What Is Clark's Health Care Plan? Economic Recovery?

[DrFunkenstein]

Since Clark appears to be jumping in the pool, can any Clark supporters point me to his actual policies. I know that he is at least vaguely liberal, and was against the war (what's his position on the IWR vote?), but what are his actual plans for promoting jobs and health care coverage? What about corporate malfeasance? How does he plan to reverse the deficit?

Basically, I have lots of questions and am more than willing to check out the answers. Thanks guys!

[Dob Bole]

1. Don't know.

These are good questions, and I hope they'll be answered soon. Here are my plans:

Economic Recovery:
Defeat George Bush

Health Care:
Defeat George Bush

Environment:
Defeat George Bush

Supreme Court:
Defeat George Bush

[Pepperbelly]

2. I hope he doesn't advance a health care plan ...

because the plans are all frauds.

There simply IS no money for it. Bonehead and his crew have so devestated the fiscal house that if we can avoid defaulting on our bonds, it will be a miracle. As far as economics, I am so ready to hear what Wesley has to say on the matter because he is perhaps the single most economically qualified person to ever run for the office.

[DrFunkenstein]

3. Uh Wha?

All the health care plans are frauds and Clark is single most economically qualified?

I asked a legitimate question, and I hope the answers get a little more specific than that. Honestly, I'm not even sure what you mean, really.

[Pepperbelly]

6. ok ...

Re: health care plans ... Have you noticed that we are experiencing a half-trillion dollar a year budget deficit? You realize that means that the US government is spending a half a trillion dollars a year more than it is taking in. Where in the world do you see any money at all for extending health care bennies? Until that is dealt with, there simply isn't any money for anything at all. The very first thing that has to be done is to get hold of that and at the very least reduce it or it will be questionable whether the country will be able to not default on our bonds. There simply is no money.

Re: Economics ... Wesley is an Oxford trained economist. I suppose that one can pooh-pooh that fact but it is silly to do so. His economic credentials are such that he was a professor of economics at West Point and, if he chose, could do the same virtually anywhere. What other candidate have we ever seen with that sort of economic credentials?

[DrFunkenstein]

7. Thank You

At least I learned that Clark studied economics at Oxford. I don't buy your health care description, though. The other candidates have put it into their budget proposals.

[Pepperbelly]

9. many a slip between the cup and the lip ...

What they put in their plans will not work. Nobody realized exactly how badly Bush would devestate the government. Remember this, the babyboomers start retiring in 2010 and since Bonehead has done his damage, I do not see room for anything else.

Actually, nothing worthwhile will happen at all in health care until we go to a single-payer plan somewhat like that advanced by Kucinich but politically, i can't see that making it through Congress. The rest of the plans are smoke and mirrors until the gorilla sitting in the middle of the living room is put back in the cage.

on edit: maybe I am just too pessimistic.

[xray s]

12. It requires leadership

"Actually, nothing worthwhile will happen at all in health care until we go to a single-payer plan somewhat like that advanced by Kucinich but politically, i can't see that making it through Congress."

I think it can make it through Congress.

Employers, the medical profession and unemployed Americans are being crushed by the current system. The political tide is turning.

A lot of the money is there, but too much goes into paying for a bureaucratic mess of administration and paperwork, marketing and management salaries. Switching to Medicare for all would save administration costs. The rest of the money has to come from reordering priorities. Tax cuts for the top 1% and pursuing global PNAC fantasies vs taking care of business at home.

It will take a leader to get it done. Someone who will face down the right-wing barage and explain the benefits directly to the American people. Maybe it will be in steps, but I do not want to see our candidate throw in the towel because of the current political climate. Then work to change the damn political climate.

I do not think that is too much to ask. We have too much at stake.

[Pepperbelly]

13. I appreciate what you are saying and in ...

my post noted that is the only system that would actually work. However, I think you are too optimistic about Congress doing what is best for people rather than what is best for their donors. I remember when Bill tried to do some substantial work on health care and the Democrats, after being pressured by the parasites dining so well on the medical care system, folded like craven, greedy shitheads and joined the gops in defeating the plan.

I don't think that much has changed since then except they are even worse.

[Bread and Circus]

18. Funk....

Pepperbelly has a point. We have to get an
economic house in order before promising
on things we may not be able to deliver.

Anyway, give Clark some time. I expect his
announcement will be tomorrow and his plan
will be laid out within weeks thereafter.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. Good point... OH WAIT

HE HASN'T EVEN ANNOUNCED HE'S RUNNING YET! Give the man a break for god's sake, many politicians emerge talking about one issue and then later decide on a platform.

