Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2015, 01:21 PM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,858,535 times
Reputation: 9283

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Where did you get this nonsense? Sen. Nelson alone motivated a great deal of compromise on the issue of Obamacare funding abortion.
Are you talking about Cornhusker kickback Nelson... who is incidentally a Democrat... what are you talking about? He was one of the few holdouts to get to 60... You think Obama talked to him because he wanted to? You think Obama talked to the republicans to inject their ideas into the Obamacare? Delusion must be bliss...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2015, 01:24 PM
 
18,983 posts, read 9,075,608 times
Reputation: 14688
Quote:
Originally Posted by katzpaw View Post
Too bad Obama tried to compromise and our politicians are owned by big business - should have gone for single payer. Even the article cited by the OP says single payer has less overhead.
Yep, that was before Obama realized the GOP had morphed into the party of hell no!! to everything. Attempting to work with the Tea Party was the president's biggest mistake. It was, and still is, an exercise in futility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,364,082 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
So true. I lived in Massachusetts in 2006. I watched Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich sell this exact plan every single day in the newspapers, on TV and on Sunday shows. They both went on Sunday shows - yes, Newt Gingrich(!) saying Romneycare was the GOP solution to national health coverage. It's sickening to watch how the GOP lies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/he...ives.html?_r=0

Gingrich Supported Romney Health Care Plan in 2006 Newsletter | Fox News

Gingrich praised Romney health care plan in 2006

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...ticle-1.997193

Reversal On Health Mandate Came Late For Gingrich And Romney : Shots - Health News : NPR

The Tortuous History of Conservatives and the Individual Mandate
"Newt Gingrich(!) " has not been very popular among conservatives in around 15 years. He derailed the conservative revolution of 1994, then went on to work as a "historian" for Freddie Mac. This was why he tanked in the 2012 primaries, just as I predicted that he would.
//www.city-data.com/forum/elect...newt-tank.html

As for Romney, at the time he was tacking as a moderate/liberal R in what was arguably the most liberal state in the union--the only state to vote for McGovern as prez. If Romney had not been left of center at the time, he never would have been elected Gov. of Mass. I believe that Romney later went a genuine conversion to conservatism. The best evidence is that he continued to run hard right after he got the 2012 nomination, when it would have been to his advantage to swing back left.

Anyway to cite Romney and Gingrich from 2006 as proof that Obamacare was really somehow a conservative program is a fail.

Again this legislation was passed with ZERO (!) Republican votes. Democrats own it 100%. No amount of twisting and turning is ever going to get around that simple fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 01:38 PM
 
21,989 posts, read 15,716,760 times
Reputation: 12943
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
"Newt Gingrich(!) " has not been very popular among conservatives in around 15 years. He derailed the conservative revolution of 1994, then went on to work as a "historian" for Freddie Mac. This was why he tanked in the 2012 primaries, just as I predicted that he would.
//www.city-data.com/forum/elect...newt-tank.html

As for Romney, at the time he was tacking as a moderate/liberal R in what was arguably the most liberal state in the union--the only state to vote for McGovern as prez. If Romney had not been left of center at the time, he never would have been elected Gov. of Mass. I believe that Romney later went a genuine conversion to conservatism. The best evidence is that he continued to run hard right after he got the 2012 nomination, when it would have been to his advantage to swing back left.

Anyway to cite Romney and Gingrich from 2006 as proof that Obamacare was really somehow a conservative program is a fail.

Again this legislation was passed with ZERO (!) Republican votes. Democrats own it 100%. No amount of twisting and turning is ever going to get around that simple fact.
You're joking, right? Not only are Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney Republicans - they both ran as Republican presidential candidates after Obamacare was passed and Mitt Romney was your Republican presidential candidate in 2012. And Romneycare came from the Heritage Foundation, a Republican think tank.

Give it a rest. As you know, Republicans plotted to vote against anything and everything the Democrats proposed on the night of Obama's election. It wouldn't have mattered if they handed a blank page to the GOP Congress and said "here, you write it", they still would have voted against it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 01:54 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Medicare is insurance.
Medicare is the closest thing we have to single payer.
Medicare isnt a signle payer system, Medicare takes taxpayer money and then contracts out the payment to various processing companies, paying them a flat rate, then the processing companies, (usually insurance companies), then make payment, thus reducing the Medicare overhead, while "profiting" from the spread. The insurance company takes on the risk, while Medicare can budget the overhead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 01:56 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
I looked more closely at the report and it's more stupid than you might have thought. Most of the additional cost is basically just the cost of private insurance going up (because more people have insurance).
Ahh, see thats just wrong though.. ACA needed to be passed in order to insure the 32 million americans who didnt have insurance. We now have about 34 million uninsured, and the number isnt expected to fall below 30 million..

Furthermore, the cost wasnt supposed to go up, we were told it would go down, $2500 per family to be exact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 02:00 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post
Thanks for digging deeper, deconstructing wingnut stories is tiresome and commensurate to this video.
ACA was supposed to REDUCE the cost of insurance, not raise it
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 02:02 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Something like 1/10th the overhead in private insurance. Switching everyone to Medicare would probably be the single easiest way to reduce the cost of health care in America.
Thats not true either, medicare keeps its overhead low by outsourcing much of its payment processing to the private industry, who THEN makes payments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 02:02 PM
 
324 posts, read 416,691 times
Reputation: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
ACA was supposed to REDUCE the cost of insurance, not raise it
Actually that's false. Obamacare was supposed to slow the growth of healthcare cost. To my knowledge, it has done just that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2015, 02:04 PM
 
324 posts, read 416,691 times
Reputation: 189
Quote:
2 months is overly generous. Between Frankin's recount, Kennedy's death, and
various legislative breaks and holidays, the Dems had a useful supermajority for
something like a week or two.
lol....You're probably right. I don't remember the exact figures, but I knew it was WAAAAYYYY shorter than the 2 years the GOP is always talking about..lol..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:07 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top