15 votes
I disagreeMany other countries have banned its use. We should too. Look it up for your self, there is a high risk to health that it causes. General info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A
If not banned it should at least require a label, so it can be avoided.
1 vote
I disagreeSince the middle of the 20th Century, the United States has become a largely suburban nation with massive road networks dependent on auto transport. This infrastructure creates a series of problems: 1) Ongoing needs for enormous investments in road construction and maintenance 2) Tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths, plus many more injuries 3) Billions of dollars in lost productivity from time that workers spend ...more »
Since the middle of the 20th Century, the United States has become a largely suburban nation with massive road networks dependent on auto transport.
This infrastructure creates a series of problems:
1) Ongoing needs for enormous investments in road construction and maintenance
2) Tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths, plus many more injuries
3) Billions of dollars in lost productivity from time that workers spend sitting in traffic
4) Health problems from automotive exhaust and from the stress of driving
5) Social/family problems caused by the stress and time requirements of long commutes
6) National security and trade imbalance issues related to the import of huge amounts of oil to satisfy the gasoline needs of our automobiles.
Attempts to solve these problems have thus far proved largely ineffective. Repairing and expanding the current road system will have massive costs both in the short-term (construction) and in the long-run (maintenance). Creating a high-speed rail network is both technically challenging and extraordinarily expensive - a national vanity project.
It is encouraging to note the development of electric and hybrid cars. These hold some promise of reducing gasoline usage (although people may simply drive more if gas mileage improves), but they cannot solve the other issues around transportation infrastructure and congestion.
I believe that *part* of the solution should include government promotion of bicycling efforts. This Bicycle Promotion Program (BPP) could include several components:
1) Studies of existing bike path networks and bike share programs, particularly in Europe and Asia, but also in US cities like Portland, Oregon and Davis, California. These studies could identify best practices and distribute standards that would save various US cities from the problems of a trial-and-error approach.
2) Funds to build bike paths and bikeways in US cities and towns. The cost of building bike paths is a tiny fraction of the cost of building rail systems or highways. The cost of maintaining these systems is also tiny compared to the cost of maintaining and running road and rail networks.
3) Tax credits to encourage the purchase of bicycles, particularly electric-assist bicycles which can extend the range and terrain over which a person can feasibly commute or exercise.
4) Grants for bicycle-related research - i.e. materials that would make bicycles lighter or lengthen the battery life of electric-assist bicycles.
« less full details »
-3 votes
I disagreeAmericorp workers by and large are students working to help pay for school. Americorp by and large does really good work. Giving health care benefits to these students is least a start to covering some of the uninsured. Because young people generally have few serious problems, the cost would actually be pretty minimal.
-42 votes
I disagreeIf you had a choice between being an American citizen or being a citizen of Heaven, which would you choose? For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; Philippians 3:20 I am choosing being a citizen of Heaven since Obama and his team is taking America straight to world citizenship, and then straight to hell. Citizen of Heaven = Thumbs up Citizen of America ...more »
If you had a choice between being an American citizen or being a citizen of Heaven, which would you choose?
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; Philippians 3:20
I am choosing being a citizen of Heaven since Obama and his team is taking America straight to world citizenship, and then straight to hell.
Citizen of Heaven = Thumbs up
Citizen of America = Thumbs down
« less full details »
-18 votes
I disagree"You will know a tree by it's fruit." Matthew 7:16 The Obama Tree is a black Oak. The leaves protect the tree from the light of truth. The bark is hard and callus to prevent transparency. The fruit is the ACORN, to reproduce itself again and again. The roots of deception go deep into the American soil. By David Craig Mastrianni © 2009 Toalterorabolish.com Please help me report any copying of the ...more »
"You will know a tree by it's fruit." Matthew 7:16
The Obama Tree is a black Oak.
The leaves protect the tree from the light of truth.
The bark is hard and callus to prevent transparency.
The fruit is the ACORN, to reproduce itself again and again.
The roots of deception go deep into the American soil.
By David Craig Mastrianni
© 2009 Toalterorabolish.com
Please help me report any copying of the original literary works by David Craig Mastrianni. Visit www.toalterorabolish.com or www.elegalplan.com and contact us.
