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.
The GOP-sponsored Medicare Drug program of 2003 had a HORRIBLE rollout and was very unpopular to begin with - now, 10 years later:
"Nine of 10 seniors are satisfied with their drug coverage a decade after then President George W. Bush signed into law the massive prescription entitlement for millions of elderly Americans under the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003..."
Well let's see. If a corrupted statement is made, and is supported by a non-credible source, what's the most effectively way of refuting that statement? Answer: Point out the lack of credibility of the source.
Did you even think through your reply logically before posting it? It sure seems like you did not.
How about you actually research what the guy has posted. Present your counter examples. But no, you either didn't think to do that, because you really didn't think your reply through logically before posting it, or you do know that what I wrote is true, that the guy is a right-wing hack, and you didn't want to admit it, because you realized that it would make that much clearer that your earlier comments were without merit.
Uh huh. Let's see what other nonsense you come up with.
Look, you don't have to take his word for it. You don't even have to take a third party word for it. Companies have released direct statements of their reactions to Obamacare, but if you didn't have such blinders and filters on you could see that. You are right though, my post was illogical for thinking you would dig deeper into the matter instead of going off on a left-wing temper tantrum, but I assumed too much of your capabilities. Sorry.
Since you consider the shutdown "little", please prove it by posting a receipt showing your remittance of $24B of your own money into the US Treasury.
Employees being disengaged , calling in a false illness to go to a game, texting, so and so on "cost" the economy billions. The economy doesn't have a a set standard of how much money it's supposed to make. It fluctuates all the time. It will be fine. Why the hell should I reimburse the treasury? I, nor any citizens beyond lawful taxes owe it anything. Not sure what silly point you were trying to make.
Quote:
It isn't just about government workers pay being delayed. There was other, very substantial, non-reversible damage. Even if you refuse to admit it.
What were the these non-reversible damage you keep squealing on about and yet to say anything about it in detail?
Quote:
Call me a little road-weary but after outlining the benefits of ACA about a thousand times, a reasonable person would believe that critics like you already understand what we've said and simply refuse to admit it. ACA is intended to make health coverage affordable for those who could not afford healthcare under the prior system. Prove to me that your comment here has some integrity and that you have some measure of care for others by acknowledging that, after a few decades of trying to bring about some significant healthcare reform, that that accomplishment is substantial, and that the life and health of those most vulnerable in society is more important than how ACA's impact on those more affluent will adversely impact their comfort and luxury. Show that you recognize a responsible prioritization when you see it.
Until I actually hear from everyday people preaching the benefits of ACA, then I would concede. Not some governmental sponsored research from a partial source. I will take the word of those who actually have to live with it over what some bureaucrat or blogger or politician or pundit with an agenda to sell. You can quote whatever "study" you can find, won't change the way the people have been affected by it.
Quote:
This thread isn't about the virtues of ACA, so expecting a full rehashing of what has already been discussed in detail in other threads isn't on-topic. You've heard all the arguments, even if you deny it. This thread is about the blame for the shutdown. Stop denying that the side you support was at fault, for insisting on rehashing the same argument that they've lost 40+ times already. That's the topic of this thread - the rehashing.
I haven't heard any argument that wasn't put forth my some lefty quoting some pundit or bias source. I am going by what the people have said. I have, in real life, set across people telling me how negatively Obamacare affected them. Not people with an agenda, but actually Obama supporters working everyday jobs.You might have bought in to what some elite puppet-master had to say, sorry for that.
Quote:
Say something relevant to this thread, and I'll address it. Stop trying to make every political argument about ACA. That's over. Expect outright ridicule for every additional attempt you make to replay the same argument your side has lost 40+ times already. It's time for the right-wing to grow up and move onto honorably working with their opposition to make things better, even within ACA.
Really, this is what I meant by echo chambers. You don't want to hear anything that may be negative about your ideology, party or views. I am not making political arguments about ACA, I am stating how the way people and businesses have been affected by it, because you don't want to hear it because it makes your party look bad then it's making "political arguments" and you don't want to hear it. Someone, an Obama supporter, hell, several Obama supporters tell me that their hrs been cut by Obamacare and it's making "political arguments". What type of hyper-partisan crap is that?
