Start A Petition

Nancy Pelosi Threatens Discharge Petition To Break Fiscal Cliff Stalemate

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: congress, Pelosi, Boehner, republicans, government )

- 2030 days ago -
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi offered her own way to break the apparent stalemate over the so-called fiscal cliff -- by taking matters out of House Speaker John Boehner's hands.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Sue H (7)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 3:50 pm
Go Get 'Em Nancy!

Vicky P (476)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 3:57 pm

Jason S (50)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 4:44 pm
Good posting, thanks

JL A (281)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 5:37 pm
Glad there is another option/alternate route for the good of the country and that Pelosi is willing to show the needed leadership when Boehner appears unwilling to do so other than to try to force his minority viewpoint at odds with the majority of the nation on the rest of us.

Michael Carney (217)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 7:54 pm
Noted...This makes sense to me...It's obvious Boehner, has no intention doing anything in a bipartisan way, so just take it out of his hands, and do the right thing for the Country...And quite seriously, taking it out of his hands, is the best idea I can think of anyway, I mean he has got to be the worst Majority House Leader we've ever had in this Country, just look at Congress's record sense he's been in charge...They've done absolutely Nothing...

John B (185)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 9:20 pm
Thanks Carrie for the link to the article by Sabrina Siddiqui. Good read and video. According to my math she would only need 20 GOP votes to force the Senate bill to the floor for a vote. Read, viewed and noted.

JL A (281)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 10:00 pm
Thanks for doing the math for the rest of us John! You cannot currently send a star to John because you have done so within the last week.

Carrie B (306)
Saturday December 1, 2012, 10:16 pm
Pelosi needs a total of 218 signatures. How many of the republicans are willing to sign remains to be seen.

Alexandra Rodda (180)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:43 am
May the Force be with her!"

Giana Peranio-paz (398)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:58 am
Read and noted. Thanks.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:20 am
Thought the liberals out here hated rich people. Nancy Pelosi is worth $35.5 million. Oh, that's right, she's a democrat so it's okay for her to be rich.

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 6:05 am
Maybe she should say a prayer, that will stand as good as chance as this idea.

Arielle S (313)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 8:15 am
And when there is a puffed up doof like Boehner being a hard-nose, I say, "get 'em, Nancy!"

Chris C (152)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 11:08 am
How do we know that Nancy Pelosi ISN"T sharing her wealth? It's really none of anybody else's business, actually! Dems don't hate wealth - Progressives don't hate the rich in America...what a stupid idea! The mystery here is some of the STUPID comments! What Dems hate is the attempt to create a PLUTOCRACY! We hate the rich who try to get richer on the backs of the poor and elderly. We hate the corps and the rich who send jobs overseas and who shelter their money offshore to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. I STILL remember that Romney refused to show his pertinent tax returns. I come from the same city as Warren Buffett and I believe as he does! Everyone should pay their fair share of taxes.

Carrie B (306)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 11:16 am
Diane, I don't think Pelosi has a problem paying her fare share of taxes like the republicans do. Who said democrats/ liberals hated rich people? We leave hate to the republicans who find selfishness a virtue.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 11:37 am
Most of resent those people earning a great deal of money. I've read your comments. There's nothing wrong with Pelosi being worh $35.5 million. More power to her. Read Carrie's comment: "republicans who find selfishness a virtue." I assume the selfishness comes from the republicans not agreeing that they should share their hard earned wealth with their next door neighbor.

Everyone SHOULD pay their fair share. We have 47% of Americans who aren't paying any taxes at all for different reasons. So, why should the rich continue to fund their lifestyles? What happened to personal responsibility Americans? Where did they go? No jobs? Talk to Obama. He hasn't created any jobs in four years.

Chris, why would you hate the rich who want to get richer? When they do get rich they don't do that on the backs of the poor....where do you come up with these comments? They get richer because they are smart business people.

Romney didn't have to show his tax returns....just for one year. So, why should he show more? Why did Obama scrub the internet of his past? You have questions and I have questions.

Socialism begins when a country ovetakes the healthcare of the people. With $60 billion a year in fraud and abuse my position is why should we let them have the rest of our health insurance when they've done such a poor job managing medicare and medicaid. They need to be fired. It's our tax dollars being wasted every year. I would think most of you would be outraged about that.

Carrie B (306)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 11:45 am
Diane, you mean like Mitt Romney's "hard earned" wealth? I am talking about paying taxes appropriate to your income.

Obama has not scrub the internet of his past. Check Snopes.

You make up the most outrageous things to defend your belief in the robber baron culture.

Nancy M (169)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 11:55 am
"Everyone SHOULD pay their fair share. We have 47% of Americans who aren't paying any taxes at all for different reasons."

Every one IS paying their fair share. Stress on the word FAIR.

And you know better Diane. You KNOW they are paying payroll tax, property tax in some cases, state taxes including sales tax, etc.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:00 pm
Carrie, are you suggesting that the Mitt Romney broken the law? Has he been charged with tax evasion? No? Mitt Romney is following the tax laws that are in place. So, unless you have proof that Mitt Romney has broken the law, you might want to sit down. He has paid his taxes according to the tax laws just lie every other rich person.

Do you think that both Susan Rice and Nancy Pelosi filed their taxes using the same tax laws that Mitt did? Or, do you think Mitt was the only rich person to take advantage of how the tax laws are written?

Carrie B (306)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:04 pm
I don't know why Mitt Romney hides his money in offshore accounts. Neither do you, Diane. I'm saying he doesn't pay a fare share of his income in taxes, and he should!

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:16 pm
Medicare fraud and abuse could not exist if it were actually socialized medicine instead of private enterprise.

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:26 pm
"suggesting that the Mitt Romney broken the law"

It appears that he couldn't show his tax returns because he had hidden money in UBS swiss and got amnesty. yes. He most likely broke the law.

Romney Failed to Disclose Swiss Bank Account Income - ABC News​romney-failed-disclose-swiss-bank-account...

The campaign had maintained that it was not necessary to disclose the Swiss account because Romney's money manager, ... That form identified a UBS money market ...

