Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the right-wingers don't like ACA, let them propose a superior replacement that provides as much if not more of a safety net for those less fortunate in society.
Oh wait: That wasn't what the right-wingers want, is it? They want to dump poor people over a cliff and rationalize such irresponsible self-centeredness with vacuously inane excuses for their callous disregard for the most vulnerable in society.
If the right-wingers don't like ACA, let them propose a superior replacement that provides as much if not more of a safety net for those less fortunate in society.
Oh wait: That wasn't what the right-wingers want, is it? They want to dump poor people over a cliff and rationalize such irresponsible self-centeredness with vacuously inane excuses for their callous disregard for the most vulnerable in society.
It is Ayn Rand objectivism, openly adopted by certain influental repubs (including Limbaugh, Paul Ryan). A bonafide sociopath, Rand objectivism says that selfishness is a virtue, the weak and helpless (i.e. the poor and sick) are useless burdens (i.e. parasites, takers) on society who should be abandoned (i.e. no health care) so the "strong" can carry on. People who survive (the rich) are "superior animals" who mate with each other and this improves the societal gene pool.
That's the basics. Sound familiar?
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith.
Run a Presidential candidate on the platform of repealing the PPACA. Oh, wait - you did. You lost.
Get a majority in Congress and overturn the legislation. Wait a sec - you tried that too, didn't you?
I guess all you can do then is challenge the law in the Supreme Court... Yeah, that sorta misfired, too.
Well, too bad, then. The legislation stands. Put on your big-girl pants and deal.
Actually most of the supreme court challenges were delayed because Obamacare wasnt implimented yet..
You havent seen anything yet...
And if Congress isnt having an effect, why are you spending so much time whining about it? According to your argument, slavery should still be legal since the Supreme Court upheld that as well..
If the right-wingers don't like ACA, let them propose a superior replacement that provides as much if not more of a safety net for those less fortunate in society.
Oh wait: That wasn't what the right-wingers want, is it? They want to dump poor people over a cliff and rationalize such irresponsible self-centeredness with vacuously inane excuses for their callous disregard for the most vulnerable in society.
If you might care to notice -- ObamaCare is dumping the working poor over a cliff -- I guess people in this country that struggle to get by on $17,000 to $28,000 a year don't matter .. ObamaCare wasn't written for these people.
When you are required to pay up to 52% of your annual income to pay for insurance, then there's a problem ..
ObamaCare was written only for the already existing welfare cases and the insurance industry.
LIE.. Obamacare is expected to cost the states BILLIONS, and possibly the federal government TRILLIONS..
You have yet to tell me where that money will come from.
Should we cut out aid to food stamps, or starve seniors by cancelling Social Security?
INNUENDO.."expected" by whom, the Fox "experts" on their payroll?
Any objectivist conservative certainly wants to destroy social security - and have hated that "entitlement" from day one. Where ya been?
INNUENDO..expected by whom, the Fox "experts" on their payroll?
Any objectivist conservative certainly wants to destroy social security - and have hated that "entitlement" from day one. Where ya been?
Why is it, everyone who supports the bill, doesnt seem to know very much about the costs involved in it?
The same goes for non-supporters.
Besides your duck-and-dodge tactics on what other posters contribute, you automatically assume that opponents and people of your view have the real "truth" - but your views are suspect because the RW wants it to fail. You can find all kinds of similar-minded RW trumped-up "studies" which support your view (breitbart, daily caller, godfather, etal), and they are a total waste of time because of their, and your, agenda.
I do wonder about the effect of delaying the mandate of businesses to pay the penalty and the amount of revenue lost by cancelling the LTC insurance program. These are 2 sources of revenue that need to be replaced. IMO this is what the Republicans could have rationally focused on. Lower the debt limit by the proposed revenue to ACA that was lost by these 2 policy changes or pick another area of the budget that you will lower by that lost revenue amount.
FYI: Our dem state is working within the ACA parameters and our insurance payments for next year is going to go up by 10%... and it has already been very high and going up yearly... so how is that working out for us exactly?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
