NLIC.org

Philip Said:

What do you think about Obama's Stances?

We Answered:

1) Tax Cuts: For right now, raising taxes is necessary. The reason our economy is in a mess is because the dollar's value dropped so precipitously. That is directly related to the National Debt; which got that high because of how Bush borrowed money to fund the Iraq War when he was unwilling to raise taxes.

Since later you say that you want to stay in Iraq (there are logical reasons for doing so), we either have to raise the money to pay for it or we will continue to deal with a failing economy (and eventual depression).

If you want lower taxes, we have to cut spending. And the honest fact is where most of our money is going is to this war in Iraq. The Iraq War is costing us more money than every entitlement program the Democrats push combined. So if you want lower taxes AND a good economy, the war will have to go. That, or we raise taxes to maintain the economy above depression. Or we combine both (get out of the war and raise taxes), and we pay off the National Debt and actually fix the economy entirely.

After we have paid off the National Debt, we then lower taxes on everyone and keep spending down. I believe in Conservative fiscal ideas, but they are not what is called for right now.

We have to raise taxes to fix what Bush did in spending; then cut them later to keep it fixed.

2) I partially agree with you on the Energy Plan. But what history has taught me is that if you allow the oil companies to get more to drill (they actually have 68 million acres in the continental US already and aren't drilling any of it), they will do so. But then they will fight every attempt to move on to a new energy source (since it costs them money), and they have the money to convince our politicians to stop any attempt to move to other energy sources.

In essence, if we give them the ability to drill in ANWR and further in the Gulf of Mexico, they will take it and then prevent any move to break off of oil. We won't do anything about the problem for at least 7-10 years; and then we will get the same problem again in less than 30 years (closer to 20 years).

We suck it up now or we suck it up in 20 years. Up to you which one you want; but if we suck it up now the sooner we can get off of oil and stop providing money to terrorists.


3) Universal Health Care. I really don't see how your point works out where its less profitable to become a doctor. Perhaps explaining that further (and I am completely serious on that, not making fun); its possible, but I don't see how.

What I do see is why the cost of health care is so high. The truth is that there are two major problems. One, there are poor who can't afford health insurance, but the law still requires they be taken care of. This drives up the cost when they don't pay.

The other cause of the high rise is health insurance companies themselves. They are a business; they don't make money if they always have to pay out money. Because of this, they fight paying every chance they get. This is especially true on big ticket items like heart attacks, strokes, and longterm care for cancer sufferers or the aging.

They know how long it takes to get court action on lawsuits, so they are willing to take a chance on getting sued. They know most people cannot wait it out because they need money now. So they refuse to pay. Well, the hospital already did the work and the lab tests and treatments and so on; and they need to be paid, so they go to the patient when the health insurance company bails.

Well, the patient thought they were covered, so they don't have the money to cover things like heart attacks or cancer. So they also skip out on the bill; and the hospital is stuck. They have to try to make it up somewhere, so they do so by sticking it to other patients in the form of higher costs on labs and treatments and so on.

So both those who are too poor to be insured and those who thought they were covered are screwed under our current system. Both problems are fixed under a Universal Health Care System.


4) I more or less agree with you on immigration. I disagree that if you get rid of the "jobs for illegals," that they'll stop coming. What will happen is that they will try to find new ways to get past it; and they have been rather successful so far in doing so.

I have a different plan for ending illegal immigration. But so far every attempt I've made to get it out and see how people like it shows that almost no one supports it. It will work, but apprarently people don't want to deal with the situation anymore and won't wait for how long it will take to work.

Every plan (including yours) will never end the problem altogether. Your plan has the best chance of limiting it, but it won't end the problem. My plan has a very good chance of ending the problem, but it will take at least 10 years and probably 20 years before it does.

I realize that no one would support my plan anyway, so I've decided to abandon trying to spread the idea. But know that your plan will not end the problem as you believe it will; nor will McCain's or Obama's. Your's has the most effectiveness of the three, though. So I'd agree with yours if those three were my choices.




5) Iraq: For the record, there were no terrorists in Iraq before we went in. Saddam Hussein kept them out. Not because he was a good guy; it was more jealousy.

Hussein relished his reputation as the man who had stood up to the US. Of course, that rep starts to pale when compared to those who not only stood up to the US, but actually attacked back. Basically, Hussein didn't want to be outshone by Osama bin Laden; so he kept them out.

He also did not have weapons of mass destruction. And that idea that he took them into Syria is bunk. Saddam Hussein was Sunni, Syria is mostly Shiite. They would not help him in the least. Saddam Hussein didn't have any, and we know because he had no where to send them (unless he sent them to Saudi Arabia--who would have told us if only to get further on our good sides and make more money off of us).

However, that is the past. And while they weren't there before, al Qaeda is in Iraq now. So there is logic to staying and kicking them back out. But as I said in the opening subject (taxes), if you believe we should stay in Iraq, we must raise the taxes to pay for it.

That, or we will have to deal with a weak economy (and possible depression).

And one must point out that Obama doesn't want to stop fighting the terrorists entirely. He just wants out of Iraq, he wants to stay in Afghanistan (where Osama bin Laden is). There is a pretty good chance we still won't have to fight them here; because we will be fighting them in Afghanistan. We'll just have better luck finding Osama bin Laden if we are in the same country he's in...

That's up to you to decide if the Iraq War is worth higher taxes OR a weak economy. But we will have to suffer one or the other if we stick with the Iraq war.

Jessie Said:

Size of a kidney stone?

We Answered:

Stones with sizes lower than six mm pass all on their own through the urine. Stones of 5-7 mm have a 50 per cent chance of passing spontaneously. One or more stones can be in the kidney or ureter at the same time. Stones are also removed using cystoscopy or ureteoscopy or percutaneous surgery.



http://1-bestreview.net78.net/kidneyremo…

Vera Said:

help with assisgment?

We Answered:

6 completely unrelated questions here and another 6 is another post? You don't want help, you want us to do your homework for you.

I can't speak for others, but I'm here to help people understand, not to help them avoid understanding for themselves.

Neil Said:

typical consulting rate versus salary?

We Answered:

The consulting rate should be 1.07 times your wage.

It sounds like you're getting confused about what's your wage and what's not. You increase your wage to take account of holidays, sick leave etc, then you multiply whatever you give to yourself by 1.07 and give the extra 7% to things unrelated to your own wage, i.e. things that your employer would normally provide for the company as a whole.

Dustin Said:

How do you turn a non-union job into a union job?

We Answered:

I am not a union member but can give you a starting point:

Many intercity and local transit bus drivers are members of the Amalgamated Transit Union.
http://www.atu.org/

Some drivers belong to the United Transportation Union
http://www.utu.org/
or to the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
http://www.teamster.org/

So contact one (or all) of them, and tell them you are interesting in unionizing. I imagine they'd be happy to hear from you.