« less full details »
-27 votes
I disagreeOrgan donations should be held in total transparency and regarded as a high honor in this nation. An organ donor should be publicly honored or at least mentioned as a heroic citizen that has saved others' lives with their bodily sacrifice. Total transparency should take place with the organ donation process: Where the organ came from, who donated it, and to whom it is assigned to. The recipient and the donor's families ...more »
Organ donations should be held in total transparency and regarded as a high honor in this nation. An organ donor should be publicly honored or at least mentioned as a heroic citizen that has saved others' lives with their bodily sacrifice.
Total transparency should take place with the organ donation process: Where the organ came from, who donated it, and to whom it is assigned to. The recipient and the donor's families should be able to know exactly where the organs went and from where they came.
Next or in obituaries should read of the organ donations and where they went.
« less full details »
-43 votes
I disagreeInstead of bailing out banks and auto industry why doesn't the government set up a government health insurance business and offer that to people in the US... Instead of insurance companies profiting from us, why not set up a self insurance program for Americans? This would be the only thing that I would nationalize if I was Obama!
107 votes
I disagreeIn the spirit of transparency and accountability, the national health care debate must include an open and honest analysis of Single-Payer Health Care. We need a thorough analysis of Single-Payer and how it would affect the quality and costs of our health care system, compared to other proposals being discussed. In 2003, Barack Obama stated: "I happen to be a proponent of a Single-Payer universal health care plan. We ...more »
In the spirit of transparency and accountability, the national health care debate must include an open and honest analysis of Single-Payer Health Care. We need a thorough analysis of Single-Payer and how it would affect the quality and costs of our health care system, compared to other proposals being discussed.
In 2003, Barack Obama stated: "I happen to be a proponent of a Single-Payer universal health care plan. We may not get there immediately, because first we've got to take back the White House, and we've got to take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House."
Source: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/watch2.html
But today, now that "we" have in fact taken over the White House, Senate, and House, Single-Payer advocates are being shut out of the discussion. Only two Single-Payer advocates were invited (reluctantly) to the recent White House forums on health care reform, and they were not allowed to speak. The recent Senate Finance Committee hearings chaired by Senator Baucus did not include *any* representative for Single-Payer, and advocates who attended this hearing were arrested.
Congressman John Conyers supports Single-Payer, and his bill HR 676 has 93 co-sponsors. Bernie Sanders has introduced his own Single-Payer bill, S 703, in the Senate. Polls have shown that many Americans, including doctors and nurses, support Single-Payer health care.
Nurse Donna Smith describes Single-Payer as public financing and private delivery, combined "together in one system that takes out the waste and the abuse that's really happening, which is where all the money goes into the health insurance. Up to 30 percent of the [current health care] costs have nothing to do with health care at all and everything to do with fueling the health insurance [companies]."
Source: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/watch.html
« less full details »
170 votes
I disagreeOur banking system is a privately-owned, for-profit enterprise based on fraud. It is owned and run by the international banking cartel because congress passed a law in 1913 (the Federal Reserve Act) creating the FED (a privately owned bank) and legalizing/granting a monopoly on the creation of money to the private banker owners via the FED. Uh-oh. That's bad because it requires the US gov't to BORROW money AT INTEREST ...more »
Our banking system is a privately-owned, for-profit enterprise based on fraud. It is owned and run by the international banking cartel because congress passed a law in 1913 (the Federal Reserve Act) creating the FED (a privately owned bank) and legalizing/granting a monopoly on the creation of money to the private banker owners via the FED.
Uh-oh. That's bad because it requires the US gov't to BORROW money AT INTEREST for government projects and operations from the FED and incurs an ever-increasing federal debt. Simply put, this is an economically and ecologically unsustainable system. It is an enormous monopoly game whose endgame, where the bankers have all the money, property and control and everyone else is broke, is what we are experiencing now. Our fraudulent banking system is at the root of our current economic meltdown. The interest on the debts has grown so large that the citizens and the country simply cannot pay anymore. Current government actions, the bailout and other schemes put forth by (guess who) bankers are aimed at propping up the current system as long as possible, instead of actually reforming banking so that it works for everyone.
WHAT WE SHOULD DO:
• Repeal the Federal Reserve Act and make debt-free treasury money the legal tender of the realm.