"Pelosi being worh $35.5 million"
That isn't that much these days but the big message is, she thinks SHE should pay more taxes too. Now that's a real patriot!

OMG Diane. You are relentless with your fascist nonsense! I guess it would really take FOREVER to correct your mountain of misinformation. You do not want to see the big picture.

Nancy M (169)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:27 pm
I do wonder, now that Diane has raised the question, at what rate does Nancy Pelosi pay taxes? Or Susan Rice. Given that they actually do have income, I am guess it is a higher rate than Mitt.

Yes, what Mitt is doing (and perhaps Nancy and Susan are too) may be legal but that doesn't mean it is the proper thing to do.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:33 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Nancy because you have done so within the last week.

David Menard (43)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 12:52 pm
Go Nancy!

James Maynard (84)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:09 pm
Ha ha ha, leave it to the "real" Speaker of the House
to figure out a way to get things done. Brava Nancy!


Kit B (276)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:10 pm

**Does NOT change the fact.

Good grief Charlie Brown - does this woman (Diane) ever verify anything? These people need no defense by anyone. Nor do the many unethical practices we have seen over the last 30+ years culminating in this current depression - and yes we may hate the word, but it is a depression and not just a recession.

Kathlene Lentz (30)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:16 pm
John Boehner is so busy keeping his head stuck up his rich donor's asses that he has lost touch with reality. Ms. Pelosi has, for once, put forth a really good idea.

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:18 pm
It's the fox cult, Kit. A religion of hate for anything but what they are told is good and right. Jim Jones did the same thing.

DORIS L (61)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:22 pm
Go Nancy Go!

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 1:22 pm
Thanks James!

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:12 pm
Kathy, want to talk about rich donors? Try a few of Obama's rich donors....he brought in my donations than any candidate as ever brought in and they didn't come from poor people. Try George Soros and Ms. Prizker.

Kit, none of these "rich people" have been charged with tax evasion. They are following the tax laws. Don't like the laws? Get them changed but for now they aren't doing anything that they are not allowed to do. I'm sorry if you don't like that but it's a fact. They are called tax loopholes and they exist and they are legal.

"Medicare fraud and abuse could not exist if it were actually socialized medicine instead of private enterprise." No gold star deserved on this absurd comment. The point is that our government has mismanaged medicare and medicaid. Why do you think counties with socialized medicine have raised their tax rates to 50% to 60%? Could it be the escalating cost of giving everyone "free" medicine? There's a hefty price to pay to give everyone health insurance. Some countries are looking at going back to private healthcare because taxes are going through the roof.

Is this what you see in America's future? Your children and grandchildren sending the government 60% of their income every month because YOU believed in socialized medicine for the United States? Breathtaking....

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:14 pm
typo: why do you believe "countries"....and a few other typos

Chris C (152)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:16 pm
Diane O - I'm sorry- it is apparent you cannot be saved! It's a supreme waste of time! You are indeed a lost cause!

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:23 pm
I'm afraid you're right, Chris. We're watching some one that refuses to be corrected.

"he brought in my donations than any candidate as ever brought in and they didn't come from poor people."

I'm poor. 80% of us are poor. More than half of his donations were from small donors, Diane. It figures because we know that the republicans destroyed our economy. You're still marching to Rove's orders.

Nancy M (169)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:23 pm
Diane, I am not going to defend something I view as immoral and unethical just because it is legal. I will do whatever I can to change the law. Otherwise we will all be back in some type of 1850s Dickensian novel.

Kit B (276)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:35 pm

I completely agree Nancy - being legal does not make an act right. Avoidance of something is also an act of not doing.

These mega campaign contributions are legal but not right...or maybe they are exactly that. Very right wingish.

Check it out on less biased site or a dozen, Diane and discover for yourself that the campaign contributions to Romney out weighed those to Obama by 4-1 in dollars. Yes, many of those contributions were from people that gave as little as $5.00 some of us gave more.

Hey, if taxes need to be 60% then so be it - The Danes pay 50% but look what they get for that money. As for so-called "socialized" medicine - bring it on.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:46 pm
Kit mentioned a depression. Look what ObamaCare will do to our country in the upcoming year:

Hospitals are expected to cut some 93,000 jobs in 2013 in anticipation of ObamaCare. A former presidential candidate and conservative advocate says America needs to prepare for major changes in the medical industry.

Orlando Health, a not-for-profit network of community and specialty hospitals, is just one example of the massive layoffs expected in the coming year. Officials with the Central Florida-based healthcare services provider announced on Monday that the largest staff reduction in its nearly 100-year history will result in cutting up to 400 jobs, starting immediately.

Gary Bauer, president of Washington DC-based American Values, warns that this is only the beginning of an economic catastrophe that will impact America for years.

“The ripple effects, the negatives on our economy, are going to be playing out for not just months, but for years,” he says. “And I doubt we will ever be able to totally measure the complete cost in manpower and in money — in addition to taxes — that ObamaCare will end up costing the American people, proving once again there is no such thing as a free lunch, and there is no such thing as free healthcare.”

Bauer is sadly confident that the quality of healthcare, in a nation known for its excellence in medical services, will see a decline.

"I think that what the public still doesn't realize is that all the savings the president projected are literally savings that come from not paying hospitals, doctors and other care centers for services," he tells OneNewsNow. "And if you don't pay them, you're not going to get the services, unless somehow through courts or otherwise we can restrict the impact of ObamaCare."

Louisiana State University announced in October it would cut 1,495 positions and various programs across its seven hospitals to trim more than $150 million from its budget.


And if you don't like the link google Louisiana State University laying people off. This is only one example there are many more layoffs coming across our country.

Nancy, you have your freedom of speech. Bottom line is that our country has laws. The rich people are folllowing the tax laws on the books. Moral obligation? What about the crew Obama surrounded himself with who are actual tax evaders....but you are okay with that. Warren Buffett owes $1 billion in back taxes. Remember Charlie Rangel and Tim Geithner both need to go to jail for tax evasion. Do your research. Mitt Romney hasn't broken any laws. He has never been charged with tax evasion or any form of breaking the tax laws.

