193 posts
Personally, I think the fact that people are going to get healthcare anyway more than justifies the fines in the healthcare act. I would have been happier with a single-payer system, but then the Republicans would be calling it socialism. I think they're doing that anyway, even though this is an entirely private-market healthcare solution. Now, when you go to the friggin emergency room and the taxpayers bail you out, at least we've collected some meager amount of money from you.
Is it going to bankrupt businesses or the country? Fuck no, that's just stupid. Do you realize that healthcare costs for businesses have been skyrocketing anyway? There was already a "mandate" on most large businesses as it was... for example, in Silicon Valley, if you are a tech company, there is no fucking way you're going to be able to hire anyone unless you have competitive benefits. Since I've been here, healthcare costs to my company more than doubled, before the healthcare law was even signed! At least the healthcare law now mandates that 80% of spending by an insurance plan has to be on healthcare. That's a good fucking start.
Anyway, you know that the healthcare law was basically designed by Mitt Romney, right?
Gotta admit, though, that Mitt can really stick his foot way deep in his mouth. The difference between a Mitt gaffe and a GWB gaffe? Mitt looks like he totally knows what he's saying when he says it, with real confidence. GWB always looked puzzled that he was even there.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/mitt-romney-blames-press-overseas-controversies/story?id=16894680#.UBgJrbSe6sg
Hookbender — Jul 31, 2012So your against the healthcare thing? You think Romney is right on for trying to get rid of it? And you agree that it's bad for the economy? Business, and to costly?
I think it's the plan the Heritage Foundation came up with and Mitt implemented.
Bad for the economy? What's bad for the economy is the shrinking of the middle class. Less buying in a consumer society means bad economy. Economy is money and resources moving around. Money that moves up and stops hurts the economy. Money that moves up and goes off shore doesn't help this country at all.
I am in favor of single payer, a tax based system. We have a double for profit system where profits rule pricing and care. We haven't stressed medicine as a profession, here, for a long time. We needed to start talking and working on this problem. It's shameful we haven't sooner.
Wait.... your a fox news watcher? What the hell. Your accusing me of that, yet your the one actually watching fox???? Wow.
You don't read what I write, do you? I have said over and over that I look at as many sides as I can, FOX being one of them. FOX is often more interesting in what it doesn't say. The things it ignores entirely for as long as it can...
I'm still reading the healthcare thing so I can't really give you what seems to be the worst element of the healthcare law. I don't think businesses should be forced to carry insurance on their employees or be fined, if that's actually the case. And I don't think the cost of insurance has been addressed in this thing, nor the problem with law suits that doctors have to take in consideration. That's just me spouting shit that may not be true. I'm still reading the thing.
Let me know what you find.
Hookbender — Jul 31, 2012nd I don't think the cost of insurance has been addressed in this thing, nor the problem with law suits that doctors have to take in consideration. That's just me spouting shit that may not be true. I'm still reading the thing.
Wouldn't the fact that insurers have to pay out 80% of their revenue as actual medical spending reduce costs?
And come on, law suits, seriously? Could you drink any more Kool-Aid? That's the ONE thing Republicans proposed to fix healthcare. Tort reform. You know why? Because Republicans get more money from the health care industry, and big pharma, then they do from lawyers. Bottom line. If you are grievously injured by poor medical care, wouldn't you want the freedom to sue the bastard who ruined your life? I have examples from my own life where this was totally justified, and not hardly enough.
So how much do these frivolous lawsuits cost? Uh, would you believe less than 2%? Would you believe... 3 tenths of a percent? Is that going to make insurance suddenly cheaper?
http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/justice/hs.xsl/8686.htm
Other authorities have also found that the direct costs associated with medical negligence are a tiny fraction of health care costs. According to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), the total amount of money spent defending claims and compensating victims of medical negligence in 2010 was $5.8 billion, or just 0.3 percent of the $2.6 trillion spent on health care in the U.S. that same year.
"Other authorities have also found that the direct costs associated with medical negligence are a tiny fraction of health care costs. According to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), the total amount of money spent defending claims and compensating victims of medical negligence in 2010 was $5.8 billion, or just 0.3 percent of the $2.6 trillion spent on health care in the U.S. that same year."
See. I have a problem with that kind of mentality. Just .03 percent of the 2.6 trillion spent. It was "only" $5.8 billion. Only $5.8 billion damn dollars???? Only?
There's a huge problem, I mean fucking gigantic, when anyone looks at 5.8 billion dollars as trivial in any situation.
Our government is very good at this kind of thinking and look at our debt now.
Not talking about Obama in the above statements. Talking about government as a whole.
Hookbender — Aug 02, 2012"Other authorities have also found that the direct costs associated with medical negligence are a tiny fraction of health care costs. According to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), the total amount of money spent defending claims and compensating victims of medical negligence in 2010 was $5.8 billion, or just 0.3 percent of the $2.6 trillion spent on health care in the U.S. that same year."
See. I have a problem with that kind of mentality. Just .03 percent of the 2.6 trillion spent. It was "only" $5.8 billion. Only $5.8 billion damn dollars???? Only?
There's a huge problem, I mean fucking gigantic, when anyone looks at 5.8 billion dollars as trivial in any situation.
