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.
Such a sad day for America. It saddens me that so many Americans that I swore to defend for 15 years of my life in the USAF would blindly and blithely subscribe to the folly of a collection of lazy, socialist, fragile egomaniacs who hate the idea of working for/earning any benefits.
Ladies and gentlemen, the libnuts got their way - it's survival of the fittest. Let's hope that most of these freaks that want something for nothing continue to shove McDonalds/Jack In The Box/whatever down each and every morning into their mordibly obese lemming-like selves and thereby eliminate themselves from a rapidly weakening domestic gene pool.
I can't believe that I, along with so many other decorated veterans on CDF, fought for a nation filled with absolutely ignorant people that supported this immense pile of pork.
Because I remember myself having very different political views in college. My political stance changed very quickly after having worked in the real world for awhile.
This is true with most people still in school. Things change a lot when you graduate and get a real job. It's entirely different...
His opinion still counts just as much as yours. You don't get to decide that.
Perhaps you should actually read about how its going to be funded? The government is not funding this with by deficit spending, the spending is funded via taxes. For example an increase of .9% on medicare taxes on income above $200k ($250k for households) and also charging medicare taxes on certain investment income (which is strangely currently excluded...).
Yeah right. Discounting the accounting gimmicks in the estimates....where is the money going to come from when the real costs come in? Only a fool would believe that the costs will come in as estimated (when has a government program EVER not exceeded the estimates?) or even more laughable....that we'll actually save money on this boondoggle.
No...its being funded by modest tax increases. Also, estimates are just that...estimates. One can always argue that the estimate is overly rosy or this and that and at the end of the day the only way you're really going to know is to see what happens.
The Congressional Budget office is bipartisan, but of course when a bipartisan organization says something that conflicts with a particular party it is deemed a partisan organization. Its all one big joke...
why don't you tell me exactly why you support this turd sammich of a bill.
I find it very interesting that there are people on this forum that think the only reason someone could support this bill would be because they must have some sort of personal gain from it.
Some people actually believe that health care is something that all Americans should have access to. Really. Some people just actually care for their fellow human beings, without having anything to gain.
Crazy! I know!
To address your edit of the last post, to know I'm close to tax increase, family income approaching $250k.
I find it very interesting that there are people on this forum that think the only reason someone could support this bill would be because they must have some sort of personal gain from it.
Some people actually believe that health care is something that all Americans should have access to. Really. Some people just actually care for their fellow human beings, without having anything to gain.
Crazy! I know!
To address your edit of the last post, to know I'm close to tax increase, family income approaching $250k.
I think what they are asking is not why you would support socialized medicine (which this bill is NOT) but what provisions or articles in this bill do you support. Essentially, have you read the bill to verify the title matches the contents?
No...its being funded by modest tax increases. Also, estimates are just that...estimates. One can always argue that the estimate is overly rosy or this and that and at the end of the day the only way you're really going to know is to see what happens.
The Congressional Budget office is bipartisan, but of course when a bipartisan organization says something that conflicts with a particular party it is deemed a partisan organization. Its all one big joke...
From the article...
Quote:
The answer, unfortunately, is that the budget office is required to take written legislation at face value and not second-guess the plausibility of what it is handed. So fantasy in, fantasy out.
Do some research!!!
Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congressional budget scorekeepers say a Medicare fix that Democrats included in earlier versions of their health care bill would push it into the red.
The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that rolling back a programmed cut in Medicare fees to doctors would cost $208 billion over 10 years. If added back to the health care overhaul bill, it would wipe out all the deficit reduction, leaving the legislation $59 billion in the red.
The so-called doc fix was part of the original House bill. Because of its high cost, Democrats decided to pursue it separately. Republicans say the cost should not be ignored. Congress has usually waived the cuts to doctors year by year.
Medicare fix would push health care into the red - Yahoo! Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Medicare-fix-would-push-apf-2700343586.html?x=0&.v=2 - broken link)
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.