason why the government couldn't properly subsidize payments to companies that perform better in their health services and pioneer new discoveries. It works with many other sectors, why not health care? While there are obviously bad public schools, the no child left behind/FCAT system of accountability to the government for it's funding has done quite a bit to kick schools in the but. Basically if you want to continue to receive government funding, you find a way to teach better and raise scores, or your school is taken over by the state/federal government. Is it perfect? No, but it has shown that accountability is closely related to results, just like in real life.

There is no reason why our government can't properly subsidize a system similar to medicare, but run by independent doctors (like medicare) and have the people receive the care and medicine they need as stipulated by their doctors. Everyone can pay a reasonable amount into it, and the government can help defray the rest from various funding. Remember the proposal for a national catastrophic disaster insurance fund? Could be the same principle. The rest who can not afford even the very low cost to participate would be required to vollunteer their time in some reasonable capacity in order to qualify for it.

Everyone would have to contribute something in order to participate. As it is now, our health care system in the private sector is run by companies that only care about the bottom line, and keeping profits up. They have whole teams of people looking for any period or comma out of place in order to deny services to people, in order to keep costs down, in order to appease their share holders. It's really sickening when you start to think about it.

America is a wonderful country, and we are still the leaders of innovation in nearly everything. Our GDP is off the charts. When I refer to "profit based" I do not mean rewarding quality care and innovation in the medical field, I mean our current model on how HMO/PPO's are run, in a profit above all else manner. We jut can't continue that way, because it's essential philosophy is morally wrong.

Why couldn't we have a national sales tax increase of say 5 cents? Just like how income tax is unfair, a flat tax based system targets EVERYONE and makes EVERYONE contribute because everyone has to buy things. I don't like excess taxation like everyone else, but most non frothing at the mouth partisan people understand that if taxation is reasonable and benefits the whole, it is a necessary thing, especially if it's fair. If the small taxation isn't enough to fund our new healthcare system, then the government subsidizes the rest via all kinds of potential means.

There are HUGE, ultimately vast areas in our desolate desserts that could be extremely lucrative solar energy farms where we could export energy to surrounding Canada or other countries after we defray our own energy grid needs. We could also take a one time costly hit to set up a solar collector in space that beams the suns energy back to earth like a big magnifying glass to cut atleat 50% of our power needs in this country. This was thought about in the 70's, but wasn't financially or technically viable due to the costs. Well, with oil at it's current costs and technology where it is now, it is very feasable. It just takes a backbone and an ability to absorb the first stages of the cost for an ultimate reward.

This administration has been one of the most scientifically averse administration in a very very long time. It's time to get someone in the white house who understand that technology, innovation, and resolve are the only things that will save us. We need to get off foreign oil for many reasons, then get off oil itself for many reasons. The most obvious answer to our needs is that giant fireball in the sky that comes out every day. 1/10 of 1% of the energy released by the sun in one second would fuel our planets energy needs for years.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Well Kayleesgrandma, I see what you are saying. But there is no reason why the government couldn't properly subsidize payments to companies that perform better in their health services and pioneer new discoveries. It works with many other sectors, why not health care? While there are obviously bad public schools, the no child left behind/FCAT system of accountability to the government for it's funding has done quite a bit to kick schools in the but. Basically if you want to continue to receive government funding, you find a way to teach better and raise scores, or your school is taken over by the state/federal government. Is it perfect? No, but it has shown that accountability is closely related to results, just like in real life.

There is no reason why our government can't properly subsidize a system similar to medicare, but run by independent doctors (like medicare) and have the people receive the care and medicine they need as stipulated by their doctors. Everyone can pay a reasonable amount into it, and the government can help defray the rest from various funding. Remember the proposal for a national catastrophic disaster insurance fund? Could be the same principle. The rest who can not afford even the very low cost to participate would be required to vollunteer their time in some reasonable capacity in order to qualify for it.

Everyone would have to contribute something in order to participate. As it is now, our health care system in the private sector is run by companies that only care about the bottom line, and keeping profits up. They have whole teams of people looking for any period or comma out of place in order to deny services to people, in order to keep costs down, in order to appease their share holders. It's really sickening when you start to think about it.

America is a wonderful country, and we are still the leaders of innovation in nearly everything. Our GDP is off the charts. When I refer to "profit based" I do not mean rewarding quality care and innovation in the medical field, I mean our current model on how HMO/PPO's are run, in a profit above all else manner. We jut can't continue that way, because it's essential philosophy is morally wrong.

Why couldn't we have a national sales tax increase of say 5 cents? Just like how income tax is unfair, a flat tax based system targets EVERYONE and makes EVERYONE contribute because everyone has to buy things. I don't like excess taxation like everyone else, but most non frothing at the mouth partisan people understand that if taxation is reasonable and benefits the whole, it is a necessary thing, especially if it's fair. If the small taxation isn't enough to fund our new healthcare system, then the government subsidizes the rest via all kinds of potential means.

