[LaFayette]

Quote

... and once that happens you'd better get a passport in order

And where would you go to flee healthcare? The rest of the industrialized world already has it.

This post has been edited by LaFayette: 29 March 2010 - 02:02 AM

[Lemur]

At the point where that would be recommended collapse would be inevitable in America and anywhere would be better.

It's not that healthcare in that manner is a bad idea, rather that the way we go about it is a nightmare.

[CTphpnwb]

It's ironic that you're dealing in absolutes here. Health care reform is necessary because the current system is a severe economic drain on our country that only benefits the insurance industry. Republicans want lower taxes, but force tax payers to foot the bill for all the people denied coverage because of so-called pre-existing conditions! I think it's incredible that Republicans could spend $1.5 trillion on two wars and not count it as part of the deficit, then get fiscal religion when they're not in power any more.

The fact is that Obama's (not really) health care, at least what's been passed, was supported by Republicans until Democrats embraced it. It's basically what Romney did in Massachusetts!

[Lemur]

Does it bother you at all that the CBO estimates the national debt will be 90% of GDP by 2020 under Obama’s budget?

http://www.facebook....170efe598da32a7

And you think allowing them to spend more on healthcare is that great of an idea?

[CTphpnwb]

It bothers me that Republican policies made that a certainty well before Obama was elected. It also bothers me that people don't realize that we're spending too much on healthcare without this reform, and that this reform will actually reduce what we're spending while being honest about the numbers. Emergency room visits are extremely expensive.

This post has been edited by CTphpnwb: 29 March 2010 - 06:42 AM

[KYA]

CTphpnwb, on 29 March 2010 - 06:42 AM, said:

It bothers me that Republican policies made that a certainty well before Obama was elected. It also bothers me that people don't realize that we're spending too much on healthcare without this reform, and that this reform will actually reduce what we're spending while being honest about the numbers.

Who's we? Did you even read the bill? It doesn't address costs. It provides subsidies for those who already can't afford it and forces all of us to buy health care insurance.


Sure, the 'exchanges' "might" lower costs, but it's not set in stone. Companies will always find a way around legislation (see the recent credit card legislation clusterfuck: thanks by the way, all the retards who can't keep their spending/credit under control raised my interest 1% from 8.9% to 9.9%), so the incentive needs to be to get them to do the right thing.


If your premium is, say, $200 a month and the government picks up half your tab (hooray your bill is only $100!), health care isn't any cheaper, it isn't any more affordable. All it did was shift the cost from you to the government which you will pay anyway through taxation. Health care is just as expensive today as it was a month ago, nothing has changed.

[CTphpnwb]

You're forgetting about the huge cost of emergency room visits. Those costs get passed on to local, state and federal agencies, increasing taxes for all of us. Getting those people into health insurance means that they get far more cost efficient care.

Quote

It doesn't address costs.

By the way, I find this to be one of the funnier Republican talking points. If it did more to address costs they'd claim it as more "proof" that it was socialism. Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

This post has been edited by CTphpnwb: 29 March 2010 - 09:51 AM

[Lemur]

Bad bad idea to bring up republicans as the cause of the downward spiral. Fiscal Liberalism is to blame in this case, primarily due to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the subsidies granted to the housing marked that collapsed one of the key elements in the US economical infrastructure.

We were screwed long before Bush, and the more you hit the Blame Bush button the more you ignore the facts: Obama is in charge now, and he's done nothing but spend more with no end in sight.

Those that have given subsidies the middle finger have thrived while those that have are crashing in flames. Look at Ford, they decided to keep going and for it have done amazing lately. GM? Do I really need to go there?

If this was such a miracle system then how is it that Congressmen and Senators are staying with their private insurance and not touching this thing?

I work with homeless and jobless but I can tell you right now is the perfect time to be a complete sloth in america.

I'll say it again:

If people were as concerned with their responsibilities as they were with their rights there would be NO PROBLEM to begin with.

No one deserves rights until they take the responsibility to earn them. Even the disabled are able to work in some manner, and they surely don't account for a vast majority of people here...

10%+ unemployment with no end in sight? Trillions in debt? Collapse becoming more of a valid inevitability daily? Hope is nothing but a political buzz-word thrown around to soothe the masses.

[capty99]

i disagree with pretty much everything you've said.

[CTphpnwb]

Lemur, on 29 March 2010 - 01:08 PM, said:

We were screwed long before Bush,

Before Bush, we had budget surpluses.
Before Bush, we didn't lie about the cost of war. Before Bush, we didn't bail out large corporations and let their CEOs give themselves bonuses.

As for people not working, that's a crock. The real problem is companies not hiring or worse, hiring H1B visas because they're cheap. Republicans need to learn that workers are consumers, and as you steal from workers you weaken the economy.

[KYA]

CTphpnwb, on 29 March 2010 - 01:01 PM, said:

Lemur, on 29 March 2010 - 01:08 PM, said:

We were screwed long before Bush,

Before Bush, we had budget surpluses.

Which was not used to pay down our national debt.

[capty99]

CTphpnwb, on 29 March 2010 - 01:01 PM, said:

Lemur, on 29 March 2010 - 01:08 PM, said:

We were screwed long before Bush,

Before Bush, we had budget surpluses.
Before Bush, we didn't lie about the cost of war. Before Bush, we didn't bail out large corporations and let their CEOs give themselves bonuses.

The largest of the economic bubbles was set in place by Bill Clinton and Alan Greenspan. Yes, we had tremendous growth during that period but it was unchecked growth. Alan was seen as a genius at the time, but his policies, and Bill Clinton's (like all president's) didn't actually see the effects of their actions until 4-8 years later.

[supersloth]

10 year terms! 10 year terms! 10 year terms!

[CTphpnwb]

KYA, on 29 March 2010 - 03:06 PM, said:

CTphpnwb, on 29 March 2010 - 01:01 PM, said:

Lemur, on 29 March 2010 - 01:08 PM, said:

We were screwed long before Bush,

Before Bush, we had budget surpluses.

Which was not used to pay down our national debt.

And when was the last time a Republican paid down the debt? Reagan institutionalized it, and it grew faster under Republicans than under Democrats.

[KYA]

So we go with the lesser of two evils? That contradicts your comments in this thread thus far.