Our government is very good at this kind of thinking and look at our debt now.
Not talking about Obama in the above statements. Talking about government as a whole.
I don't think that's much at all. If you can say in your field that you lose only .03% of your money over the course of doing business, you're doing pretty fucking good. In retail, shrinkage runs 1.5%. That's 1.5% of your money and goods that just disappears between the order and the accounting, usually stolen, or incorrectly charged, etc. And I'd damn well bet that if you run a gas station, you lose far more than .03% of your fuel to evaporation and leakage.
And remember--there are a lot of legitimate cases of medical errors and malpractice. In my own experience, my wife's best friend had a baby, there were complications, and the doctor should have done an emergency C-section. Instead he watched as the the kid went through serious distress, culminating with several minutes without oxygen and a child born with cerebral palsy. The hospital paid out $2 million in a trust for his care, which has been used for the last 17 years to provide the kid with things like wheelchairs, aides, and special programs to try to enable him to develop autonomy and be able to live on his own (and if you ask me, it's not nearly enough, he'll be in care for the rest of his life and the money runs out when he turns 18). Shit happens. That it only costs the medical system .03% is actually pretty amazing.
Good point. I'm sorry to hear about your friends child. I wish them the best!
I just get so pissed when government talks about cutting spending and the conversation goes pretty much like the medical example you gave. As far as government goes, you have to start somewhere. I'm just glad I'm not in politics or the medical field.
Why can't these two ignorant fucks, Romney and Obama, talk about their plans for the future rather than attack each other? Makes me think neither of them have a clue. >:(
Hookbender — Aug 07, 2012Why can't these two ignorant fucks, Romney and Obama, talk about their plans for the future rather than attack each other? Makes me think neither of them have a clue. >:(
+1.
Right now I think both guys have 46% of the vote, solid. We're going to spend the next 3+ months watching these two candidates spend somewhere close to $1 billion to get another 4%. That means winning daily news cycles, dominating social media, jumping on every single misquote, tearing down the other guy. For three more months.
I think Obama should start bragging about keeping America safe for 4 years. ;D Worked for Bush. ;D
Romney picks Ryan. Thats a win.
Hookbender — Aug 11, 2012Romney picks Ryan. Thats a win.
Oh I disagree. First of all, vp doesn't win or lose he election. Even Sarah Palin didn't lose it for McCain, he did that himself. Second, Ryan is a policy wonk whose big achievement is proposing a budget that guts everything people like. Third, when's the last time a ticket won with a house rep in the veep slot? And 4th, no matter how good he looks Romney is still an out of touch walking gaffe waiting to happen. Look for two rounds of improved polls after this, then back to he usual. It's Obama's race to lose right now.
charger — Aug 12, 2012[quote author=Hookbender link=1342042977/100#110 date=1344720354]Romney picks Ryan. Thats a win.
Oh I disagree. First of all, vp doesn't win or lose he election. Even Sarah Palin didn't lose it for McCain, he did that himself. Second, Ryan is a policy wonk whose big achievement is proposing a budget that guts everything people like. Third, when's the last time a ticket won with a house rep in the veep slot? And 4th, no matter how good he looks Romney is still an out of touch walking gaffe waiting to happen. Look for two rounds of improved polls after this, then back to he usual. It's Obama's race to lose right now.
McCain had that small crack in the door slammed shut because of Palin.
Ryan shows that Romney will address our debt. No way will we be 4 years into his term with no budget. His pick will make him look lagit about addressing our debt. Obama will get crucified about the lack of a budget down the road. That's coming.
If Romney and Ryan stick to talking about the economy, budget, and debt, they win. Obama has failed on all those points and he said himself, if the economy doesn't improve, he's a one term President.
The economy has improved, radically. You keep talking about how crappy it is, I'm not seeing it what I am seeing is that if we dont focus on education it will continue to get worse -- forever. Why?
What's the unemployment rate? 8.3%? Know what the unemployment rate is for college graduates? Under 4%. For People without a high school degree? Something like 13%. Our economy has plenty of jobs for educated people but there are less and less jobs for the undereducated. Those people used to work in factories. Those factories are now in china. You seem to think its the governments job to make jobs? But the government is chopping them. The private sector has shitloads of them... For educated people. In fact job openings are at a high for something like the last 5 years right now. There are massive openings. If you have a degree.
So what do you think? Are people at all responsible for their plight? Or is it obama forcing them not to complete school? Does Romney have a plan for education, especially higher education??
charger — Aug 12, 2012The economy has improved, radically. You keep talking about how crappy it is, I'm not seeing it what I am seeing is that if we dont focus on education it will continue to get worse -- forever. Why?
What's the unemployment rate? 8.3%? Know what the unemployment rate is for college graduates? Under 4%. For People without a high school degree? Something like 13%. Our economy has plenty of jobs for educated people but there are less and less jobs for the undereducated. Those people used to work in factories. Those factories are now in china. You seem to think its the governments job to make jobs? But the government is chopping them. The private sector has shitloads of them... For educated people. In fact job openings are at a high for something like the last 5 years right now. There are massive openings. If you have a degree.