If tax evaders are standing close to Obama, the liberals give all of them a pass. You folks are just too transparent.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:48 pm
Can't be saved? Saved to what? You believe that this administration is golden and they are not. What you accuse the republicans of being guilty of Obama has surrounded himself with people who actually ARE tax evaders. The problem is you don't like reading the truth. Worse yet is that you don't do any research and stay glued to your biased left wing media outlets and they don't report the truth. Everything I have stated can be easily researched so before you tell me that I cannot be saved to your way of thinking...I say "no thank you" I'll just stay with the truth.

. (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:53 pm
Nancy's a very wealthy woman in her own right and the Obamas aren't doing too badly either. It might behoove y'all to do a little research into how they made that money and when. Both parties do not serve the people. They serve themselves and their masters. Michelle Obama is not the nice lady you think she is.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 2:57 pm
Obama brought in $1.08 billion and Romney brought in $1.13 billion so I'll stand corrected but the only reason Obama didn't bring in more is probably due to Golman Sachs gave $3.3 million to Romney instead of Obama which put them very close. So, are you critical of what Obama brought in for donations? No? But you are critical of what Romney brought in because it was slightly more?

Tom Edgar (56)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:07 pm
Dianne O is so far off the mark of being a responsible American in her defence of the under taxed over rich it is breath taking. CHANGE THE TAX LAWS? Excuse me the laws are put in place, by the affluent, so that the rich, who are in power, do have those loopholes that they so readily exploit.

As for your wonderful medical system, for the comparatively rich. Look to the whole of Scandinavia, Europe , Australia and New Zealand, all those countries have varying degrees of "Socialised" medical care.
Each and every one of them ranks way ahead of America in Health, Education, and Social Welfare responsibility. In Denmark even the comparatively wealthy consider tax evasion to be anti social, so do I. Even
by every official measure, including the U S A's own statistics. Evidently Dianne, along with most of the G O P, seem to think Taxation is just a game to be controlled by those holding the winner's pot, whereas it should be that, as my wife used to say. I'm an Australian, I'm proud to be able, and willing to pay my taxes. In all my business life I never "Fiddled" a single cent from my tax and I was in a profession where I had to pay Sales Tax monthly. Evidently Dianne is not only not proud to be a responsible American, along with her tax dodging, happily failed, Presidential candidate and so many others. She, and they, extol tax fraud (evasion) as some kind of virtue proving what clever business people they are.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:14 pm
Kit, you might want to think about moving to's the perfect country for you. Denmark residents were paying as high as 59% of their income in taxes plus various other taxes. They lowered it down to 51% in 2009 to "stimulate growth." It's a utopia for liberals. Now, this is interesting,..Denmark's corporate tax rate is a flat 25%. Now that is a utopia for corporations. Meanwhile, citizens of Denmark have been paying 59% now down to 51% but who knows how high it will go again?

Kit, I say go for it....move to Denmark.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:15 pm
As Kit actually said, average donation amounts were much lower for Obama (statistical mean--the total number of people giving and how small the amount was vs. a lot fewer giving large amounts)--tells the picture vividly of who supported each candidate.

Source check(after filling in the missing characters): AFN is a Christian news service - with more than 1,200 broadcast, print, and online affiliates in 45 states and 11 foreign countries - that exists to present the day's stories from a biblical perspective.
The rest of the story:

"We have made great strides in improving our quality outcomes. But these gains have also triggered lowered revenues due in part to a reduction in readmissions."

The cuts are necessary as the hospital transitions to a new payment model, one that pays based on value or outcome, not on volume, said Sitarik.

"Eventually that will even out," said Lewis, "but for a while it will present a fiscal challenge."


JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:17 pm
continuation of the story above:
Reducing services or laying off people who are providing hands-on care is very harmful. One wonders what their mission is."

Laura Goodhue, executive director of the health-advocacy organization Florida Chain, also questioned whether the layoffs were necessary.

"I'm not sure why they're having layoffs now. And I'm not sure what they're referring to in regards to reduced payments," she said.

"As a result of the Affordable Care Act, more Floridians are going to have health coverage, not fewer, so there will be more paying Floridians in the system," Goodhue said.

Kit B (276)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:26 pm

Thanks Diane but I think I will stay here and continue to support those things I believe to be the best way to help my fellow Americans. As has become normal, you make statements with "facts" that you make up as you go.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:31 pm
Carrie, once again, another childish comment. Sorry, but that comment was ludicrous. I pay a great deal in taxes every year. I do my part as I'm an actual tax payer and not a part of the 47% who pay no taxes at all. The truth is that Americans will NOT get better healthcare. There is a shortgage of doctors now and it is escalating as more and more doctors who qualify through reputation among their patients have opted out of participating in medicare and medicaid because they aren't paid what they deserve from our government. They are going into concierge medicine. Instead of seeing 2,000 plus patients they've reduced their patient load down to 600 who pay an annual fee to receive excellent patient care. I joined because I'll be forced to go on medicare even though I don't want it. At least by paying the annual fee and being with a reputable doctor and great patient care I can relax. I honestly feel sorry for those Americans who will be stuck with ObamaCare....with a high shortage of doctors, well, you paint your own will be very bad. Shortage of doctors? Why would any young man or woman pay $300,000 for a medical degree/specialist to earn $20.00 per visit by the government? They won't go into medicine. They'll not put themselves in debt to earn $20.00 or less per patient visit. Now what will you do? It will take months before you can get in to see your doctor because of a severe shortage of doctors.

Nancy M (169)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:32 pm
ANd if we continue to allow the likes of Walmart to TAKE from the workers and give to themselves, our economy will never get better.

Kit B (276)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:37 pm

Oops! There is another liar, pants on fire. Diane. Fact check before you call that 47% of the American people tax cheats - that is wrong and you know that.