There are HUGE, ultimately vast areas in our desolate desserts that could be extremely lucrative solar energy farms where we could export energy to surrounding Canada or other countries after we defray our own energy grid needs. We could also take a one time costly hit to set up a solar collector in space that beams the suns energy back to earth like a big magnifying glass to cut atleat 50% of our power needs in this country. This was thought about in the 70's, but wasn't financially or technically viable due to the costs. Well, with oil at it's current costs and technology where it is now, it is very feasable. It just takes a backbone and an ability to absorb the first stages of the cost for an ultimate reward.

This administration has been one of the most scientifically averse administration in a very very long time. It's time to get someone in the white house who understand that technology, innovation, and resolve are the only things that will save us. We need to get off foreign oil for many reasons, then get off oil itself for many reasons. The most obvious answer to our needs is that giant fireball in the sky that comes out every day. 1/10 of 1% of the energy released by the sun in one second would fuel our planets energy needs for years.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Well Kayleesgrandma, I see what you are saying. But there is no reason why the government couldn't properly subsidize payments to companies that perform better in their health services and pioneer new discoveries. It works with many other sectors, why not health care? While there are obviously bad public schools, the no child left behind/FCAT system of accountability to the government for it's funding has done quite a bit to kick schools in the but. Basically if you want to continue to receive government funding, you find a way to teach better and raise scores, or your school is taken over by the state/federal government. Is it perfect? No, but it has shown that accountability is closely related to results, just like in real life.

There is no reason why our government can't properly subsidize a system similar to medicare, but run by independent doctors (like medicare) and have the people receive the care and medicine they need as stipulated by their doctors. Everyone can pay a reasonable amount into it, and the government can help defray the rest from various funding. Remember the proposal for a national catastrophic disaster insurance fund? Could be the same principle. The rest who can not afford even the very low cost to participate would be required to vollunteer their time in some reasonable capacity in order to qualify for it.

Everyone would have to contribute something in order to participate. As it is now, our health care system in the private sector is run by companies that only care about the bottom line, and keeping profits up. They have whole teams of people looking for any period or comma out of place in order to deny services to people, in order to keep costs down, in order to appease their share holders. It's really sickening when you start to think about it.

America is a wonderful country, and we are still the leaders of innovation in nearly everything. Our GDP is off the charts. When I refer to "profit based" I do not mean rewarding quality care and innovation in the medical field, I mean our current model on how HMO/PPO's are run, in a profit above all else manner. We jut can't continue that way, because it's essential philosophy is morally wrong.

Why couldn't we have a national sales tax increase of say 5 cents? Just like how income tax is unfair, a flat tax based system targets EVERYONE and makes EVERYONE contribute because everyone has to buy things. I don't like excess taxation like everyone else, but most non frothing at the mouth partisan people understand that if taxation is reasonable and benefits the whole, it is a necessary thing, especially if it's fair. If the small taxation isn't enough to fund our new healthcare system, then the government subsidizes the rest via all kinds of potential means.

There are HUGE, ultimately vast areas in our desolate desserts that could be extremely lucrative solar energy farms where we could export energy to surrounding Canada or other countries after we defray our own energy grid needs. We could also take a one time costly hit to set up a solar collector in space that beams the suns energy back to earth like a big magnifying glass to cut atleat 50% of our power needs in this country. This was thought about in the 70's, but wasn't financially or technically viable due to the costs. Well, with oil at it's current costs and technology where it is now, it is very feasable. It just takes a backbone and an ability to absorb the first stages of the cost for an ultimate reward.

This administration has been one of the most scientifically averse administration in a very very long time. It's time to get someone in the white house who understand that technology, innovation, and resolve are the only things that will save us. We need to get off foreign oil for many reasons, then get off oil itself for many reasons. The most obvious answer to our needs is that giant fireball in the sky that comes out every day. 1/10 of 1% of the energy released by the sun in one second would fuel our planets energy needs for years.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Well Kayleesgrandma, I see what you are saying. But there is no reason why the government couldn't properly subsidize payments to companies that perform better in their health services and pioneer new discoveries. It works with many other sectors, why not health care? While there are obviously bad public schools, the no child left behind/FCAT system of accountability to the government for it's funding has done quite a bit to kick schools in the but. Basically if you want to continue to receive government funding, you find a way to teach better and raise scores, or your school is taken over by the state/federal government. Is it perfect? No, but it has shown that accountability is closely related to results, just like in real life.

There is no reason why our government can't properly subsidize a system similar to medicare, but run by independent doctors (like medicare) and have the people receive the care and medicine they need as stipulated by their doctors. Everyone can pay a reasonable amount into it, and the government can help defray the rest from various funding. Remember the proposal for a national catastrophic disaster insurance fund? Could be the same principle. The rest who can not afford even the very low cost to participate would be required to vollunteer their time in some reasonable capacity in order to qualify for it.