So what do you think? Are people at all responsible for their plight? Or is it obama forcing them not to complete school? Does Romney have a plan for education, especially higher education??
The economy may have gotten better, but at a very slow pace. At a pace that doesn't justify the stimulus spent. At a pace Obama himself knows isn't enough.
If the unemployment rate is 8.3%, how can we have people without diplomas at 13% and college grads at 4%? Who the fuck else are you counting Willis?
When did I say it was governments responsibility to provide jobs? Show me. The government should be chopping jobs. And I hope that continues until I say stop, which could take a lifetime by the way.
Forget what Romney has a plan for, show me the improvement Obama has made in education in 3.5 years. Has he made it easier to get one? Has he reduced the cost? we need massive improvement in what people pay for their college education. A kids parent making 1 million a year should pay more for his education that a kid who's parents make 50k a year, for example. And, factories need to make it's way back home. Slowly, but steady moving. Forget raising taxes, just get the factories home and that will fix most of it. (Debt)
If you don't have a highschool education it's your own fault 99% of the time. It's fucking free. It's 20k to 50k a year at Walmart in time. For free.
Hookbender — Aug 13, 2012
The economy may have gotten better, but at a very slow pace. At a pace that doesn't justify the stimulus spent. At a pace Obama himself knows isn't enough.
You have no way to prove or disprove how fast the economy should or would get better under any president. At this point, if you read the news at all, you know that it's a friggin miracle we haven't collapsed considering how bad the European crisis is. We're fucking adding jobs and reducing unemployment even with the rest of the world in crisis. It's a near miracle.
If the unemployment rate is 8.3%, how can we have people without diplomas at 13% and college grads at 4%? Who the fuck else are you counting Willis?
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm/
What, you think I make this shit up? If you have a college degree, you have a 1 in 25 chance of not having a job. 4.1%. Also, you have a 72% chance of both participating in the labor market, and having a job. For high school dropouts? Only 40% participate in the workforce AND have jobs... out of 46% total who are even in the labor market. For a high school graduate, it's 8.7% unemployment. Some college, 7.1% unemployment. By far, the number one factor that determines how likely you are to have a job -- is your level of education.
When did I say it was governments responsibility to provide jobs? Show me. The government should be chopping jobs. And I hope that continues until I say stop, which could take a lifetime by the way.
They are chopping jobs. You keep saying Obama is not creating jobs. Dude, Obama does not create jobs except in government. You know who did that really well? Bush. He added Homeland Security and shitloads of jobs. To. The. Government.
Now Obama's chopping them... and you're crying about unemployment.
Forget what Romney has a plan for,
Well that's not hard to do, since his plan is just undo whatever Obama did!
we need massive improvement in what people pay for their college education. A kids parent making 1 million a year should pay more for his education that a kid who's parents make 50k a year, for example.
WAIT....
You think RICH people should pay more than poor people?
I think you're voting for the wrong guy.
And, factories need to make it's way back home. Slowly, but steady moving. Forget raising taxes, just get the factories home and that will fix most of it.
This is not going to happen. It's just not. Factories have left. those jobs aren't coming back. In fact you yourself thought we should let millions of factory jobs in the car industry go a couple years ago. Most low-paying repetitive assembly jobs have left, and they are not coming back. Those people who can only do that type of job are screwed. They need to go back to school. And we need to be graduating a shitload of engineers and thinkers from colleges, not pushing this anti-intellectual bullshit.
And more info:
Job openings in the U.S. rose in June to the highest level in four years, indicating employment gains may accelerate in the second half of the year.
The number of positions waiting to be filled climbed by 105,000 to 3.76 million, the most since July 2008, from a revised 3.66 million the prior month, the Labor Department said today in Washington. Hiring and firings cooled.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-07/job-openings-in-the-u-dot-s-dot-increased-in-june-hiring-dropped
There are 3 and 3/4 MILLION jobs out there looking to be filled.
Also, the highest unemployment in the US ever? 10.8%, in, wait for it... 1982. Right smack dab in the middle of Reagan's first term. Did that guy get reelected?
Ahhh Ryan, the smiling boy... Isn't he one o' doze career pols who keeps coming back year after year?
Fascinating read... Romney having trouble finding economists who agree with him about how Obama ruined everything.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/08/economists-to-romney-campaign-thats-not-what-our-research-says/
Paul Ryan is a really stupid choice if Romney wants to win over independents. Like, monster stupid.
I've known about this guy for a while. Seems like a reasonably nice fella, much nicer than Mitt Romney - but he's a "true believer". He only thinks his ideas will work to fix the economy, and there are VERY FEW economists who think his ideas will do anything but tank the economy and make things worse. Plus, he has very little actual experience, especially with anything international, and no success in getting his Randian (as in, free market fundamentalist Ayn Rand-inspired) budget ideas passed, because he has almost never compromised on anything. He'd be a useless if not fundamentally divisive figure as president of the Senate (part of the VP's role, Constitutionally).
Plus he has sided with social conservatives on MANY if not MOST issues, and the majority of those are viewed as anti-woman, so he's seen as a member of the crusaders in the "War On Women", trying to drive those rights back 45 years. No woman except a very religious one is going to vote for the Romney/Ryan ticket, and most women independents are not very religious.