Thanks for the laugh about the shortage of doctors - wonder what planet you live on - it sure is not Earth. You just make up stuff and see what will stick - here is a hint - none of it. We may disagree with your perverted thinking about the people of this country, that does not make us stupid.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:39 pm
"There are 4,400 concierge doctors in the U.S., 30 percent more than there were last year, according to the American Academy of Private Physicians, their professional association. “This is all doctors want to talk about,” says Jeff Goldsmith, a health-care industry analyst and trend spotter. “ ‘I want to go off the grid. I’m done billing Blue Cross. I can’t deal with this anymore. It’s destroying my life and my relationship with my patients.’ ”

The trend is apparently attributable to the problems with private insurance and not ACA, Medicare, etc.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:49 pm
No, Kit, you would be wrong....AGAIN. I didn't call the 47% who pay no cheats. We all know that 47% of Americans pay no tax at all for various reasons.

Why don't you google shortage of doctors in America. Then google MDVIP concierge medicine and then google simply concierge medicine and get your results. It will stick, my friend.

Here's but one source:

When the Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandate takes effect in 2014, some 30 million newly covered patients—people generally treated in emergency rooms now—will be shopping for doctors. That’s a problem because the U.S. has 15,230 fewer primary-care physicians than it needs, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Yet teaching hospitals aren’t rushing to fill the void. The federal government foots most of the bill for residency programs—and Congress has capped enrollment at about 85,000 students for the last 15 years. “We’re actually already later than we should be in addressing the issue,” says Tom Price, a Republican congressman from Georgia who’s also an orthopedic surgeon.

Medical schools are pressing lawmakers to pass legislation introduced in August that would add 3,000 residencies a year through 2017. The cost to taxpayers: about $9 billion. “It is an expense that is necessary,” says Allyson Schwartz (D-Pa.), a co-sponsor of the bill. Deficit-watching Republicans say the government should quit funding the program.

Medicare pays for more than 75 percent of doctor residencies. Atul Grover, chief public policy officer for the Washington-based Association of American Medical Colleges, says teaching hospitals pick up the tab for about 10,000 positions annually, at a cost of $145,000 per resident. One way to lessen the burden on taxpayers would be to collect fees or taxes from insurers, Price says. That would amount to a “cost shift,” says Robert Laszewski, an insurance industry consultant in Alexandria, Va. Insurers “pass all premium taxes, state and federal, on to the customer,” he says.

The administration says taxpayers are already subsidizing doctor training too heavily. The government spent $9.5 billion on the program in 2009, the most recent year available. That was $3.5 billion more than what it actually cost for residencies, according to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, which monitors the spending.

But Washington isn’t accounting for all the indirect costs associated with training, says Mike Rossi, who oversees government reimbursements at the University of Pennsylvania Health System. Of the $120 million Medicare paid last year to support 855 Penn residents, $96 million went toward direct expenses such as salaries; the remaining money was necessary to cover “clinical inefficiencies,” Rossi says, such as having residents perform multiple tests on a patient so they can get practice.

If funding issues aren’t resolved, Grover’s organization predicts the doctor shortage, including specialists, will climb to 130,000 by 2025. That may mean less preventive care and fewer hoped-for cost savings. Says Grover: “We’re going to have to find ways to see more patients with fewer physicians.”

The bottom line: The U.S. is short on primary care doctors, just as 30 million people are about to acquire health insurance under Obamacare.

But, the real information will be under the concierge medicine. It's truly amazing that physicians all across our country are taking their practice down to 600 patients to get out of ObamaCare. With the annual fees they are being paid it more than makes up the difference and it becomes a win/win in excellent patient care. There's more than one way to outfox the fox.....The Affordable Care Act. Wrong for America. When you have people like Nancy Pelosi who was never qualified to erect a healthcare plan you get a plan that America won't buy into.

Good, JLA, you are actually doing some research. Now do some research on the same subject relating to ObamaCare. This is good. I'm getting you folks into doing serious research. You will never read about concierge medicine listening to the biased left wing media.....they are in the tank, like you are, for socialist healthcare. Remember there are 49% of Americans who did not vote for Obama and we are a very large group of Americans.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:52 pm
And, JLA, factor in that concierge medicine hasn't been around that long. It will only gather steam and take off. What the liberals won't tell you is that the large majority of Americans are in good shape financially. Baby boomers make up 78.2 million of our population. Many of them have excellent credit, money in the bank, no mortgages and strong retirement investments. They can pay for concierge medicine and they will.

ObamaCare is falling apart at the seams and it should. It was never a good plan for America because we have empty suits in congress putting it together people who have never put together a healthcare plan for a company much less a country. Remember what Pelosi said, "You'll know what's in it after it passes." Classic dumb dumb Pelosi.

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:54 pm
"We all know that 47% of Americans pay no tax at all for various reasons."

They pay little tax because they work for poverty wages. Another issue, caused by your peeps that you duck.

There is no way to paint you right, Diane. You either remain greedy and with the greedy or do a 180 and change your ways. It's obvious that you'll remain with fox and the greedy.

Carrie B (306)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:57 pm
You know Diane, other countries seem to do quite well with what you call "socialized medicine". The Affordable Care Act is a step in the right direction for this country and it will only get better if we can keep the greedy republicans from trying to keep insurance company profits at an all time high while Americans go without affordable insurance. That is basic and something even you should understand.

I remember when HMO's and PPO's first started out. They were affordable and provided good care as well as good physician's fees. Then the insurance companies decided to get greedy, and changed the rules for the number of patients a physician had to see, as well as how much they would pay for each patient. Some also determined that if a physician hospitalized an HMO patient he or she would lose all that year's previously paid monthly fees. Physicians at that time received a small monthly roster fee for each patient on his/her insurance roster, whether that person was ever seen or not. That means if I had gone to my doctor in March for my yearly checkup, was not seen before or after that until say Dec.15th, and I had to be hospitalized for any reason, all of the physicians roster fees would be taken away for the entire year. That is pure greed by insurance companies. Consequently HMO's and PPO's turned into one of the worst things anyone could possibly have.

