• 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!

More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going broke

Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Bull ****ing ****! What do you think the mandate is for, or the statements of those same liberal politicians saying that this bill was the "first step" to UHC.

For health care reform. Not socialism. Keep up. ;)
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

For health care reform. Not socialism. Keep up. ;)
With what? You got owned.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

With what? You got owned.

So, this is where you pronounce your own victory as if that means something?

Look, good people are working for comprehensive reform, needed reform. It will be a long process, and we need more than the mess we got so far, but a first step has to be taken before you can have a second step. What are you not getting?
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

So, this is where you pronounce your own victory as if that means something?

Look, good people are working for comprehensive reform, needed reform. It will be a long process, and we need more than the mess we got so far, but a first step has to be taken before you can have a second step. What are you not getting?
Whatever. 10 Characters.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Whatever. 10 Characters.

Well, I would love to continue with that stellar rebuttal, but it's later. Perhaps we'll chat tomorrow.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Well, I would love to continue with that stellar rebuttal, but it's later. Perhaps we'll chat tomorrow.
Nah. I'm pretty much done with you.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

You're just dodging the question Boo. Would the industry itself be socialized or would it not?
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

You're just dodging the question Boo. Would the industry itself be socialized or would it not?

Sure, if you call a direct answer dodging. :lamo
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Sure, if you call a direct answer dodging. :lamo

You still have not answered whether or not European health care is a socialized industry or not. It's a simple yes or no answer.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

You still have not answered whether or not European health care is a socialized industry or not. It's a simple yes or no answer.

I don't know how to get more specific than no. I even explained why.

For the future, understand that yes and no questions are not good questions. Mostly dishonest people who are trying to skew a debate ask such questions. So, while I clearly gave you that simpliton answer, you should seek explaination, if your honest that is. ;)
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

I don't know how to get more specific than no. I even explained why.

For the future, understand that yes and no questions are not good questions. Mostly dishonest people who are trying to skew a debate ask such questions. So, while I clearly gave you that simpliton answer, you should seek explaination, if your honest that is. ;)

Then tell me what is wrong with my logic.

The industry is controlled by the government.
The government is controlled by the people.
Therefore the industry is controlled by the people.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Then tell me what is wrong with my logic.

The industry is controlled by the government.
The government is controlled by the people.
Therefore the industry is controlled by the people.
Industry isn't controlled by the government. The first one has to be true before you can move on. Regualtions and limited involvement does not equal control. Socialism isn't socialism until all or most of industry is controlled by te government.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Reid to Netroots: "We're Going To Have a Public Option"

For all the talk about how his GOP Candidate says some wild things... where is the accountability for old Harry

Yup, crazy old Harry Reid. And guess what? I actually agree that he is crazy. So why in the hell did the GOP run someone against him who is so nutty that she actually makes him look sane?
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Yup, crazy old Harry Reid. And guess what? I actually agree that he is crazy. So why in the hell did the GOP run someone against him who is so nutty that she actually makes him look sane?

Because the GOP is just as bad. Come on, you're smart enough to know that.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Industry isn't controlled by the government. The first one has to be true before you can move on. Regualtions and limited involvement does not equal control. Socialism isn't socialism until all or most of industry is controlled by te government.

So then what is it? Half socialism? 3/4? What's the percentage?
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Yup, crazy old Harry Reid. And guess what? I actually agree that he is crazy. So why in the hell did the GOP run someone against him who is so nutty that she actually makes him look sane?

They didn't. You, and other progressive Republicans want more Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Dan Browns in the Party. The base doesn't.

Yes, she's vocal and unabashed in wanting to scale back Gov't. The media, in protecting their preferred party have attacked her as Crazy.

Can you name 3 things Angle has said/done that make her "Crazy" and why you feel that way Dan? I bet you cannot.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

So then what is it? Half socialism? 3/4? What's the percentage?

Something different. Not prue capitalsim and not prue socialism. Calling it socialism is lying. And calling it prue capitalism is lying. But it isn't new. We haven't had prue capitalism since the great depression. Even beforethat actually.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Something different. Not prue capitalsim and not prue socialism. Calling it socialism is lying. And calling it prue capitalism is lying. But it isn't new. We haven't had prue capitalism since the great depression. Even beforethat actually.

You're right, we've never had capitalism in this country. Say Boo, have you looked at my thread in the health care forum? You might find it interesting. Maybe UHC isn't the answer to skyrocketing prices. Maybe the problem is too much government intervention. Also, the European healthcare industry is much more socialized than our own.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/health-care/77819-did-healthcare-problems-start.html - Read that first post thoroughly.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

You're right, we've never had capitalism in this country. Say Boo, have you looked at my thread in the health care forum? You might find it interesting. Maybe UHC isn't the answer to skyrocketing prices. Maybe the problem is too much government intervention. Also, the European healthcare industry is much more socialized than our own.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/health-care/77819-did-healthcare-problems-start.html - Read that first post thoroughly.

I'll check out the thread, but I must tell you we will not go back. It would mean far less health care for many. Doctors won't allow it either, for good and bad reasons.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

How would it mean far less health care for many if we had more doctors?
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

How would it mean far less health care for many if we had more doctors?

Doctors are only one factor. The fact is people would not be able to afford the treatment if we removed all third party payers. I was responding to this statement:

Maybe the problem is too much government intervention.

Government is also a third party payer. Many point to this more than fewer doctors as being the reason for higher costs. If we took out third party payers, you would have less doctors naturally because too few could afford much of what they do. Medicine today is what it used to be, and even back then most Americans did use modern medicine. Much was done at home with home remidies, many of which didn't actually work.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

1 issue at a time here. Would getting rid of the restrictions put in place on the advice of the Flexner Report lead to more doctors and hence lower prices?
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

1 issue at a time here. Would getting rid of the restrictions put in place on the advice of the Flexner Report lead to more doctors and hence lower prices?

Well, they all work together, but in a word, . . . NO.

As the artcile back then showed, many areas were saturated with doctors, and yet costs went up, not down. Part of that articel, not all of it, was showing that medicince simply didn't respond the way other parts of the market place did. I was younger then, working as a nurse (LPN / EMT), and very interested in this subject. I later worked in medical sales and other related areas. I have seen nothing to make me doubt this claim.

Doctors are a small part of the cost. We need more doctors now, and efforts are in the bill to get more. But you will not see costs go down due to there being more doctors.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

Well, they all work together, but in a word, . . . NO.

As the artcile back then showed, many areas were saturated with doctors, and yet costs went up, not down.

The article never said that.

Part of that articel, not all of it, was showing that medicince simply didn't respond the way other parts of the market place did. I was younger then, working as a nurse (LPN / EMT), and very interested in this subject. I later worked in medical sales and other related areas. I have seen nothing to make me doubt this claim.

The article never said that either.

Doctors are a small part of the cost. We need more doctors now, and efforts are in the bill to get more. But you will not see costs go down due to there being more doctors.

More supply does not lead to lower costs? I need an amazing explanation for this.
 
Re: More crazy Harry Reid in action - Public Option not if but when, SS not going bro

The article never said that.



The article never said that either.



More supply does not lead to lower costs? I need an amazing explanation for this.

The 1980 article did, and yes, it does in medicine. Cost do not go down with more doctors.
 
Back
Top Bottom