Like I said before, he seems like a nice enough guy, but he's not ready to be president, and he's got really horrible ideas about how to fix our economy.
I really hope the country's not stupid enough to elect this ticket, because if you think the Bush years were bad for foreign and domestic policy, just wait...it can get SO MUCH WORSE.
Tripper
Ryan's not going to help the ticket... He's good looking, able to speak to crowds, no foreign policy experience, ridiculous ideas about monetary policy, ultra conservative, tea party favorite. Sound familiar? He's Sarah Palin without the screechy voice and the gaffes. He's going to energize really conservative people and the tea party, but ultimately I think this was a fail by Romney. He already had the conservative vote. Instead of just confirming that, he should have gone center and picked someone who would tell independents and out-of-love Democrats that Romney is okay for them, he's a nice guy who can compromise and make the country work again. Instead he picked a guy who is as far to the right as Michelle Bachmann? A guy who wrote up a budget plan that cuts everyone's taxes, but mostly rich guys, rewrites Medicare as to make it useless, and completely guts Medicaid? Some pundits call this a gutsy choice. I call this the ultimate marginalizing pick for Romney. Of all the choices he had, he completely blew it. I think Romney just guaranteed an Obama win.
Interesting views. In the end, the lack of a budget and lack of even an attempt to address the debt will sink Obama's chances, imo.
On the other hand, I just listened to Biden in North Carolina and I just have to like this guy. He just has a good blue collar way of speaking to people. He's like one of the guys, not some fancy pants lying fucker like a lot of politicians come across. I think he did an excellent job in NC. Straight talk, kinda.
I can't wait for the debates. It could be some of the best we've had in some time. Hopefully, it will press them all to offer up plans going forward for our country and quit beating the hell out of each other with bullshit.
It is funny watching the pubs reel. Chicken minus head comes to mind...
Hookbender — Aug 15, 2012Interesting views. In the end, the lack of a budget and lack of even an attempt to address the debt will sink Obama's chances, imo.
I think you're just about the only one who cares whether there is actually a budget or not. Addressing the debt is another story, and if people cared about that as much as Paul Ryan (or Rand Paul for that matter), then Romney would be a shoe-in. People care about jobs and the economy. The Republicans give us no plan at all for either... in fact, at every turn they've been actively trying to sink the economy so Obama would fail. Yet, the economy presses on. Their plan for jobs is tax cuts. When's the last time a tax cut hired someone? If the rich just needed money to hire, they would be hiring. We have lower taxes now than we have since the Great Depression. The Republican plan is to use magic, I think.
I agree on Joe Biden. He's the only blue collar guy in the race and he's the only one of all these guys I'd want to spend any time with (in fact I'm sure Michelle Obama would be way more fun than the pres).
Wait till you see a Paul Ryan speech. It's like watching a talking head on Fox News crossed with a calculator.
Going with Ryan only solidified how out of touch with reality Romney is for me. I used to be a die hard conservative.....now I just get to watch my party die hard.
What's with all the (false) outrage Romney's showing over the other side, umm, campaigning against him? Isn't this the pot calling the kettle black? No one will have more money spent in negative ads in a single election cycle than Romney. He's dragging Obama all through the shit, misquoting or selectively quoting him all over the place, and he's crying about the tone of the campaign? It's not a fucking Bain Capital mixer, it's an election.
Alright now. Back the fuck up. Obama is spewing a load of shit himself. Doing the same damn thing. Now, continue with something worth reading.
This is gonna be a ugly mess. No way to make a decision on who to vote for unless you get off your ass and off TV and actually do research on your own. Otherwise, someone else will be voting for you.
I'm voting against Obama care myself. Something you guys convinced me was better than what we had. Not so sure thats the truth. Especially since it was sold to us based on lies. And the lack of a budget or attempt to address the debt. There has to be sacrifice in some areas on this issue. It's way serious and our President hasn't fucking addressed it yet in 3.5 years. He's out in my book.
Fenderbender — Aug 15, 2012Going with Ryan only solidified how out of touch with reality Romney is for me. I used to be a die hard conservative.....now I just get to watch my party die hard.
Your party has left the building years ago. It will never be the same. But, neither will the other side.
Hookbender — Aug 16, 2012[quote author=Fenderbender link=1342042977/100#124 date=1345049584]Going with Ryan only solidified how out of touch with reality Romney is for me. I used to be a die hard conservative.....now I just get to watch my party die hard.
Your party has left the building years ago. It will never be the same. But, neither will the other side.
I have no party now. Nothing I see is worth seeing in government. They are all full of shit and worthless to me. I'm waiting for the sleeping giant to wake up and revolt and burn the palaces.
I don't either. I like a little each party does, and hate a lot both party doesn't do.
I thought the Occupy movement would be that sleeping giant. They should have waited a year and started their protests this summer, instead of starting them in the fall of last year, in NYC...
I think the Republican party is so far right that it no longer represents this country. But I also think the Democrats have moved right with them, and are now so centrist... there are no liberals left. Our system is out of whack.