And I know this because I worked in a hospital billing dept. as a patient care rep. I dealt with patients and their insurance companies on a daily basis. Not much fun.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 3:58 pm
Bush eliminated the subsidies to encourage doctors to seek specialties in areas with shortages and to medical schools to expand capacity. Those tracking using the actual validated data whether various professions have now or will have in the future shortages to meet the need identify these two changes to be the primary factors affecting sufficiency of doctors.

As the fact check post above indicated,concierge is in response to insurance industry practices and had nothing to with ACA.


JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:00 pm
Diane--we are wishing you would actually do some real research and pay attention to the facts from unbiased sources with credibility instead of the few you present where high school teachers would've rightfully given students Fs if they'd used them on papers they turned in.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:07 pm
JLA, that would be your personal opinion. I happen to do a great deal of research from all sources. I'm not locked into to one source never have been because I believe that with the biased left wing media and the biased right wing media that you have to go beyond what they are force feeding Americans. You have to dig for the truth.

None of the comments here ever bother me. I consider the source.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:15 pm

Baby boomers actually have net debt, not the rosy financial picture asserted above

In order to learn and actually understand material educators and trainers frequently say requires first learning enough to realize how much you don't know...and doing research limited to views one wants to believe usually ends up being at odds with facts or the consensus of experts.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:16 pm
Yes, Carrie, VERY SMALL COUNTRIES, seem to do quite well with socialized medicine if you don't mind handing over more than 50% of your income to make it so.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:17 pm
I never realized Canada was a small country...................hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:23 pm
Correlation between socialized medicine and a strong credit rating:
Now that the USA no longer has a stellar AAA status, all remaining countries with AAA ratings have socialized medicine.

While reading this list, remember that our Health Care reform law was watered down after an uprising of Teapublicans marched into Washington screaming, holding misspelled signs — as if they knew more than the rest of the world.

AAA countries according to Standard & Poor’s:

Hong Kong
Isle of Man
United Kingdom

I guess Australia is also a small country? Only Russia and China are large countries I guess (my geography teacher taught me Canada was bigger than the US)

Carrie B (306)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:24 pm
Thank you JL. You beat me to it.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:28 pm
Countries without AAA but socialized do include Brazil and Russia....I guess China is the only country we;re supposed to look to for comparisons or what?
Countries with Universal Coverage, click for larger map)

The next time someone mentions how bad Canada or the UK are in health care please kindly ask them:

"Well since you are so versed in the health care of other nations maybe you can comment on...
Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Spain, France, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Chile, Portugal, Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Cuba, Germany, The Netherlands, Ireland, Romania, Sri Lanka, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cyprus, Israel, Hong Kong, Switzerland, Belgium, Austria, Czech Rebpulic, Greece...."
it continues with this food for thought:
Or is every country in the world using a system that is actually worse than:
* 18,000 dying every year because of lack of health care * every 30 seconds someone filing for bankruptcy with 68% having insurance at the time. * 45.7 million (15% of the population) not covered * having the top health-care CEO making a 1.1 BILLION dollar bonus * Every citizen paying up to $4000 dollars more than the Eurozone.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:41 pm
JLA, Kit brought up a European country and that was my focus. Of course there are other very large socialist/communist countries in the world! If you wanted to discuss them now is the time. Let me ask you this one question, JLA. Would you live in any of those countries and if so, why? What the liberals are doing to America is bringing her status down to the level of these other countries. Think they are wonderful countries? Want to live there? If not, why not? If so, why? I believe these are pertinent questions because I would like to understand the way the liberals think.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 4:47 pm
Please respond to this question (and it wasn't Kit):
Is every country in the world using a system that is actually worse than:
* 18,000 dying every year because of lack of health care * every 30 seconds someone filing for bankruptcy with 68% having insurance at the time. * 45.7 million (15% of the population) not covered * having the top health-care CEO making a 1.1 BILLION dollar bonus * Every citizen paying up to $4000 dollars more than the Eurozone.
Is this truly what you WANT for our country?

Kit B (276)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 5:17 pm

Huh oh, now you've done it J L - you asked a direct question. Diane does not or can not answer direct questions. I did bring up one of many European countries so that must be the limits of focus.

If we have such wonderful medical care in the United States, then "Why is infant mortality still a U.S. problem?" A serious problem, actually.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 5:31 pm
I know Kit and all the baby boomers are going to pay for concierge medicine with their net debt, too...I wish she'd teach me how that works and how hospitalization factors into it--wouldn't one still need insurance for the latter so you'd be paying twice when you already pay $4000 more than in the Eurozone?

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 5:33 pm
Not so fast, Kit, I have a response. The infant mortality rate can be directly attributed to illegal immigrants in our country. That can be googled. There are many reasons why Americans don't have health insurance either through their the companies they work for or through an insurance company. It comes down to personal choices...yes, once again. Healthcare must be a fixed expense in a family's expenditures. Many who don't have healthcare insurance don't have it because they've over extended their expenses because they want a house, a new red truck, a new flat screen TV and the healthcare insurance just isn't a priority. And let's do the math on this. Socialist countries take over 50% of their citizen's salary to pay for health insurance because they want everyone to pay for those who don't pay. We don't have that high tax rate in America. So, gain do the simple math. address those Americans below the poverty line....they can apply for medicaid to take care of their healthcare which is funded by the taxpayers. We allow illegal immigrants to go to our emergency rooms which drives up the cost of our taxpayer funded healthcare costs. Americans who do not have healthcare can also go to any emergency room and receive medical care.

Healthcare in America is not a right. Americans need to pay for healthcare insurance. We have the best medical care in the world and people from other countries come to the US for medical care. But we won't have the best healthcare for long because doctor's are leaving and our young people would be absolute fools to invest $300,000 in medical school to graduate and be paid $20.00 per visit by the government.

Soclaized medicine will impact the quality of healthcare in our country. Less doctors. Less surgeons. More Americans and physicians going to concierge medicine. We are a rich country. The majority of Americans can pay for better healthcare. Those who cannot can apply for medicaid at the taxpayer's expense. What works in other countries cannot work in America.