And grow up? Why the hell should the right work with liberals making their policies better?. IF they couldn't reach it through bi-partisan support why should it fall on the right to make a bridge? If their policies wasn't such disasters, why should the right come in and help and not let the left own the mess they created in their hubris?. No, you people grow up and deal with your own stupidity. Your side created ACA, now deal with it.
Quote:
How convenient... you decide the parameters of the assessment and then make the assessment and then declare that your side comes down on the right side of the assessment. Do you even realize how self-delusional your comments are? Eric, I have to give you credit: You have mastered circular reasoning.
I am affected by ACA and don't benefit from it at all. I support it because it is the right thing to do. That's all. Your comments are therefore utterly wrong. But will you admit it? Of course not. Because part of the right-wing deception that you've evidently taken in, you are forced to believe that the people supporting ACA are doing so for their own personal benefit, even though nothing could be further from the truth in many cases.
Regardless, you're again trying to rehash the ACA matter. It's over. Show that your side has some measure of responsibility and mature demeanor and start moving ahead with other issues.
I said that liberals like you are pushing things, like Obamacare, pushed by people who won't be affected by it, the numerous waivers given out to Unions, businesses, government workers, etc, and when those things have all kinds of unintended consequences, liberals just tell you to shut up and get out the way. Isn't that what you are doing?. that your side "won" and that to just be quiet and move on?. No delusion on my part, a reading comprehension, or lack thereof on yours though.
And if I had a penny for every time a liberal said they don't mind paying higher taxes, more regulations and more bureaucracy, I would be rich as sin (even though very few liberals, if any, live what they preach, an Occupy Activist was just convicted with evidence by his Rolex, you can't make this up). Pat yourself on the back, I don't care what you support and don't. People, the working class have been affected not too well by it so I don't care what you are for or not. I am not trying to "rehash" anything. It is Obamacare that can't seem to stop being a disaster. Just recently it was said that people would have to pay upfront for deductibles they could barely afford. So why you think the argument is over and anything after that is rehashing, some of use are not left-wing, hyper-partisan, ideologues.
Quote:
Yes you are. I understand right-wingers have to fall back on deception to support most of what they support, but please don't deceive yourself about this: Republicans committed a corrupted act. Even other Republicans publicly state that. Admit at least that much.
What I think the right did was extreme, yes, but seeing as how the left want to ram any policy down the throats of Americans and force it there until they accept it is a far greater corruption. The govt is back on but Obama-care horrors are just beginning. By next week the govt shutdown will be old news, lets see if Obamacare could do the same and not some new unintended consequence is reported. Would you flap your arms at that too and say "we won, the argument is over, so move on"...I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
Quote:
Now you're just projecting. That's exactly what Cruz and his ilk have done for the last two weeks. Enough with the nonsense, Eric. Time to accept that the nation is not all about just what you want. Time to move on.
Really?, nonsense, who are the ones shoving this horrible policy down the nation's throat and demanding it stay there no matter the fallout? Because you people don't want to admit you are wrong you would rather gag and choke us all and when we speak up we are the selfish and demanding ones. Really now, come on. It's you people putting your ideology above the nation's well being, come off it.
BTW - 'just a little shut down'? That's indicative of the uninformed tea party mantra. Go research how much that 'little shutdown' has cost our country.
I'm going to agree with you that the website is a disaster ~ how about that?
I'm not going to agree that the Teaparty did anything but HARM our country. They have had 40 chances to suggest improvements to Obamacare and they tried to outlaw it; defund it; etc.
It was the teabaggers that stomped their feet and had a tantrum - while the rest of us watched
and PAID FOR IT.
Ok, list tea party members in positions of power that have put forth policies and laws that have harmed us. Seeing as how Obama said flat-out that he will not compromise, why the hell is it always up to the right to bend and give in and when the don't, they are being selfish and uncooperative? Even for not accepting left-wing idiocy, they still need to shut up and work with whatever the dems want. Maybe if Obamacare wasn't such a mess the right wouldn't have much to cry about but seeing as how that's not the case, then maybe the democrats ought to be a little more compromising seeing as how this is the mess they created.