I think that even if you vote against Obamacare, you still probably like almost everything in it if you were asked. What will the Pubs replace it with? Are you looking forward to returning to health costs rising 15-20% a year?
charger — Aug 17, 2012I thought the Occupy movement would be that sleeping giant. They should have waited a year and started their protests this summer, instead of starting them in the fall of last year, in NYC...
I think the Republican party is so far right that it no longer represents this country. But I also think the Democrats have moved right with them, and are now so centrist... there are no liberals left. Our system is out of whack.
I think that even if you vote against Obamacare, you still probably like almost everything in it if you were asked. What will the Pubs replace it with? Are you looking forward to returning to health costs rising 15-20% a year?
Peaceful protests simply won't get the job done. People can't quit their jobs for months on end to protest. I think something a bit more revolutionary is needed. I'm so disgusted at government and it inability to do anything. No one really wants to take a stance.
I was proud of Obama for taking a stance, but highly disappointed at his inability to care out the plan. I for one like the idea of Obamacare. I'm tired of watching my premiums soar. I get a yearly raise and my insurance gets one too. It's counterproductive.
I'd much rather see my money go to things that are worthwhile. Making sure our people are taken care of when they are sick is highly worthwhile.
I live like Randy right now. Most of the stuff doesn't really affect me. But I have relatives that ave had terrible medical issues and they are retired and cannot afford healthcare or they simply cannot afford the medicine they need. It's outrageous to claim we are the greatest country in the world and we cannot even see fit to take care of those of us that cannot take care of themselves.
Now before Hooky gets it twisted....I'm not for handing out shit to be handing it out. If you need it, you should be able to have it. You shouldn't have to worry about the cost.
When you have situations were you have a pre-existing medical condition, you have to stay at your job because if you don't.....when you switch jobs you can't get insured because of the pre-existing BS. That's crap.
Burn the palaces I say. Let the people take it back over instead of rich people that are simply title seeking.
This country does an awful lot to foster those few who are very very rich, but at what cost?
Is health care a right? I think it is, yes. If everyone cannot get health care (and in our country that means INSURANCE), then we fail. Even if we have lots of really fantastically successful rich people. And that's why I still think Obamacare is going to look better and better over time, and it will get refined and improved over time. Look, Mitt Romney's not going to overturn Obamacare. All the Democrats need is 40 senators to completely obstruct Congress (as the Republicans proved for the last 4 years) and it's doubtful the Republicans will even have a simple majority.
And before you call me socialist because I believe healthcare is a right, think about it. What do you think should happen to people who are sick in this country if they don't have, can't get, or can't afford insurance? Unless you believe they should be left to be sick without doctors or hospitals or health care, you are as socialist as I am.
charger — Aug 17, 2012I thought the Occupy movement would be that sleeping giant. They should have waited a year and started their protests this summer, instead of starting them in the fall of last year, in NYC...
I think the Republican party is so far right that it no longer represents this country. But I also think the Democrats have moved right with them, and are now so centrist... there are no liberals left. Our system is out of whack.
I think that even if you vote against Obamacare, you still probably like almost everything in it if you were asked. What will the Pubs replace it with? Are you looking forward to returning to health costs rising 15-20% a year?
Some stuff in Obamacare is spot on. Like the lifetime limit that goes away, not being able to drop a sick person or turn a person down because of any reason, really. Stuff like that is great. But government is involved, thats the scarry part. You think rising cost is bad now, just wait my friend. But your right, I do like a lot of the stuff.
charger — Aug 17, 2012This country does an awful lot to foster those few who are very very rich, but at what cost?
Is health care a right? I think it is, yes. If everyone cannot get health care (and in our country that means INSURANCE), then we fail. Even if we have lots of really fantastically successful rich people. And that's why I still think Obamacare is going to look better and better over time, and it will get refined and improved over time. Look, Mitt Romney's not going to overturn Obamacare. All the Democrats need is 40 senators to completely obstruct Congress (as the Republicans proved for the last 4 years) and it's doubtful the Republicans will even have a simple majority.
And before you call me socialist because I believe healthcare is a right, think about it. What do you think should happen to people who are sick in this country if they don't have, can't get, or can't afford insurance? Unless you believe they should be left to be sick without doctors or hospitals or health care, you are as socialist as I am.
Wow. Already bragging about dems obstructing congress. Something you bitch about with repubs constantly. No wonder out countries at a stalemate half the time.
I don't think your a socialist at all. I understand why you like Obamacare. I also know if it were the repubs that lied and manipulated America to get this passed, you'd be pretty much against it.
Fixing healthcare is something we all agree needs to be addressed. But those good things in Obamacare could be implemented without all the bullshit in the law.
Hookbender — Aug 18, 2012I don't think your a socialist at all. I understand why you like Obamacare. I also know if it were the repubs that lied and manipulated America to get this passed, you'd be pretty much against it.
Fixing healthcare is something we all agree needs to be addressed. But those good things in Obamacare could be implemented without all the bullshit in the law.
Two things that would be nice to see here:
1. Evidence that anyone lied to get the Affordable Care Act passed.
2. Evidence of what you call "bullshit" in the law.
I find it amusing that you're siding with the folks that lied us into WAR over the folks who you SAY lied us into healthcare reform (even though you've provided no evidence that anyone lied about it).
