60 Minutes- Boehner and McConnell can't explain an ACA alternative plan

[jaeger19]

Talk about nuts, look in the mirror, this is about personal responsibility and power closest to the people. You think that the state can implement a universal healthcare program without approval of the citizens?

Yes it can. The ACA was enacted... tell me.. do you think that was at the approval of all the citizens?... again sir.. you are too funny.

Please show me where I supported my state approving universal healthcare? What part of this do you not understand, I DO NOT SUPPORT THE FEDERAL GOVT> OR THE STATE IMPLEMENTING UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE

Because you have stated over and over that personal responsibility means that the state will take my money and pay for other peoples healthcare.... RATHER than mandate that people pay for their own healthcare insurance rather than stick the bill onto me.

sorry sir.. but thats been your argument with me.

People make bad choices all the time but in the liberal world are never held accountable for them.

That's exactly what makes you should change your lean to liberal MR.. "the taxpayers of the state should pay for peoples healthcare"...

For you it is all about getting paid and asking the taxpayers to fund an insurance program for those many of whom choose NOT to purchase insurance

Actually.. I have repeatedly stated the EXACT OPPOSITE... so you must be channeling your inner liberal and transferring it onto me.

I am opposed and have always been opposed to socialized medicine. That's why I support the ACA's mandate that people have health insurance.

Do you want the govt. to provide a nanny for everyone now?

Sir.. you are the one calling for government to be the NANNY.. not me. I think the government should protect my rights by requiring people to be personally responsible.. rather than as you want.. have the state pay for them.

Yeah, you are right, I have always been for that lying bitch. I am going to join the family of Chris Stevens in her being campaign manager.

It would make sense with your views. Whats the matter though.. Hillary is not liberal enough for you?

Now you are going off the deep end in talking about parents

Nope.. just using logic.... you claim mandates to be responsible are "lack of freedom",.. and instead you want government to pay for those not being responsible.

well the government currently mandates that people support and pay for their children.. (i.e. you get charged with neglect, reckless abandonment etc if you don't). According to your logic.. that mandate is a lack of freedom... and we should all pay for the children when their parents refuse to support them.

 

[Conservative]

jaeger19;1064436934]Yes it can. The ACA was enacted... tell me.. do you think that was at the approval of all the citizens?... again sir.. you are too funny.

ACA is a national program approved totally by Democrats and never voted upon by the people so no it wasn't approved by the citizens.

Because you have stated over and over that personal responsibility means that the state will take my money and pay for other peoples healthcare.... RATHER than mandate that people pay for their own healthcare insurance rather than stick the bill onto me.

No, you are wrong, I don't support a state mandate only the reality that it is up to the people of the state to decide like the people of MA did

That's exactly what makes you should change your lean to liberal MR.. "the taxpayers of the state should pay for peoples healthcare"...

Again, reading comprehension isn't a strong suit of yours. I will vote against my state implementing a universal healthcare program but if it is initiated I will support it. Again, reading comprehension isn't a strong suit of yours.

I am opposed and have always been opposed to socialized medicine. That's why I support the ACA's mandate that people have health insurance.

ACA is a federal mandate that affects people's freedom of choice whereas the penalties go to the Federal bureaucrats not to the states.

Sir.. you are the one calling for government to be the NANNY.. not me. I think the government should protect my rights by requiring people to be personally responsible.. rather than as you want.. have the state pay for them.

That is what you continue to say and that is not what I am saying. I am against a mandate but if there is one it has to be approved by the people not the bureaucrats in D.C. Healthcare is a state and local issue not a federal issue. MA figured it out, Hawaii figured it out, apparently you haven't

well the government currently mandates that people support and pay for their children.. (i.e. you get charged with neglect, reckless abandonment etc if you don't). According to your logic.. that mandate is a lack of freedom... and we should all pay for the children when their parents refuse to support them.

You honestly trying to compare a healthcare insurance mandate to personal child care? Wow, that isn't even worthy of a response.

 

[jaeger19]

ACA is a national program approved totally by Democrats and never voted upon by the people so no it wasn't approved by the citizens.

And neither is state legislation voted on by the people.

No, you are wrong, I don't support a state mandate only the reality that it is up to the people of the state to decide like the people of MA did

No I stated you support taxing me.. and giving it to other people for their healthcare.. which was fine by you at the state level. Rather than mandating that they get their own healthcare.