If the government can write a check, they can issue money--it's all done with the stroke of a key these days...
This would break the bankers' monopoly and the stranglehold they have on the US economy.
• Pay off the federal debt to the FED with all the worthless Federal reserve notes traded in for US Treasury Notes.
This would retire the debt and we would no longer need to spend our tax money paying interest on it.
• Create Treasury banks to lend to businesses and individuals, using the interest on those loans to fund gov't
operations and projects that enhance the well-being of the nation, -- education, research, infrastructure, etc.
• Form an Monetary Committee to oversee all banking activites including sales of deriviatives and draft
Ellen Brown, J.D., author of "The Web Of Debt and What We Can Do To Break Free" to oversee the
implementation of the 3 suggestions above.
I admit, I have only scratched the surface of these issues. These suggestions may not be the full answer to our woes but taking these steps would go along way toward straightening out our banking system and building a healthy and sustainable economy. An excellent analysis of how banking really works and affects all of us can be found at www.webofdebt.com, Other resources include the videos/films "From Freedom to Facism", "Money As Debt" --if you can still find it on the internet. It has been banned from google video and is expected to be removed from YouTube soon. And the video/film "The Money Masters".
All right, I am going to put WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT here too.
It seems like the why part doesn't get shown in the idea once it is submitted. If you see it twice, I apologize.
This idea is important because it would restore oversight and control of the money supply to the government on behalf of the people of this country. It would allow us to pay off and retire the federal debt, paying it off with all those traded in worthless federal reserve notes. It would provide competition for private banks, breaking the bankers' monopoly of money creation and their stranglehold on our government through the creation of recessions/depressions by manipulation of the availability of credit. Were the government to lend debt-free treasury money to businesses and individuals, interest on such loans could be used to fund government operations instead of taxes or to fund infrastructure, education, health care for everyone and other programs for the common good instead of being shoveled out of the economy into the pockets of private bankers. It would solve the "credit crunch". If the government decided it was time to make loans available there would be no bankers in between saying "Sorry! We're gonna use the bailout money to buy up other banks."
And I notice there is no category for ideas about banking. Why the hell not? We're in a depression for chrissakes! We SHOULD do something to fix the system.
« less full details »
46 votes
I disagreeIn the past, people paid health care providers directly. Then some companies got in the middle between the patients and the providers and "handled the money". I don't call this a healthcare system. I see no reason for there to be any middlemen (or middle companies) involved in healthcare. This is not like auto or home insurance where some people will never use it. Health care is something that every person will ...more »
In the past, people paid health care providers directly. Then some companies got in the middle between the patients and the providers and "handled the money". I don't call this a healthcare system.
I see no reason for there to be any middlemen (or middle companies) involved in healthcare. This is not like auto or home insurance where some people will never use it. Health care is something that every person will use sooner or later (although some use it more).
What we need is negotiated fair prices for all health-related services. There would be no "health insurance companies" making profits off of sick people. The government already provides health care "insurance" to its workers (elected officials) and to the poor and retired (MediCal or MedicAid), it should really provide services to all who desire them. Certainly, wealthy people may still obtain services however they desire.
« less full details »
84 votes
I disagreePLEASE, IF YOU VOTE THIS STRATEGY UP THEN PLEASE SIGN THESE PETITIONS LISTED ON THIS PAGE. IF YOU DON'T SIGN THE PETITIONS THEN YOU DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS STRATEGY. TELL OTHERS TO SIGN THE PETITION. EACH SIGNATURE APPEARS A VOTE FOR SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE, RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE, EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT, AND THE WOMEN'S FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT. Congress and the President must enact S 703 single payer universal ...more »
PLEASE, IF YOU VOTE THIS STRATEGY UP THEN PLEASE SIGN THESE PETITIONS LISTED ON THIS PAGE. IF YOU DON'T SIGN THE PETITIONS THEN YOU DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS STRATEGY. TELL OTHERS TO SIGN THE PETITION. EACH SIGNATURE APPEARS A VOTE FOR SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE, RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE, EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT, AND THE WOMEN'S FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT.
Congress and the President must
enact S 703 single payer universal
health care and set up a new
prescription drug benefit in
Medicare Part B covering 80% of the
cost of all drugs with no extra
monthly premiums, no extra yearly
deductible, no means tests, no
coverage gaps, and remove the means
test for Medicare Part B and until
that happens, I refuse to buy ANYTHING
from Republican contributor Rite Aid
Pharmacies and American Express
Corporation, 2 contributors to
conservative officeholders in the GOP
and the Democratic Party.
I have seen and spoke to a lot of well meaning Democrats wanting to make change in Washington and they issue petitions that do not include a boycott of the friends of those who would block progressive action and legislation. Such Democrats unnecessarily tie their left hand behind their backs. I urge people to consider boycotting the friends of those conservatives in congress in order to force them to sit up and take notice and capitulate to our demands. In our country money appears an important factor in getting action done. We need to go on a purchasing strike against the friends of regressives in order to force them to cooperate with us. It appears peaceful and legal in an atmosphere of legalized bribery in congress. We need to take back control over our purchases and how the profits get spent especially how they get used for legalized bribery in congress. We indirectly fund conservatives in congress through our purchases. We need to set conditions for our purchases through targeted boycotts.
If you don't like a particular TV program, you call their sponsors and tell them you will boycott them until the program either goes off the air or changes to your liking. This works similar with political parties, politicians and their sponsors (campaign contributors).
If you have a blog please post this on your blog. I want to get at least 100,000 people to sign these petitions, the first one which you can demand single payer health care and a fix to the Medicare prescription drug benefit.
Doctors and nurses, please get those who see you for medical treatment to sign this petition and also tell them not to do business with Republican contributor Rite Aid Pharmacies. If a person cannot stop buying medications from Rite Aid then at least tell them to not buy consumer items from Rite Aid Pharmacies. The person can still sign the petition.
Since Senator Baucus still blocks any notion of enacting S 703, if you will, please in your personal comments indicate that you will also boycott one of his contributors American Express Corporation. The main target remains Rite Aid Pharmacies. The petition letter does go to Senator Baucus too, so he will get the message.
May I ask you for a favor? Can you get 1 new person to sign this petition each week? I hope you can do this. If every person gets just 1 new person to sign this each week, we can double the amount of signers every week. Thank you for signing this petition.
I have included the email address for the Rite Aid Board of directors as a recipient of your email too.
COPY AND PASTE THESE URLS AS I COULD NOT CREATE LINKS IN THIS MESSAGE. THANK YOU.
Sign the petition at
and the email will go out right away to GOP minority leaders and to Rite Aid Corporation.
After you sign this petition sign these too.
HTTP://BIT.LY/single_payer_baucus
which you can petition Max Baucus for S 703 and his campaign contributor American Express Corporation who gave him over $50,000 for his campaigns for senate.
Also sign these petitions.
HTTP://BIT.LY/10_an_hour_min_wage
HTTP://BIT.LY/norm_coleman_concede
HTTP://BIT.LY/women_freedom_of_choice_act
IMPORTANT NOTE: To encourage people to recruit others to sign this petition, just click on the Invite friends button on that page and you can send this to other people by their email or by other social networks. The top recruiters appear on this page.
So please get as many people to sign these petitions. Thank you.
« less full details »
86 votes
I disagreeOverconsumption of sugary soft drinks is a major contributor to obesity and related health issues, and is hence a big cause of out-of-control health care costs. A moderate tax on sugary soft drinks, and the elimination of the corn subsidies that make high-fructose corn syrup calories so cheap, will steer consumers to healthier alternatives. This is traditionally called a "sin tax". Similarly, while most Americans agree ...more »
Overconsumption of sugary soft drinks is a major contributor to obesity and related health issues, and is hence a big cause of out-of-control health care costs. A moderate tax on sugary soft drinks, and the elimination of the corn subsidies that make high-fructose corn syrup calories so cheap, will steer consumers to healthier alternatives. This is traditionally called a "sin tax".
Similarly, while most Americans agree that marijuana consumption is not desirable, it is very clear that the costs of prohibition greatly outweigh the benefits. Legalizing and taxing marijuana will provide needed revenue for improving our health care system, and at the same time free up law enforcement to focus on more serious problems and relieve some of the strain on our prison system.
« less full details »
Copyright © 2013 IdeaScaleFeedback Software
| Widget | IdeaScale Privacy Policy
Powered by IdeaScale
Social Web