Tripper
Tripper — Aug 19, 2012[quote author=Hookbender link=1342042977/125#134 date=1345313242]I don't think your a socialist at all. I understand why you like Obamacare. I also know if it were the repubs that lied and manipulated America to get this passed, you'd be pretty much against it.
Fixing healthcare is something we all agree needs to be addressed. But those good things in Obamacare could be implemented without all the bullshit in the law.
Two things that would be nice to see here:
1. Evidence that anyone lied to get the Affordable Care Act passed.
2. Evidence of what you call "bullshit" in the law.
I find it amusing that you're siding with the folks that lied us into WAR over the folks who you SAY lied us into healthcare reform (even though you've provided no evidence that anyone lied about it).
Tripper
First, it was passed before most people even had the opportunity to read it.
Second, Obama said that obamacare wasn't a tax increase and it was just decided that the thing is. Obama said that his term would be open, but this law was not ever exposed to us before it was passed.
The bullshit, without going into detail, is that government is involved. Never a good thing. The cost of this is pretty much a unknown. It was said it would cost X, but history shows us that government hasn't run anything very well. The cost will go up. It will be more. Health care cost go up almost every year, the cost of this will go up as well. Why would it not?
Tax
http://factcheck.org/2012/06/how-much-is-the-obamacare-tax/
Hookbender — Aug 19, 2012[quote author=Tripper link=1342042977/125#135 date=1345345556][quote author=Hookbender link=1342042977/125#134 date=1345313242]I don't think your a socialist at all. I understand why you like Obamacare. I also know if it were the repubs that lied and manipulated America to get this passed, you'd be pretty much against it.
Fixing healthcare is something we all agree needs to be addressed. But those good things in Obamacare could be implemented without all the bullshit in the law.
Two things that would be nice to see here:
1. Evidence that anyone lied to get the Affordable Care Act passed.
2. Evidence of what you call "bullshit" in the law.
I find it amusing that you're siding with the folks that lied us into WAR over the folks who you SAY lied us into healthcare reform (even though you've provided no evidence that anyone lied about it).
Tripper
First, it was passed before most people even had the opportunity to read it.
Which is on the individuals who voted without reading. That's not lying to pass a bill. Nice try.
Second, Obama said that obamacare wasn't a tax increase and it was just decided that the thing is. Obama said that his term would be open, but this law was not ever exposed to us before it was passed.
Because Obama didn't draft the law or have anything to do with it except tell the leaders in Congress what he wanted to see. And it WAS made public multiple times in its many iterations, and the GOP kept lying about the provisions being discussed. This was all over the news in 2009. Where were you?
The bullshit, without going into detail, is that government is involved. Never a good thing.
NEVER a good thing? Hoover Dam? Interstate Highway System? Police? Fire? Military? Holy shit are you wrong on that...
The cost of this is pretty much a unknown. It was said it would cost X, but history shows us that government hasn't run anything very well.
The government only runs things poorly when things aren't staffed and funded properly and there isn't proper oversight. Otherwise, it's a fucking champ. The Republicans have been doing EVERYTHING THEY CAN to prove government is the enemy, and that includes fucking with the government itself to make it seem more inefficient.
The cost will go up. It will be more. Health care cost go up almost every year, the cost of this will go up as well. Why would it not?
This is the only criticism I have of the ACA - there should have been more extensive price controls in there. Of course, if you had read the bill and understood what you were reading, you'd know that there ARE cost controls that force insurance companies to keep premiums down, to reduce fraud in medicare and other programs (that's where that lie that Romney and Ryan are throwing out there about $700 million dollars in cuts to Medicare comes from), and to increase competition (which helps lower premiums).
When the fuck did you become so intellectually incurious as to just repeat the same horseshit people like Neal Boortz are saying?
Tax
http://factcheck.org/2012/06/how-much-is-the-obamacare-tax/
That is a tax PENALTY that ONLY GOES TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T BUY INSURANCE. Not everyone in the country. So it will affect maybe 1% of people (since it also only goes to people who CAN afford insurance but refuse to buy it).
Like I said, same GOP bullshit talking points. You really need to work up those critical thinking skills again...your arguments are pathetic these days.
Tripper
Trip
Nope. No, no, no. Don't give me that bullshit criticism as if your so much more intelligent than anyone. Stick that up your ass.
And this sugarcoated liberal slanted view you have shines through again. If your gonna ignore the facts of the matter thats fine. I really don't care. Your entire post is pretty much bullshit.
Hookbender — Aug 20, 2012Trip
Nope. No, no, no. Don't give me that bullshit criticism as if your so much more intelligent than anyone. Stick that up your ass.
And this sugarcoated liberal slanted view you have shines through again. If your gonna ignore the facts of the matter thats fine. I really don't care. Your entire post is pretty much bullshit.
How do you figure? HE countered everything you said. Agreed with you once. And your argument has enough holes to sink a ship.
Are you an ostrich? You just gonna ignore what he says or are you going to prove him wrong? IF you prove him wrong....then you look like the hero. IF your argument is "Nuh-huh", well you're not really making any head way and it shows how programmed you really are.
