• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does This Make It Better?

I'm not ready freak out just yet. The Senate is going to tear this thing apart. Impossible to tell what will be in or out.
 
Pyrite said:
the 1.4 million figure-is-undocumented-migrants-are-the-only-ones-who-would-lose-benefits is a lie.
Click to expand...
It would be, if she had said it. But she didn't. You're (purposely??) conflating two statements for the purpose of labeling her comment as a lie, That isn't nice.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
It would be, if she had said it. But she didn't. You're (purposely??) conflating two statements.
Click to expand...
Post #27


She did.

I've already shown that what I pointed out is correct. See my Posts #8 and #20.

What do you think about Ernst's flippant reply to constituents that everyone is going to die?
 
RetiredAtLast said:
Ernst did not say that any identifiable group would be the only people that lose services. She referred to people who shouldn't be on it in the first place AND she referred to illegal aliens. Among the people who shouldn't have been on it in the first place are healthy, single men with no children and who are able to work but not at least seeking employment. The proposed changes in the law would exclude such men from Medicaid. IN ADDITION, Ernst referred to more than a million illegal aliens who would be removed from eligibility. Two groups of people.

I'm going to assume that you misunderstood what she said, but that now you understand.
Click to expand...
I understand alright. 5 trillion, I notice you didn't mention that.
 
Hari Seldon said:
I understand alright. 5 trillion, I notice you didn't mention that.
Click to expand...
I also didn't mention the weather in Norway. Neither one seemed relevant to the discussion you quoted.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
No, you haven't. You said what you think Ernst said, but you're mistaken.

Bad joke.
Click to expand...
Post #30


Wrong. I did NOT "say what I think Ernst said". I quoted her words. And NBC, which is a credible source, pointed out her lie that only undocumented immigrants would be deprived of benefits. If you want to try to show that NBC is not a credible source, go for it.
 
Pyrite said:
Wrong. I did NOT "say what I think Ernst said". I quoted her words.
Click to expand...
OK. She's a Republican and you have to believe that what she said was a lie. You're wrong, but I have other things I can think about.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
OK. She's a Republican and you have to believe that what she said was a lie. You're wrong, but I have other things I can think about.
Click to expand...
Post #33


Not at all. I haven't said or even indicated this.

I've used credible sources, one of which - NBC - pointed out her lie that only undocumented migrants would who lose their benefits (Post #8, Post #20).

If you don't want to believe NBC, that's on you, not on me.
 
Last edited:
Pyrite said:
pointed out her lie that only undocumented migrants would who lose their benefits
Click to expand...
Please quote your source where you think it says that Ernst said ONLY illegal immigrants would lose eligibility. Be sure to include the word ONLY.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
Please quote your source where you think it says that Ernst said ONLY illegal immigrants would lose eligibility. Be sure to include the word ONLY.
Click to expand...
Post #36


I've already copied and pasted the relevant information twice: in Posts #8 and #20. I've already shown Ernst's false portrayal that the 1.4 million to lose their benefits would be undocumented migrants. That you don't want to accept this is your problem. Trying to make it mine won't work.

I've asked you a question based on the topic of the thread, which you've refused to answer. You're not posting here in good faith. And what you're doing now might be described as trolling.
 
Ernst doubling down on a bad remark is not smart. And she refuses to explain that Medicade expansion has to be rolled back to only working poor with children 7 and under. Politicians who are too lazy to give details while doubling down on snark don't win many elections
Even in a Republican state it creates a weakness to exploit
 
anatta said:
Ernst doubling down on a bad remark is not smart. And she refuses to explain that Medicade expansion has to be rolled back to only working poor with children 7 and under
Click to expand...
Why? Is 8 years old the magic age at which kids stop mattering to MAGAs?
 
Pyrite said:
That you don't want to accept this is your problem. Trying to make it mine won't work.
Click to expand...
The problem is that you're misinterpreting what the article said. I believe that you're doing it because you have to believe that all Republicans always lie.
Pyrite said:
I've asked you a question based on the topic of the thread, which you've refused to answer.
Click to expand...
You asked me what I thought of her comment that we're all going to die. I responded that it was a "bad joke."
Pyrite said:
You're not posting here in good faith. And what you're doing now might be described as trolling.
Click to expand...
You're posting a lie. If your understanding of written English is as bad as it seems, that's your problem. And you're probably not posting in bad faith, but in ignorance.
 
dmpi said:
The system is broke and tough choices need to be made to save the system for those who really need and deserve it.
Click to expand...
Yeah - the monied elites and their well deserved tax cuts, paid for by gutting social services, medical care, and regulatory agencies. MAGA!
 