[dontpanic]

5. Clarke Issues

Try this link to find out more about Clarke's probable plateform. It's not in-depth, but it's a start.
http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/on_the_issues.htm

[DrFunkenstein]

8. Health Care and Economics

Like you said - it's thin, but its a start.

Health Care and Education: Clark is a strong supporter of a social safety net, including effective and well-supported systems of education and health care:

"I grew up in an armed forces that treated everyone as a valued member of the team. Everyone got healthcare, and the army cared about the education of everyone's family members. It wasn't the attitude that you find in some places, where people are fending for themselves and the safety net doesn't work." (Source: Waging Modern War)

Taxes and the Economy: Clark favors a responsible and progressive taxation system that creates jobs and doesn’t put this country into ruinous financial shape with gaping deficits. Clark, who at one point taught economics at West Point, was against Bush’s tax changes because they don’t effectively create jobs, they are unfair, and they imperil our nation’s fiscal health.

“Taxes are something that you want to have as little of as possible, but you need as much revenue as necessary to meet people’s needs for services.” Meet The Press

“The Bush tax changes were not efficient in terms of stimulating the kind of demand we need to move the economy back into a recovery mode, a strong recovery and a recovery that provides jobs.” Meet The Press

“The tax cuts weren’t fair… the people that need the money and deserve the money are the people who are paying less, not the people who are paying more. I thought this country was founded on a principle of progressive taxation.

In other words, it’s not only that the more you make, the more you give, but proportionately more because when you don’t have very much money, you need to spend it on the necessities of life. When you have more money, you have room for the luxuries and you should—one of the luxuries and one of the privileges we enjoy is living in this great country.” Meet The Press

“I mean, you look at the long-run health of the country and the size of the deficit that we’ve incurred and a substantial part of that deficit is result of the tax cuts. You have to ask: “Is this wise, long-run policy?” I think the answer is no.” Meet The Press

[Donna Zen]

11. filling in some gaps

On jobs...because will have gone beyond the limits set by the Full Employment Act, he has said he will fund both the job training mechanism and the provision that provides incentives to small and medium size businesses. He's sees those as the growth sectors. Because he has said many times that the tax-cut policy is not productive under its current configuration, it would follow that the money would be shifted away from the 1% currently receiving 40% of that money.

Pepperbelly! I was pleased to hear your take on the health care. Nevertheless, I see Clark finding the money for children and drugs for the elderly.

And yes, accept that they are all lying to you about these healthcare plans. The country, that's us, will be at least 600 billion in the red and that's just what we see. What we don't see are private contracts and appropriations that are run off the books. The actual debt is closer to a trillion. We are now going to have to start printing our way out of this which will mean inflation.

Clark has said that as startling as it may seem, we have no actual economic plan in America. Nada. A Clark presidency will get you one.

Secondly, he has said that true healthcare reform will take many years. He does say we need to start today if we are to get there. That is why I believe that children and the elderly will come first.

[union_maid]

15. Okay, but..

He's got to have some kind of healtcare plan. That's a major concern for most people who'd consider voting Democrat. I agree that the only viable plan is a singlepayer plan, but the situation now is dismal for too many people. Yes, there's a huge deficit, but healthcare is a major vulnerability for the Republicans. If Clark's plan is to continue with the status quo, it's going to hurt him a lot.

[waldenx]

10. none of them have a plan

They all just say that things will magically improve.

[phegger]

14. Try this:

http://www.theconnection.org/shows/2003/09/20030908_b_main.asp

Some discussion about economics, no health care sorry--but gives you a pretty good sense of where the guy is coming from.



-ph :smoke:

[Donna Zen]

16. To underscore PB's point:

Did anyone catch Paul Krugman on Charlie Rose? A recap of a very important point:

Currently the amount of the Fed. Budget is 20% of GDP

After the junta tax cut, the money coming in is 16% GDP

Krugman said even with some growth GDP...probably offset by normal and unavoidable increases in spending growth, there is NOTHING on the horizon to alter this negative number. The deficits are endless. He said: Think Argentina. (If you disagree...please take it up with P. Krugman PHD in economics, or W K Clark masters in economics and an investment banker. I am but a lowly messenger,)

Now some things can be done, and this has been pointed out by both Krugman and Clark, the debt spending (tax cut) can be made into a more capital efficient configuration. Some money needs to be put into state revenue sharing and some money needs to spur small and midsized companies. But right now, and into a very scarey future, we are headed off a monetary cliff.

Yes...I hope to see proposals from Clark that would put in place the beginnings of meaningful healthcare reform...but along with PB I am counting on the steps as being doable and not some pie in the sky program that ignores the current grim forecast.

[lanlady]

17. Why are you asking us?

Won't Clark be addressing those issues in the coming weeks, after he declares?

[rman]

19. well, he's a four star general.

what else do you want?