I'm not making an argument. I made a simple statement which implied that healthcare could have been improved by making some of the same changes Obama has without creating this huge government program in which not even all government was allowed to read much less the people it will effect, before it was passed. It was sold as not being a tax and Obama himself said it wasn't but the courts ruled it was a tax. That is a lie. Healthcare cost continue to rise every year and I find it hard to believe the cost of this program won't do the same, especially since it's taking on many more people. So, that tax will, speculation on my part, will also rise. Obama said he would have a open presidency, where every thing could be viewed by the public, remember???? Why wasn't this? That also is a lie.
This statement and the one in question is my opinion, but I see no holes in my opinion. It wasn't stated as researched fact in a argument.
I'm against the healthcare law Obama passed because the good points of the law could have been implemented without creating a shit load of government intervention in healthcare. A law thats thousands of pages. If Obamacare can be changed in the future, as far as making it better, then we could have changed the current system to make it better..... without all this other bullshit added to the law. Example, making businesses pay a fine for not insuring employees, and other, smaller, businesses get credits for insuring.... fucking confusing shit to me. Will the small businesses get fined as well for not insuring it's people? Why not? Why? Its bullshit. Political horseshit. It could be way more easily understood and simple.
There's a difference in being involved in a discussion and ripping apart a statement someone makes and just jumping in from no where and picking apart a statement someone makes. It's fine to do whatever Trip wants with me, he certainly has that right, I just think it's bullshit. We weren't in some heated debate where sources were required to have a goddamn opinion. I'm fine with changing the fucking format, but how about a little notice? Shit.
http://factcheck.org/2012/06/romney-obama-uphold-health-care-falsehoods/
After reading this, I wonder if even Obama himself knows what in the fucking law.
The Keep Your Plan Promise
"Obama addressed the nation on June 28, shortly after the Supreme Court revealed its ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In his comments, he quickly repeated one of his favorite, if false, talking points."
"Obama, June 28: If youre one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable."
"As weve said before, the president simply cant make this promise. While the law does build on the U.S. system of primarily work-based coverage, the nonpartisan CBO has consistently said there will be some movement among those who currently have coverage."
"The CBO has estimated that at least a few million Americans with employer-based insurance will in fact not be able to keep their current plans, and theres nothing in the law that would prohibit employers from switching health care plans, just as they could before the law was passed. Also, the presidents 250 million figure includes everyone in the U.S. with insurance the latest estimate from the Census Bureau is that 256.2 million Americans have health insurance. But those who buy private coverage on their own 30.1 million persons may have to get a new plan if theirs doesnt cover minimum benefit standards, which are yet to be determined. Plus, the insurance carriers offering these policies can change the plans without the policyholders blessing. The CBO has estimated that by 2016, 2 million fewer persons will get coverage through the individual market."
"Lets look at employer-based coverage, since thats how most Americans (55 percent of those with insurance) get their policies. The latest CBO report on this topic found that under the most likely scenario, 3 million to 5 million fewer workers would get health insurance through their employers than would be the case without the law, from 2019 to 2022. Some of those employees would make the switch voluntarily, choosing to obtain coverage from another source, CBO said."
"Furthermore, Obama cant promise that employers wont switch or drop plans, just as they could do before the law was enacted. The truth is that the power to keep a work-based insurance plan is largely out of the control of the worker. Large businesses, any with 51 or more employees, will have to pay a penalty under the law if they dont offer coverage, and that penalty is $2,000 per full-time worker, excluding the first 30 workers. But that doesnt mean that some employers wont choose to pay the penalty, especially if their workers get low wages and can get federally subsidized insurance through the exchanges. Small employers can also get coverage through the state-based exchanges, so some could switch to those plans, meaning that their employees would not keep their current plan."
I look at this as a selling point in which also turns out to be a lie. I guess it could be viewed as half truth, if your a liberal. ;)
Hookbender — Aug 20, 2012http://factcheck.org/2012/06/romney-obama-uphold-health-care-falsehoods/
After reading this, I wonder if even Obama himself knows what in the fucking law.
The Keep Your Plan Promise
"Obama addressed the nation on June 28, shortly after the Supreme Court revealed its ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In his comments, he quickly repeated one of his favorite, if false, talking points."
"Obama, June 28: If youre one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable."
"As weve said before, the president simply cant make this promise. While the law does build on the U.S. system of primarily work-based coverage, the nonpartisan CBO has consistently said there will be some movement among those who currently have coverage."
"The CBO has estimated that at least a few million Americans with employer-based insurance will in fact not be able to keep their current plans, and theres nothing in the law that would prohibit employers from switching health care plans, just as they could before the law was passed. Also, the presidents 250 million figure includes everyone in the U.S. with insurance the latest estimate from the Census Bureau is that 256.2 million Americans have health insurance. But those who buy private coverage on their own 30.1 million persons may have to get a new plan if theirs doesnt cover minimum benefit standards, which are yet to be determined. Plus, the insurance carriers offering these policies can change the plans without the policyholders blessing. The CBO has estimated that by 2016, 2 million fewer persons will get coverage through the individual market."