Again, reading comprehension isn't a strong suit of yours. I will vote against my state implementing a universal healthcare program but if it is initiated I will support it. Again, reading comprehension isn't a strong suit of yours

I see.. your are against it before you are for it?

ACA is a federal mandate that affects people's freedom of choice whereas the penalties go to the Federal bureaucrats not to the states

Yeah.. the freedom of "choice" to make me pay for their healthcare when they get sick and can't afford the bill you mean. Please... change your lean...

That is what you continue to say and that is not what I am saying. I am against a mandate but if there is one it has to be approved by the people not the bureaucrats in D.C. Healthcare is a state and local issue not a federal issue. MA figured it out, Hawaii figured it out, apparently you haven't

Healthcare is a federal issue.. you haven't figured it out. by the way.. MA and Hawaii in generally support federal intervention.. as their state programs are effected by other states.

You honestly trying to compare a healthcare insurance mandate to personal child care? Wow, that isn't even worthy of a response

.

Sure it is worthy.. it shows that you are a hypocrite.. you are fine with curtailing peoples CHOICE unless the big bad Obama and democrats are for it. Seriously.. just a different type of liberal.

 

[Conservative]

jaeger19;1064444235]And neither is state legislation voted on by the people.

That isn't necessarily right as the people vote on legislative initiatives all the time. Even if it isn't the legislators are closer to the people than those in D.C. and make a bigger difference on state issues. I can see civics isn't a strong suit of yours.

No I stated you support taxing me.. and giving it to other people for their healthcare.. which was fine by you at the state level. Rather than mandating that they get their own healthcare.

Again, get some help reading, I do not support universal healthcare BUT stated that if it is initiated it should be at the state level not the national level and I stated quite clearly that I would vote against it. Keep digging that hole deeper

I see.. your are against it before you are for it?

Unlike you I have never been for Universal healthcare at either. What part of my voting against it if given the opportunity don't you understand?

Yeah.. the freedom of "choice" to make me pay for their healthcare when they get sick and can't afford the bill you mean. Please... change your lean...

Same tired old rhetoric over and over again doesn't change my position.

Healthcare is a federal issue.. you haven't figured it out. by the way.. MA and Hawaii in generally support federal intervention.. as their state programs are effected by other states.

Your opinion noted

.

Sure it is worthy.. it shows that you are a hypocrite.. you are fine with curtailing peoples CHOICE unless the big bad Obama and democrats are for it. Seriously.. just a different type of liberal.

Your opinion noted

 

[Mycroft]

There is one big difference between legislation shoved down the people's throats by the federal government as opposed to being done by the state government...at least, when it's done by the Colorado state government. Here in Colorado, we have a means to take direct and immediate action against the legislators who did the shoving. We can recall them. That recourse is not available to citizens when the federal government does the shoving.

That alone is the best reason for keeping such legislation at the state level and for keeping it out of the hands of the federal government.

 

[Perotista]

There is one big difference between legislation shoved down the people's throats by the federal government as opposed to being done by the state government...at least, when it's done by the Colorado state government. Here in Colorado, we have a means to take direct and immediate action against the legislators who did the shoving. We can recall them. That recourse is not available to citizens when the federal government does the shoving.

That alone is the best reason for keeping such legislation at the state level and for keeping it out of the hands of the federal government.

I agree. Each states needs is different and usually requires solutions unique to each state. This one size fits all government, requirements etc from Washington may fix things in one state and screw up another state beyond repair.


Besides, it is feel good legislation. Poll after poll has shown the ACA has hurt about twice as many as it helped. Those who it hurt are ignored and pushed under the rug. No one cares about them, just their political talking points and polls from an organization whose business is health care to back them up.

 

[jaeger19]

I agree. Each states needs is different and usually requires solutions unique to each state. This one size fits all government, requirements etc from Washington may fix things in one state and screw up another state beyond repair.


Besides, it is feel good legislation. Poll after poll has shown the ACA has hurt about twice as many as it helped. Those who it hurt are ignored and pushed under the rug. No one cares about them, just their political talking points and polls from an organization whose business is health care to back them up.

Actually with healthcare.. federal legislation is needed since healthcare crosses state lines and what happens in one state affects all the others. No doubt that there needs to be state involvement in healthcare. but the hodgepodge of individual state regulations often creates more problems that it solves when it comes to healthcare.