The economy doesn't have a a set standard of how much money it's supposed to make.
But it has a set amount right now, and so right-wing crybabies costing the nation $24 billion right now matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricGold
What were the these non-reversible damage you keep squealing on about and yet to say anything about it in detail?
I'll gladly provide you the details as soon as you admit that you're ignorant about the impact of the shutdown on the economy. I won't spent my time copying and pasting links for you to read unless you are honorable in your inquiry. So which is it? Are you engaging in another deflection game? Or are you sincere in your profession of ignorance about what has been reported by practically every news source?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricGold
Until I actually hear from everyday people preaching the benefits of ACA, then I would concede.
You didn't read the comment you replied to. Amazing. Utterly amazing.
That paragraph was mostly challenge you to show some character. "Prove to me ... that you have some measure of care for others ... that the life and health of those most vulnerable in society is more important ...
I don't see you even claiming, much less doing so in a convincing way, that you hold to a moral perspective. You dodge and evade addressing yourself to the moral character of that which you support. Probably a very wise move, since, as I've pointed out, you support a perspective that favors a patently immoral prioritization.
Regardless, I bet you're going to keep yourself and your family insulated from the places where the most vulnerable people in our society live, so you won't ever allow yourself the opportunity to learn first-hand the benefits of ACA doing what it was actually intended to do. How incredibly convenient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricGold
You can quote whatever "study" you can find, won't change the way the people have been affected by it.
And your refusal to consider how our current system affects those less affluent doesn't change the way those people have been affected by it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricGold
Not people with an agenda
Imagine that. You find people who are telling you what you want to hear, and declare that they don't have an agenda, and you really think that that is not self-deception? Let's dig into this: Please provide details proving that these people you talked with are the most vulnerable members of our society. Present their monthly budgets showing that they didn't earn enough income to pay for all the essentials of life, and are suffering with treatable conditions because healthcare is what they sacrificed. Let's see you prove that the people you spoke to were the people ACA was supposed to benefit, first, and then let's see you prove that they're not going to be helped by ACA next year. Put up or shut up time. Please show that you're not just engaging in self-delusion. I'll be waiting patiently for your proof.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 10-20-2013 at 09:02 AM..
Reason: no need to get personal
And you, Ken, might be happy to support those but you shouldn't have to, because the insured won't benefit as much as the providers, and guess who will eat up all that money? Government and insurance companies.
So what you're saying is that a poor person with cancer is better off without health coverage, better of leaving the cancer untreated, because them having health coverage will benefit the folks who provide them cancer treatment.
And you want the government deciding who is deserving of what kind of care?? Really?
Did Medicare ever iron out its bugs, as you call them?
Doesn't the ACA (aka, the government) decide that EVERYONE should be able to receive care by virtue of them now having access to health insurance?
As for Medicare, I only hear good reports from most people who have it. My parents have been on it for a year now and, prior to that, they had a very cadillac Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan. They both have been really pleased with how their claims/treatment/payment has been handled. My mom is completely surprised--she was scared to death to go on Medicare.
So what you're saying is that a poor person with cancer is better off without health coverage, better of leaving the cancer untreated, because them having health coverage will benefit the folks who provide them cancer treatment.
That's remarkably "interesting" "logic".
Actually I think the age of that poor cancer person will decide "if" they get treatment at all and how good that treatment will be, and the biggest one will be "if" there's any quality cancer centers still willing to take said patient to begin with.
If it goes anything like Medicare/Medicare Advantage it's very possible facilities will go the way of Mayo Clinic and just refuse to take 'em at all.
There's no question that some providers will seek to evade society's intentions. There will always be people who get special privileges at the top just like there will always be people who fall through the cracks at the bottom. That isn't justification for relaxing society's efforts to keep those two scenarios as rare as is practicable.
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.