Everyone would have to contribute something in order to participate. As it is now, our health care system in the private sector is run by companies that only care about the bottom line, and keeping profits up. They have whole teams of people looking for any period or comma out of place in order to deny services to people, in order to keep costs down, in order to appease their share holders. It's really sickening when you start to think about it.

America is a wonderful country, and we are still the leaders of innovation in nearly everything. Our GDP is off the charts. When I refer to "profit based" I do not mean rewarding quality care and innovation in the medical field, I mean our current model on how HMO/PPO's are run, in a profit above all else manner. We jut can't continue that way, because it's essential philosophy is morally wrong.

Why couldn't we have a national sales tax increase of say 5 cents? Just like how income tax is unfair, a flat tax based system targets EVERYONE and makes EVERYONE contribute because everyone has to buy things. I don't like excess taxation like everyone else, but most non frothing at the mouth partisan people understand that if taxation is reasonable and benefits the whole, it is a necessary thing, especially if it's fair. If the small taxation isn't enough to fund our new healthcare system, then the government subsidizes the rest via all kinds of potential means.

There are HUGE, ultimately vast areas in our desolate desserts that could be extremely lucrative solar energy farms where we could export energy to surrounding Canada or other countries after we defray our own energy grid needs. We could also take a one time costly hit to set up a solar collector in space that beams the suns energy back to earth like a big magnifying glass to cut atleat 50% of our power needs in this country. This was thought about in the 70's, but wasn't financially or technically viable due to the costs. Well, with oil at it's current costs and technology where it is now, it is very feasable. It just takes a backbone and an ability to absorb the first stages of the cost for an ultimate reward.

This administration has been one of the most scientifically averse administration in a very very long time. It's time to get someone in the white house who understand that technology, innovation, and resolve are the only things that will save us. We need to get off foreign oil for many reasons, then get off oil itself for many reasons. The most obvious answer to our needs is that giant fireball in the sky that comes out every day. 1/10 of 1% of the energy released by the sun in one second would fuel our planets energy needs for years.

Faust · Jun 24, 2008

Well Kayleesgrandma, I see what you are saying. But there is no reason why the government couldn't properly subsidize payments to companies that perform better in their health services and pioneer new discoveries. It works with many other sectors, why not health care? While there are obviously bad public schools, the no child left behind/FCAT system of accountability to the government for it's funding has done quite a bit to kick schools in the but. Basically if you want to continue to receive government funding, you find a way to teach better and raise scores, or your school is taken over by the state/federal government. Is it perfect? No, but it has shown that accountability is closely related to results, just like in real life.
 
 There is no reason why our government can't properly subsidize a system similar to medicare, but run by independent doctors (like medicare) and have the people receive the care and medicine they need as stipulated by their doctors. Everyone can pay a reasonable amount into it, and the government can help defray the rest from various funding. Remember the proposal for a national catastrophic disaster insurance fund? Could be the same principle. The rest who can not afford even the very low cost to participate would be required to vollunteer their time in some reasonable capacity in order to qualify for it.
 
 Everyone would have to contribute something in order to participate. As it is now, our health care system in the private sector is run by companies that only care about the bottom line, and keeping profits up. They have whole teams of people looking for any period or comma out of place in order to deny services to people, in order to keep costs down, in order to appease their share holders. It's really sickening when you start to think about it.
 
 America is a wonderful country, and we are still the leaders of innovation in nearly everything. Our GDP is off the charts. When I refer to "profit based" I do not mean rewarding quality care and innovation in the medical field, I mean our current model on how HMO/PPO's are run, in a profit above all else manner. We jut can't continue that way, because it's essential philosophy is morally wrong.
 
 Why couldn't we have a national sales tax increase of say 5 cents? Just like how income tax is unfair, a flat tax based system targets EVERYONE and makes EVERYONE contribute because everyone has to buy things. I don't like excess taxation like everyone else, but most non frothing at the mouth partisan people understand that if taxation is reasonable and benefits the whole, it is a necessary thing, especially if it's fair. If the small taxation isn't enough to fund our new healthcare system, then the government subsidizes the rest via all kinds of potential means.
 
 There are HUGE, ultimately vast areas in our desolate desserts that could be extremely lucrative solar energy farms where we could export energy to surrounding Canada or other countries after we defray our own energy grid needs. We could also take a one time costly hit to set up a solar collector in space that beams the suns energy back to earth like a big magnifying glass to cut atleat 50% of our power needs in this country. This was thought about in the 70's, but wasn't financially or technically viable due to the costs. Well, with oil at it's current costs and technology where it is now, it is very feasable. It just takes a backbone and an ability to absorb the first stages of the cost for an ultimate reward.
 
 This administration has been one of the most scientifically averse administration in a very very long time. It's time to get someone in the white house who understand that technology, innovation, and resolve are the only things that will save us. We need to get off foreign oil for many reasons, then get off oil itself for many reasons. The most obvious answer to our needs is that giant fireball in the sky that comes out every day. 1/10 of 1% of the energy released by the sun in one second would fuel our planets energy needs for years.

Presidential candidates

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member