Diane O (194)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 5:42 pm
JLA, of course, Americans who can pay the annual fee for concierge medicine still need a health insurance carrier. They will pay a fee to their preferred physcian and pay the premiums to their healthcare carrier. What the liberals don't want to admit is that the majority of Americans are doing just fine financially. Do the research on that and find out which Americans are at the poverty line and WHY. Personal choices. A president in office who hasn't helped our country....killing jobs for the past four years and more to come over the next four years, tampering with the natural recovery of a deep recession prolonging it and now he intends to tax Americans 40% on their investments and their inheritance. Obama is not only stupid but he has a personal deep seeded agenda. He was and is an ordinary man who was way out of his league to be POTUS. his book "Dreams From My Father" which I know the liberals have not read. Don't want to spend the money? Go to a library and check it out. Obama tells you in his own words who he is. But, liberal thinking is like a smouldering fire and all they need is a bit of lighter fluid (Obama) to get them going. After all, Obama was a community "agitator" and he knows how to hoodwink people.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 5:56 pm
Net debt is not doing fine,,,the rest is similarly factually challenged at odds with all credible sources and valid data.

FactCheck: no: infant mortality problem not attributable to illegal immigrants
Leading Causes of Infant Death
Infant Mortality in the United States

From Angela Morrow, RN, former Guide

Updated July 27, 2009 Health's Disease and Condition content is reviewed by the Medical Review Board
See More About:

causes of death
infant mortality
pediatric hospice

The leading causes of infant death haven't changed in the last several years, despite advanced technology and increased focus on prenatal care. While most people would expect the rate of infant death to be decreasing rapidly, it has actually remained pretty stable since 2000.

The overall rate of infant mortality in the United States is 6.86 deaths per 1,000 births. This data from the CDC's (Center for Disease Control) National Center for Health Statistics is based on the latest statistics available from 2005.
1. Congenital Defects

Congenital defects, also known as birth defects, are problems that occur while a fetus is developing in the womb. Congenital defects can affect the way the body looks or functions and range from mild to severe.

Some defects, such as cleft lip or palate, can be easily fixed or treated. Other congenital defects may need life-long treatment to manage (Down syndrome, heart defects, and others). The most severe congenital defects prove fatal and lead to infant death.

In 2005, 5,571 infants died as a result of congenital defects.

4 Heart Attack Signswww.newsmax.comRight Before a Heart Attack You'll Feel These 4 Things.

Genital Warts Worries? Genital Warts Causes, Symptoms, Treatments & More. Stop Worrying.

Free Baby Samples &, Formula, Coupons and More· Save Today at!
2. Preterm Birth and Low Birth Weight
Preterm birth, also referred to as short gestation period, is a length of pregnancy less than 37 weeks.

Low birth weight is a weight at birth which is less than 2,500 grams (5 pounds, 8 ounces), regardless of the length of gestation.

In 2005, 4,698 infants died as a result of preterm birth or low birth weight.
3. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)
Sudden infant death syndrome is the unexplained, sudden death of infants under the age of 1 year old.

In 2005, 2,234 infants succumbed to SIDS.
4. Maternal Complications of Pregnancy

Maternal complications of pregnancy are problems that occur with the mother during the gestation period and include preeclampsia, placenta previa, and incompetent cervix among many others.

In 2005, 1,769 infants died as a result of maternal complications.
5. Complications of the Umbilical Cord, Placenta, and Membranes
The placenta is an organ inside the womb that supplies the fetus with the blood supply and nutrients necessary for survival.

The umbilical cord connects the mother with the growing fetus at the placenta. The umbilical cord brings oxygen and nutrients to the fetus and takes away waste such as carbon dioxide.

Umbilical cord and placenta complications accounted for 1,095 infant deaths in 2005.

The infant mortality rate for • non-Hispanic black women was 2.4 times the rate for non-Hispanic white women. Rates were also elevated for Puerto Rican and American Indian

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 6:04 pm
I guess the income/assets/financial health of baby boomers and facts related to infant mortality didn't warrant research because someone wanted to believe they knew when what they thought they knew were at odds with the facts and reality...most of my teachers called them myths and falsehoods.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 6:13 pm
Median earnings are under $50k in this country approx. one-third pays for future medicare, social security ant taxes...-16, insurance for one is $7,000 (no spouse or kids)...and housing is est. usually at 50% of utilities, no transportation, no food...and no concierge fees.

Dorothy N (63)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 7:30 pm
No reason why the same greedy corporate representatives that have been strangling the country and creating the 'fiscal cliff' issue should be allowed to drive Americans over it - especially if Americans make it very clear to Republicans that they're watching very closely who does/doesn't sign this...

Past Member (0)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 7:34 pm
"Yes, Carrie, VERY SMALL COUNTRIES, seem to do quite well with socialized medicine if you don't mind handing over more than 50% of your income to make it so."
Denmark is 50%. Minimum wage is $18.60. Ours is around $8.00. 50% of theirs is $9.60 They get education and health care and a fast track from minimum wage. What do we get, DIANE? Wars, a shadow government, the MIC and rapid loss of rights and hope.

Guess which one we like? Country size has nothing to do with what works. If 10 people can do 100 things a day, then 100 can do 1,000. Country size is just another lame lie.

I don't think Diane is Diane at all. I think she is Karl Rove or some other insane dude. Spending every entire day here, claiming to be hard working and high tax paying. Not every one is fooled by professional cons, Karl. All the crap you spend so much time on isn't going to have the effect you hope for. Defending the super greedy rich doesn't have any effect on how we view them. It only serves to inflame. Is that what a smart person does? Poke the stick until there's war? No. It's most foolish. Do you think we don't know who your goons are?

Margery Coffey (8)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 9:07 pm
The Republicans lost. They don't get to have things their way. Time to move out of the 19th century. Let's go we have a lot of lost time to make up.

Mary Donnelly (47)
Sunday December 2, 2012, 9:33 pm
Thanks Carrie. Great post, greater comments.

For your info. Australia is the sixth largest country by land area; 52nd by population; 12th largest by GDP.