"Lets look at employer-based coverage, since thats how most Americans (55 percent of those with insurance) get their policies. The latest CBO report on this topic found that under the most likely scenario, 3 million to 5 million fewer workers would get health insurance through their employers than would be the case without the law, from 2019 to 2022. Some of those employees would make the switch voluntarily, choosing to obtain coverage from another source, CBO said."
"Furthermore, Obama cant promise that employers wont switch or drop plans, just as they could do before the law was enacted. The truth is that the power to keep a work-based insurance plan is largely out of the control of the worker. Large businesses, any with 51 or more employees, will have to pay a penalty under the law if they dont offer coverage, and that penalty is $2,000 per full-time worker, excluding the first 30 workers. But that doesnt mean that some employers wont choose to pay the penalty, especially if their workers get low wages and can get federally subsidized insurance through the exchanges. Small employers can also get coverage through the state-based exchanges, so some could switch to those plans, meaning that their employees would not keep their current plan."
I look at this as a selling point in which also turns out to be a lie. I guess it could be viewed as half truth, if your a liberal. ;)
I just don't see the "lie" part.
Your employer 9assuming you're a large employer" gives you insurance. That insurance must at least meet certain government requirements. IF that employer doesn't give you insurance, they pay a penalty for not offering insurance.
That doesn't mean you are out on your ass. If I can't get insurance from my employer, I get it from the government.
It shouldn't matter too much whom any insurance carrier is because all insurance will have to meet a standard of coverage. IF they cannot.....free market will bump those people out of competition anyway. There are still options.
Personally, I'd like to see ALL health insurance done away with. Have a state standard or a federal standard and it be free for all that pay taxes.
"Obama addressed the nation on June 28, shortly after the Supreme Court revealed its ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In his comments, he quickly repeated one of his favorite, if false, talking points."
"Obama, June 28: If youre one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable."
OK. I'll point it out to ya. Pay attention now. See the word false, 1st paragraph, third word from last? then the second paragraph is the actual lie quoted for you. Remember Obama saying this was not a tax? It fucking is a tax. Remember Clinton saying he didn't have sexual relation with that girl? Not sure that isn't true. Sticking a cigar in a cunt, especially if lit, probably wouldn't qualify as "sex" to most folks. ;D ;D And yeah, where are the wmds in Iraq? Although many other countries thought their was as well. Ahhh, they don't count....
The ACA doesn't say that employers and individuals have to keep their current plans. So this makes Bambam's statement a lie?
Your gonna have to do better than that. That doesn't deserve a response it's so flawed.
The only thing I see that isn't a freedom of choice issue in that piece is the concept of minimums in what an insurance policy can be. Outside of that, your employer could always change your plan, as can you, as an individual, if an insurance corp would take you. Can you imagine what pubs would be saying if everyone was forced to keep their current plan and employers weren't allowed to change insurance at their whim?
Were death panels a lie? Is gov takeover of healthcare a lie? Is there a non health ins corp option available?
Are you on drugs? Does changing the subject with flawed logic make you feel good? As tripper would say, you need to brush up on your critical thinking skills. Really, you make no sense tonight. If we are taking this to a logical discussion, I'm game. Your logic is terribly off and non existent. Your comparison are irrelevant to the discussions. Your questions are stupid. Make a argument against what I said. I'll respond.
Noice!!!!! Insults minus a point of view. Familiar tactic...
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/29/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-under-his-health-care-law-those-/http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/09/barack-obama/health-insurance-through-work-stays-place-under-re/http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/jul/16/eric-cantor/cantor-says-under-health-care-law-people-who-their/Getting back to flawed logic: "I also know if it were the repubs that lied and manipulated America to get this passed, you'd be pretty much against it."
America wasn't lied to and manipulated to get it passed, tho we were lied to and manipulated during the sausage making and the lies keep flying from the pubs, of course. The American people don't get to vote on nor create any piece of legislation.
Hookbender — Aug 21, 2012"Obama addressed the nation on June 28, shortly after the Supreme Court revealed its ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In his comments, he quickly repeated one of his favorite, if false, talking points."
"Obama, June 28: If youre one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable."
OK. I'll point it out to ya. Pay attention now. See the word false, 1st paragraph, third word from last? then the second paragraph is the actual lie quoted for you. Remember Obama saying this was not a tax? It fucking is a tax. Remember Clinton saying he didn't have sexual relation with that girl? Not sure that isn't true. Sticking a cigar in a cunt, especially if lit, probably wouldn't qualify as "sex" to most folks. ;D ;D And yeah, where are the wmds in Iraq? Although many other countries thought their was as well. Ahhh, they don't count....
It's not a tax. I don't see how you get from, "Keep your own insurance if you want" to "See that's a tax"
At best you can say that IF you don't want the governments plan and you want your own, but you still have to pay taxes to cover anything a government does spending wise......well duh.
Healthcare is only FREE in the sense that you shouldn't have to worry about inflating premiums and yeah you'd have to pay a tax to cover services. You DON'T have to keep your insurance. You can get on the government plan and then your "tax" money would be paying for your plan and you wouldn't feel like you're paying for your insurance and the insurance of others.