RetiredAtLast said:
I think I know the answer, but do you want all illegal aliens to be covered by the Medicare and MedicAid that you and the rest of us pay for? Do you want millions of people who have no right to be in the country, to be in front of your kids at the Emergency Room?
Click to expand...
Oh, for pete's sake, that's not how an ER works, you know that! C'mon!

Please drop the drama!
 
Jason Warfield said:
Oh, for pete's sake, that's not how an ER works, you know that! C'mon!
Click to expand...
ER's are supposed to attend to the most seriously injured/at risk patients. Assuming that they do, the secondary criteria is the time that the patient arrived. If you and I both have broken arms, the one of us who got there first will be treated first. Do I have to explain to you how things go if the population served by a given ER is increased?
 
RetiredAtLast said:
And thus you expose your socialized medicine objective. Since that form of medical care delivery is never going to happen in this country, there doesn't seem to be any point in discussing changes to Medicaid that would eliminate anyone from taxpayer funded care.
Click to expand...
it will absolutely happen. Single payer systems provide better care than we do at a fraction of the cost. We know this empirically.
 
rahl said:
it will absolutely happen. Single payer systems provide better care than we do at a fraction of the cost. We know this empirically.
Click to expand...
What Libs don't seem to know (I've asked several) how would it work in this country? Who would own the hospitals? Who would the doctors work for? How would the transition just in those two areas( to federal government ownership) happen?
 
RetiredAtLast said:
I think I know the answer, but do you want all illegal aliens to be covered by the Medicare and MedicAid that you and the rest of us pay for? Do you want millions of people who have no right to be in the country, to be in front of your kids at the Emergency Room?
Click to expand...

The alternative is they fill up the Emergency Rooms everywhere, you do realize that, yes?
EMTALA requires it.
And ER care is at least FIVE TIMES more expensive, you do know that, yes?

So if you're bound by EMTALA, and you take away Medicaid, then you have ER's overflowing with sick people, to the point where people who would normally need the ER can't access it anymore, and then when you cut funding for the entire system, hospitals begin closing and going away.
Now you have rising epidemics for diseases that would normally be handled quite easily and efficiently and you begin seeing corpses in the streets or, even "better", where the hospital entrances used to be.

Yeah, sounds like a winning plan, if your plans are all made by petulant nine year-olds.
When did the United States begin turning into South Sudan?
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
The alternative is they fill up the Emergency Rooms everywhere, you do realize that, yes?
EMTALA requires it.
Click to expand...
EMTALA dos not require hospitalization or treatment beyond stabilization.

Checkerboard Strangler said:
So if you're bound by EMTALA, and you take away Medicaid, then you have ER's overflowing with sick people,
Click to expand...
For a while, maybe. But, again, EMTALA doesn't require the treatment of all "sick" people. It won't take long for the illegal alien community to figure out that a sprained toe and a bruised arm aren't going to be treated, and some of them will take advantage of the $1,000 "go away" bonus.

The rest of that post can't be taken seriously.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
EMTALA dos not require hospitalization or treatment beyond stabilization.


For a while, maybe. But, again, EMTALA doesn't require the treatment of all "sick" people. It won't take long for the illegal alien community to figure out that a sprained toe and a bruised arm aren't going to be treated, and some of them will take advantage of the $1,000 "go away" bonus.

The rest of that post can't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

I never said EMTALA requires hospitalization or treatment (that's maybe the other voices in your head talking, not me) but you're dreaming if you think just taking stuff away magically forces people to behave "the way YOU want them to".
You're not just retired, you're sheltered, and it's obvious you've never seen much outside that shelter, lucky for you.
Was I supposed to be disappointed that you don't take something seriously because it doesn't match your worldview?

Sorry to disappoint you.
 
RetiredAtLast said:
For a while, maybe.
Click to expand...

How long is "a while" ?
PS: I find it interesting that the knock-on effects of hospitals closing here and there doesn't seem to bother you.
Is that ALSO "for a while maybe" and do those collapsed hospital systems magically come back to life once all those undesirables self-deport?
With what money does this happen?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom