• 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!

When Will Democrats Wake Up???

Now you be fair, it's also the initial step toward nirvana for them.
Of course. The grand vision is that this will fail miserably and then they can step and say...whoopise...have to modify it. Poof...universal healthcare. Oh...and they wont lie. They will tell you you CAN keep your own healthcare. And you CAN. But you will still be on the hook for the taxes to pay for the UCare as well.

2016
 
So, I see many don't like Obamacare and I see mention of it's not what people want. Of course, nobody even understands it so I don't know how you can e for or against it but assuming you're against it.....

What do people want instead? I'm genuinely curious because nobody comes up with anything beyond single payer. Obviously THAT idea never flew. So, what do "the American people" want to see happen if Obamacare got cancelled?


DISCLAIMER: I'm on Medicare and thus have no cat in this race. Just an inquiring mind, roaming free..
To be blunt...MOST of the American people want individuals to be responsible for their own damn selves, stop having children they cant afford, etc. MOST of the American people dont want to carry the rest of the slugs through life. Healthcare is just one component of it. We are a handup nation...not a handout nation. Check that...the MAJORITY of us are a hand up nation. When there is a tragedy we respond personally, privately, we cut checks, send donations, etc. We get the need to help.

Now...personally...I think where healthcare is wanted by the citizens of each state then each state should create some form of care program for their state. And they should be on the hook to PAY for those programs. No bailout, no federal intervention. No shoving off a mountain of debt buried in a federal debt sinkhole for future generations to deal with.
 
Its really funny how everyone seems to hate Congress, yet love their Congressman/woman. Its like they say, no raindrop thinks its responsible for the flood.

That's why Congress' approval rating is so low.
When a Republican voter is asked if they approve of Congress they think of Democrat Congresspeople when they answer and Democrats think of Republicans.
Voila ! 10% approval.
 
That's why Congress' approval rating is so low.
When a Republican voter is asked if they approve of Congress they think of Democrat Congresspeople when they answer and Democrats think of Republicans.
Voila ! 10% approval.

That's definitely true. Every election year people are like "throw the bums out!" And then when they get in the voting both, they change their tune to "throw all the bums out, except for OUR bum."
 
That's right! It's time for single payer. :peace

I'm all for single payer, as long as that payer is you. When you include me, I have issues.
 
So, I see many don't like Obamacare and I see mention of it's not what people want. Of course, nobody even understands it so I don't know how you can e for or against it but assuming you're against it.....

What do people want instead? I'm genuinely curious because nobody comes up with anything beyond single payer. Obviously THAT idea never flew. So, what do "the American people" want to see happen if Obamacare got cancelled?


DISCLAIMER:
I'm on Medicare and thus have no cat in this race
. Just an inquiring mind, roaming free..

Think so? Besides having already raided Medicare for Obamacare, Medicare is destined for insolvency in a dozen years.
 
To be blunt...MOST of the American people want individuals to be responsible for their own damn selves, stop having children they cant afford, etc. MOST of the American people dont want to carry the rest of the slugs through life. Healthcare is just one component of it. We are a handup nation...not a handout nation. Check that...the MAJORITY of us are a hand up nation. When there is a tragedy we respond personally, privately, we cut checks, send donations, etc. We get the need to help.

Now...personally...I think where healthcare is wanted by the citizens of each state then each state should create some form of care program for their state. And they should be on the hook to PAY for those programs. No bailout, no federal intervention. No shoving off a mountain of debt buried in a federal debt sinkhole for future generations to deal with.

OK, I appreciate that you didn't blow me off with a snappy one line response. You're giving me a real conversation and I thank you. Leaving everything else out for this discussion, nothing can be fixed but healthcare, you can pass a (reasonable, constitutionalist and objective) law about healthcare - what is your law?

The most radical law I can think of would be no more healthcare for the public. You got money, you get treated, but even then you'd be stuck regulating prices. Have you seen a hospital bill BEFORE insurance? My laminectomy, not rocket science, took one night in the hospital, no complications, no pain pills (cheap bastards). About $150K. Ridiculous. I think they got like $5K from the insurance company but if I were cash - jumpin jehosaphat that would just not be fair. So if they charge so little, they need to be forced to charge the same as they pay out now. Of course, here come the Feds. Then, even if they were realistic about prices, what about the ones who show up broke. Do they get credit? Who eats the bill if they don't pay? So, I see problems with that strategy but I wanted to give you an example of what it is that SHOULD be.

Is there a popular solution to replace this Obamathreethousandpagecare? I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours:)
 
Think so? Besides having already raided Medicare for Obamacare, Medicare is destined for insolvency in a dozen years.

OK, I was just trying to be upfront about my neutrality. I see that didn't work. So, OK, my cat is in the race. Now, what is the solution?
 
The one good thing about congress is they can fund or not fund anything they want. And Obamacare is a democrat nightmare. Bush had nothing to do with Obamacare so you have no out except to own it. It's all yours. And it's a ****ing disaster, of course anything democrats do is a disaster. Hell look at Obamarecovery, Obamajobs, Obamacare, Obamakill jobs, Obamakill coal jobs. Obamakill is all about killing jobs. Liberals have never been about the middle class, never. A perfect example of that is Obama, how better off is the middle class and the black community under Obama? Let me tell you they are worse off, lower wages and higher unemployment. This is your Anointed One

Hey, the Obama as messiah meme. I love that one. I guess you just got of Breitbart or something and were moved.

Meanwhile, so it would have been OK if the Democratic Congress defunded Bush's vanity wars? Funny the GOP whined when it was suggested.
 
Single payer, yeah, more dependence on big daddy government. Free stuff is great, the more free stuff is better than less free stuff. Right? So the more free stuff you get the better you are off. Right? So a free car is better than one you have to pay for. Right? A free house is better than one you have to pay for. Right? I mean how can you ague against free everything?

Oh wait who is funding all this free stuff? Could that be people who actually work? Who you tax to get your free stuff. The problem is the more you champion free stuff the more people engage in the free stuff you support. And the result is less hard working tax payers. So in the end the system collapses, like Greece. But of course that will never happen to you. You are smarter than them. You are only greedy to a point and only want free stuff that will not completely break the system, meaning you will take every dime a person makes and only give back to them to live as you do on the free stuff. In the end all people are equal weather you work or not.

Interesting concept. However I think that has already been tried and failed. Do you know that?

Hey, kids, the Big Gummit meme. What else can conservatives say since they lose on the merits?
 
Serious recessions don't take 5 years to recover from and Obama &his Party had free rein for the first 2 years.

They do if they are the result of failed conservative policies similar to the run up to the Great Depression.

We all know your "solution" to the Bush Meltdown -- more tax cuts for Paris Hilton, more deregulation, more unfunded vanity wars -- all the things that caused the Bush Meltdown. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is pathological, which describes conservative ideology
 
OK, I appreciate that you didn't blow me off with a snappy one line response. You're giving me a real conversation and I thank you. Leaving everything else out for this discussion, nothing can be fixed but healthcare, you can pass a (reasonable, constitutionalist and objective) law about healthcare - what is your law?

The most radical law I can think of would be no more healthcare for the public. You got money, you get treated, but even then you'd be stuck regulating prices. Have you seen a hospital bill BEFORE insurance? My laminectomy, not rocket science, took one night in the hospital, no complications, no pain pills (cheap bastards). About $150K. Ridiculous. I think they got like $5K from the insurance company but if I were cash - jumpin jehosaphat that would just not be fair. So if they charge so little, they need to be forced to charge the same as they pay out now. Of course, here come the Feds. Then, even if they were realistic about prices, what about the ones who show up broke. Do they get credit? Who eats the bill if they don't pay? So, I see problems with that strategy but I wanted to give you an example of what it is that SHOULD be.

Is there a popular solution to replace this Obamathreethousandpagecare? I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours:)
I dont think there needs to be a law and I DAMN sure wouldnt give money to people. Thats a proven disaster (look at the food stamp credit cards in California). No...the states should create an affordable alternative care program for their citizens. Anyone with a verifiable disability should be covered to need (just because you have a disability does not mean you cant function in society). Im not a big 'mandate' kind of guy so you can carry personal insurance, if you are low income you can apply for a low cost but still for fee state care plan and if you are disabled up to free insurance. Im also a big fan of 'free' clinics with supervised interns and nursing students. Yes...it still costs the state but is much more affordable than private or state supplemented hospitals. Heavy emphasis on ALL of this is the citizens of the state have to pay for it. That ought to inspire more active roles in government if nothing else does.
 
Of course. The grand vision is that this will fail miserably and then they can step and say...whoopise...have to modify it. Poof...universal healthcare. Oh...and they wont lie. They will tell you you CAN keep your own healthcare. And you CAN. But you will still be on the hook for the taxes to pay for the UCare as well.

2016

It's a conspiracy!

Ultimately every failed conservative argument reduces to this claim.
 

The law was passed when the polls were showing approximately the same sentiment. I think it was 58 oppose to 30 or 32 for and although the numbers has fluctuated, those opposed has remained in the majority. I think Obama care is what lead to the Republican take over of the House in 2010, among other things for sure. I was shocked that Obama care wasn't made a big campaign issue by the Republicans last year, but such is life. Obama care has the potential of turning over the senate to Republican control next year. Of course the old adage, time will tell is very true.
 
Wow. It's amazing that politicians aren't advised of the secondary and tertiary effects of their actions.

Well, they are. It's just that the effects they are concerned about are those that effect them, not those that effect the country.

You would think that they would have a working group of leaders in the industry advise them on such things. I just don't understand how our elected officials, of both parties, aren't more educated on what they vote on.

Well, again, they are. And there exist a wide variety of think tanks to break that kind of data down for them - and they have the Congressional Research Service and the Congressional Budget Office to help as well. But Politicians pay very good attention to their priorities. The direct effects of the laws are problems for the little people, and thus, even if the politician thinks he or she is acting in their interest, get less play, less attention, less focus.

However, when gov't is as big and far reaching as ours is, it would almost be inhuman if they did know it all I guess.:shrug:

That's the big kicker that makes central planning sort of a doomed effort from the get-go.
 
I dont think there needs to be a law and I DAMN sure wouldnt give money to people. Thats a proven disaster (look at the food stamp credit cards in California). No...the states should create an affordable alternative care program for their citizens. Anyone with a verifiable disability should be covered to need (just because you have a disability does not mean you cant function in society). Im not a big 'mandate' kind of guy so you can carry personal insurance, if you are low income you can apply for a low cost but still for fee state care plan and if you are disabled up to free insurance. Im also a big fan of 'free' clinics with supervised interns and nursing students. Yes...it still costs the state but is much more affordable than private or state supplemented hospitals. Heavy emphasis on ALL of this is the citizens of the state have to pay for it. That ought to inspire more active roles in government if nothing else does.

So, would it be (Federally) mandatory for each state to do this or optional? Free clinics are very useful, I've used one back in the day but I paid my way. They were within walking distance of my place. The Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic, slightly famous hippie-care. I worry that a state like MS might offer nothing and I'd hate to see us where people have to move in desperation for medical care. Would you be OK with Federal pricing and standards to keep the states in-line? Some states seem more rational than others.

Disability is already covered Federally. It's medical that probably needs to be subsidized for the genuinely disabled.

I hadn't meant to imply giving people money. I more meant funding whomever provided services and how - and how much - they got paid.
 
The word Obamacare is scary to people. It has been portrayed as this awful, terrible, world ending bill (which in some respects is true), but if you ask people about some of the individual perks of Obamacare (ex: companies not being able to drop coverage when a holder becomes sick, no denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions) they would be polling differently.
 
The word Obamacare is scary to people. It has been portrayed as this awful, terrible, world ending bill (which in some respects is true), but if you ask people about some of the individual perks of Obamacare (ex: companies not being able to drop coverage when a holder becomes sick, no denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions) they would be polling differently.

I like how the individual perks you listed here are forces on insurance companies for really nothing but the benefit of other people. Sorry, was I not supposed to notice that?
 
I like how the individual perks you listed here are forces on insurance companies for really nothing but the benefit of other people. Sorry, was I not supposed to notice that?

You're right, somebody who was born with deformities does not deserve the same chance as people who were born without them.
 
You're right, somebody who was born with deformities does not deserve the same chance as people who were born without them.

So when I decide to not provide coverage to this individual am I somehow violating their rights? Yes, no, maybe? It's a no, isn't it?

Admit it already, you don't care that you're calling for someone to involuntarily serve people.
 
So when I decide to not provide coverage to this individual am I somehow violating their rights? Yes, no, maybe? It's a no, isn't it?

Odd that the Supreme Court didn't mention anything about that in their ruling.....?
 
This is about a law, not about Congressional approval.

That's right, AHC act is LAW. Laws are not subject to majority approval last I checked. We have elections for our leaders and they speak for us all. Don't like it? Leave. I've heard that Somalia is lovely this time of year.
 
Odd that the Supreme Court didn't mention anything about that in their ruling.....?

Sorry, but did I mention the Supreme Court somewhere? I can't seem to find it. Please provide a quote if I did.
 
That's right, AHC act is LAW. Laws are not subject to majority approval last I checked. We have elections for our leaders and they speak for us all. Don't like it? Leave. I've heard that Somalia is lovely this time of year.

The old "it's" law so untouchable mantra. That worked real well for republicans over the years, so be sure to pick it up.

We passed something you hate, but **** you, it's law asshole. You can't do **** about it now.
 
Back
Top Bottom