Myron S (70)
Monday December 3, 2012, 5:57 am
To those who question whether Pelosi donates "sufficiently" to charities: John 7:53 et seq. Do not justify your own hard heart by speculation about others.

Nancy M (169)
Monday December 3, 2012, 6:15 am
"There are many reasons why Americans don't have health insurance either through their the companies they work for or through an insurance company. It comes down to personal choices...yes, once again."

Yes, on minimum wage no lesss, do we pay the 1000 per month for rent for the family, or buy the food to feed them, or the insurance to insure them, or the car to get to work.

Choices. It's all about choices.

Carlene V (202)
Monday December 3, 2012, 6:27 am
I hope Peloso does it. It is apparent that Boehner is hamstrung by the tea baggers who are still intent on voting aginst their own best interest. Wait until they want SS or Medicare benefits, they'll change their tune rather quickly. Boehner will go down as the worst Speaker in our history as will the Congress he really can't control. My hope is that in the next election some of the newbies who are busily thumping their bibles about abortion, same sex marriage, women's rights, disputing where Obama was born, etc.will get voted out of office so our country can continue to rebuild itself from 8 long years of the Bush/Cheney Administration.

Carlene V (202)
Monday December 3, 2012, 6:29 am
Oops, typo, I meant Pelosi

Shirley B (5)
Monday December 3, 2012, 10:21 am
Hate tio intrude on what seems like a private argument but, I cannot wait till Boehner has to hand that gavel back to Nancy. Common good sense for the "Majority of the People's common good" should prevail. Hope they have enough tissues for that day!

JL A (281)
Monday December 3, 2012, 12:59 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Shirley because you have done so within the last week.

Shirley B (5)
Monday December 3, 2012, 1:56 pm
Thank you for the thought J.L.A. . I cannot send stars because of some kind of vetting thing. Don't know how to get around that but, many of you deserve them.

faith v (16)
Monday December 3, 2012, 2:12 pm
Good for Ms Pelosi.
High time somebody found a way to make the US system work for citizens under the millionaire mark.

Tom Edgar (56)
Monday December 3, 2012, 3:43 pm
Dianne O You don't even blush when you LIE in support of your Fascist like propaganda to denigrate anything but the extreme right fundy G O P. "Socialist countries take over %50 of the income for health care" As there are no really "Socialist" countries just some that have socially responsible Governments, all who claim (spuriously) to be Democratic. do not tax at %50 total let alone just for health. In my own country the top income taxation is around thirty per cent , on taxable income after deduction allowances, and that only kicks in after the taxable income is well into the six figure mark. G S T (Federal sales tax) is only %10 on manufactured goods, which is about average for many of your State and City sales taxes alone.

You may be able to quote verifiable facts to support your bigoted viewpoint, but up to this point I haven't seen evidence that I would consider reasonable from your perspective, sometimes I even wonder if you are but a troll trying to stir up people such as I.

Tom Edgar (56)
Monday December 3, 2012, 4:23 pm
Not wishing to rake over old ground but put yourself into my shoes but transport it to a situation in the U S A

Living on a State Pension in my eighties, owning without debts my own small property. My son contracted cancer whilst living with me, which stopped him from working so he received the "Disability Pension." Operations and chemo were a constant for the next seven years, this entailed 200 mile bus trips to the Capital for medical attention not available in the "Bush" sometimes it was for out patient treatment meaning a stay in a motel, everything was paid for by the "Health Care" system. In his last stages he was hospitalised in the "Palliative Care " wing of our local hospital where I maintained a nightly vigil with a trundle bed and breakfast supplied to me. I then collapsed with a heart attack and was promptly and efficiently cared for. Flown to Brisbane, had open heart surgery and during my recovery period my son died. I was then transported back to the local hospital, by transport supplied by the City Hospital. I am out of pocket not a single cent. I haven't had to raise a loan on my home, and the resultant lack of stress in that area is a contributing factor for regaining heath. One of the lack of health care in the U S A's biggest problems is stress related premature deaths after medical attention. Well not true that I didn't lose a cent. I did buy the biggest box of American Whitefield's chocolates for the local hospital nurses.

We in Australia have a common saying when asked "Ow Yer going mate?" the answer often enough is........... " No bloody worries cobber". Which rather sums up the Social Justice/Welfare aspect. "No Worries"..

Your obsession on Socialism/Communism is rather pathetic. There never has been such a system actually practised, just as there never has been a Democratic country, yours included. Bot systems basically have the same ideological approach. Government for, of, and by the people. I know of not a single country that allows input into the governing or direction taken by their country by the people. Sometimes Switzerland and the Scandinavians allow a referendum on major policy changes, but generally what is considered "Democracy" is allowing the people to vote in, just as often, gerrymandered, and manipulated elections. That is NOT Democracy. Even Hitler was elected into power by popular vote, not even the Pope can claim that.


Kit B (276)
Monday December 3, 2012, 6:57 pm
Thanks Tom for that enlightening information.

Wrong again Diane - you just might want to check out the facts before writing out your comments, not my word but from the Center for Disease Control:

Data from the Linked Birth/Infant Death Data Set and Preliminary Mortality Data File, National Vital Statistics System

**The U.S. infant mortality rate did not decline from 2000 to 2005.

**Data from the preliminary mortality file suggest a 2% decline in the infant mortality rate from 2005 to 2006.

**The U.S. infant mortality rate is higher than those in most other developed countries, and the gap between the U.S. infant mortality rate and the rates for the countries with the lowest infant mortality appears to be widening.

**The infant mortality rate for non-Hispanic black women was 2.4 times the rate for non-Hispanic white women. Rates were also elevated for Puerto Rican and American Indian or Alaska Native women.

** Increases in preterm birth and preterm-related infant mortality account for much of the lack of decline in the United States’ infant mortality rate from 2000 to 2005.

