- Joined
- Sep 29, 2007
- Messages
- 29,262
- Reaction score
- 10,126
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I will put it this why, ..when you are born in this world, not you are mandated by law, force to buy private sector product, even though you do not want it.
please do not site car insurance......its a poor argument.
This is a nearly illegible counter-argument to the individual mandate.....it is not a counter to the point that the ACA brings down restrictions set by insurance corp's, ie, creating equal access.I will put it this why, ..when you are born in this world, not you are mandated by law, force to buy private sector product, even though you do not want it.
please do not site car insurance......its a poor argument.
How in the world is the ACA anything but equality of opportunity?
Were you born in a hospital? Would be kinda hard getting cash out of a baby though
Yes, except every point you just made is a lie! If these things are really going to be a problem, then why not wait one year, and then come back with the evidence, at which point we can all reasonably agree to repeal the Affordable care act--THAT IS, UNLESS THE REPUBLICANS KNOW THEIR POINTS ARE LIES, THAT THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT WILL PROVE THEM WRONG, THAT THEY REALLY ONLY CARE ABOUT THEIR ALREADY FAT POCKETBOOKS, AND THAT, LASTLY, THEY ARE ONLY MAKING AN IMPOSSIBLE DEMAND SO THAT THEY CAN SAY DEMOCRATS ARE UNWILLING TO NEGOTIATE!
This is a nearly illegible counter-argument to the individual mandate.....it is not a counter to the point that the ACA brings down restrictions set by insurance corp's, ie, creating equal access.
Try a little context...OK?
You don't get it, do you? Seems that you lack any understanding of leadership and economic policies fully ignoring the impact on numbers by economic policies and lack of leadership. I have no idea what relevance this chart has?
as a citizen I have liberty because of my humanity, how does government have authority to order me to buy a private sector product I do not wish, that goes against our founding principles.
Then why do some state governments oppose abortions, make it impossible for a woman to obtain one? Would that be considered the state implimenting a unwritten mandate that forces women to have a baby they did not want have?
The context was that the teabags want to defund the ACA, to threaten default over the ACA. If the comment that "we are a country of equal opportunity", how is that in opposition to the ACA?We were discussing the current mantra of "it's the wealthy that are the problem, and they need to pay more," which is an unusual stance from Obama, who is a multi-millionaire.
Then you concede to my point.To answer your question: The ACA, except for the waivers and exemptions that have been granted to some, is certainly an equality of opportunity moment for those who find that they are now required to have insurance.
Primarily based on income.Do you know how the subsidies are going to be determined for those that don't have the money to pay for it?
The House is in session, the Senate is in session, and the President is in town. What's missing for a negotiation to take place? :roll:
Because that authority was left to the States...
Bush jr. had a net LOSS of jobs in his administration. Less people were working when he left than when he started. It was Clinton who created more jobs than Reagan and the 2 Bushes combined.
The interest in doing so, from all concerned? That's just a guess on my part, though. :twocents:
Consider the population growth and looking at percentages. Jobs are not increasing. They have not kept up wityh population increases of working age.So I am told, looks like the only jobs Obama is creating are part time jobs. You really need to get over your BDS, Bush has been out of office for almost 5 years now and it is amazing that so many people keep trying to compare Obama results to someone they really despise and get frustrated when the Bush numbers are better.
I will put it this why, ..when you are born in this world, not you are mandated by law, force to buy private sector product, even though you do not want it.
FFS, what interest does an admirer of a NAZI tank commander have in Madison.....and why do you think I am in the least interested in following you down your rabbit hole when it continues to ignore the context?individual mandates, can you show me where the congress has authority over you and I in the u.s. constitution, because I can show you they don't, and even Madison states the same, they have no authority.
Then why do some state governments oppose abortions, make it impossible for a woman to obtain one? Would that be considered the state implimenting a unwritten mandate that forces women to have a baby they did not want have?
WAKE UP!
If you don't want to buy the product, then you don't have to, just pay the fine! You're entire argument rests on the assumption that the private sector can provide an essential service--HEALTHCARE IS ESSENTIAL; OTHERWISE, DO YOU SUGGEST THAT WE LET PEOPLE DIE IN THE STREETS?--at an affordable cost; however, the evidence shows that the private sector was unable to do this, and that is why we NEED the government to step in! You have to understand that the interests of the private sector contradict the interests of the citizen, so if you want to blame someone, then blame your own selfish, greedy, egotistic world view which forces government to step in, so that you can then complain about it, while providing no better alternative! So how are you going to solve the healthcare problem again? Oh, wait, you can't answer that question because your only answer is the private sector, which has already proven ineffective.
FFS, what interest does an admirer of a NAZI tank commander have in Madison.....and why do you think I am in the least interested in following you down your rabbit hole when it continues to ignore the context?
go away.
Sorry, no debate - it's called the tenth amendment.
There were 18 requests from Dems to work out a compromise, the GOP house did not agree to a meeting until after the budget deadline.Actually, there are only two entities refusing to come to the table, and one is not the House...
WAKE UP!
If you don't want to buy the product, then you don't have to, just pay the fine! You're entire argument rests on the assumption that the private sector can provide an essential service--HEALTHCARE IS ESSENTIAL; OTHERWISE, DO YOU SUGGEST THAT WE LET PEOPLE DIE IN THE STREETS?--at an affordable cost; however, the evidence shows that the private sector was unable to do this, and that is why we NEED the government to step in! You have to understand that the interests of the private sector contradict the interests of the citizen, so if you want to blame someone, then blame your own selfish, greedy, egotistic world view which forces government to step in, so that you can then complain about it, while providing no better alternative! So how are you going to solve the healthcare problem again? Oh, wait, you can't answer that question because your only answer is the private sector, which has already proven ineffective.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?