Infant mortality is one of the most important indicators of the health of a nation, as it is associated with a variety of factors such as maternal health, quality and access to medical care, socioeconomic conditions, and public health practices. The U.S. infant mortality rate generally declined throughout the 20th century. In 1900, the U.S. infant mortality rate was approximately 100 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, while in 2000, the rate was 6.89 infant deaths per 1,000 live births. However, the U.S. infant mortality rate did not decline significantly from 2000 to 2005, which has generated concern among researchers and policy makers.


Past Member (0)
Friday December 7, 2012, 2:52 pm

I don't think Diane is Diane at all. I think she is Karl Rove or some other insane dude.

Annnd Fin.

Tom C Sullivan (98)
Friday December 7, 2012, 8:28 pm

Alexandra Rodda (180)
Saturday December 8, 2012, 4:20 am
Please folks, ignore Diane O.
"She", despite the nice photo, is probably a bloke sitting in some "Americans for Prosperity" office, typing away, earning her/his salary. If we all ignore her, she'll have to get a more productive job. Maybe she/he can go ad work on a production line in some Chinese factory.

Diane O (194)
Saturday December 8, 2012, 7:04 am
"She" would be a hard working grandmother of four working forty hours a week dumping every dime I can into 401k and other investments. I am a very concerned American about the future of my country. Like you, I am here to share my opinions the same as you share yours.

Anexandra, your personal attacks define who you are. They never bother me and I won't return them in kind because quite frankly I don't take the low road like the rest of you. I believe in your freedom of speech and if I don't agree with what you've posted I usually laugh and respond. Liberals are like attack dogs on Care 2 when they read a different point of view from their own.


Diane O (194)
Saturday December 8, 2012, 7:06 am
typo on your name....Alexandra...

Jane H (139)
Saturday December 8, 2012, 11:03 am
Hooray for Nancy!!!

Yulan Lawson (156)
Saturday December 8, 2012, 3:05 pm
Why does it have to come down to these people in the system when everyone is saying they don't want any of this yet we vote these people in? The system has turned backwards on itself because of greed and money.

Robert K (31)
Saturday December 8, 2012, 10:40 pm
Oh Diane, your ignorance is running rampant again. Liberals and moderates don't "hate" the rich, but they do despise those who try to buy the elections and screw the people by outsourcing the jobs. You wingnuts bow down and kiss the asses of the rich ones who are out to destroy you and everyone else not in their privileged group.

68% of the top 1% agree that their taxes should be raised. Those are the rich we don't "hate." Those are the ones who care about America. You and your kind may think you care about America, but clearly you hate for it to be a democracy, you worship oligarchy, a brainless stance. The things you back can all be found in Somalia. Please go there, you would find it to be paradise.

BTW, at the beginning of the drought that eventually ended in the destruction of that knighted country a buddy of mine was there with the UN helping to feed the people, and he found the people to be quite wonderful in the main. Circumstances have made the country a right wing dream. No regulation, weak central government, etc.

federico bortoletto (47)
Sunday December 9, 2012, 6:03 am

JL A (281)
Sunday December 9, 2012, 7:18 am
You cannot currently send a star to Robert because you have done so within the last week.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 9, 2012, 8:39 am
IMO we should all feel sorry for and pity anyone still believing in and relying on 401k plans:

A Brief History Of: The 401(k)
By Alyssa Fetini Thursday, Oct. 16, 2008


Steven Puetzer / Getty


Follow @TIME

Forget about rescuing banks or unfreezing credit markets. The question on most minds amid the recent market chaos: What does this mean for my 401(k)? With some $3 trillion invested, these plans are the most popular retirement-savings vehicle in the U.S.--and account for a big chunk of the $2 trillion the crisis has wiped from American nest eggs.

The 401(k) plan--named for a section of the Internal Revenue Code--came about thanks to a 1978 congressional provision intended to offer taxpayers breaks on deferred income. In 1980, while trying to streamline a client's profit-sharing plan, benefits consultant Ted Benna realized that the code could be used to create an easy, tax-friendly vehicle for employees to save for retirement. The client passed, but the idea took off: there are now more than 65 million 401(k) accounts, which allow participants to invest in stocks and bonds, often with matching funds from employers--all at a lower cost than the pension plans that 401(k)s replaced. The accounts helped spark a financial-industry boom, funneling billions from under retirement savers' mattresses into mutual funds and the stock market.

But 401(k)s didn't yield smarter investors. In the 1990s, employees at some fast-growing companies kept up to 90% of their 401(k)s in company stock. When Enron and WorldCom tanked in 2001 and '02, they each took more than $800 million in savings with them, prompting landmark lawsuits. The current meltdown has skimmed about 20% from 401(k)s since 2007 and ignited debate over their retirement-income reliability. "Unlike Wall Street executives, American families don't have a golden parachute to fall back on," said California Representative George Miller at an Oct. 7 hearing on retirement savings. At least they still have mattresses.

Read more:,9171,1851124,00.html#ixzz2EZce01iI

Nancy M (169)
Sunday December 9, 2012, 8:52 am
I always thought that 401ks were created so that companies no longer had to pay pensions.

It is true, not everyone can be a good investor, esepcially when the only thing you are allowed is company stock. Nobody should put essential money- money that is required for a specific purpose, like retirement, inot the stock market.

JL A (281)
Sunday December 9, 2012, 10:07 am
You've got it Nancy--and to make more of middle class funds available to Wall Street where people would have to leave it there because of the penalties--companies no longer had to take responsibility or related expenses for protecting the retirement investments or meet any criteria on their contributions, if any, for their employees.

Nancy M (169)
Sunday December 9, 2012, 10:15 am
And they have played with our money like it was a Monopoly game. And they have lost it. And they expect to be rewarded for it.

Truly disgusting.

Tim P (48)
Monday December 31, 2012, 4:52 pm
I have a group and petition on links below. This petition of mine could also go into being about the fiscal cliff. Let’s have confidence and faith in the petitions. My petition needs 1,000 signatures in total. Let’s not be or act selfish towards one another. We could all share this group and petition with people we know. Here are the links below. Please sign the petition if you haven’t.

Reshaping the World

This petition is also on this link below…
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.