Jump to content


- - - - -

Definition of Failure : Obama repeals Obamcare


#31 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 26 December 2013 - 04:51 AM

Okay great let's say they weren't even decent or mediocre. That STILL doesn't change the fact that Obamacare is making it even worse. Why defend a crap plan like that?

You mean being forced to get a plan that actually covers that stuff? Protecting people from themselves? The horror.... We do this everyday, in the form of age restrictions. 

 

Like I said before, I think Obamacare WILL fail. But the optimist in me hopes that something will be changed as a result. (For instance, the impending bankruptcy of Medicare) Perhaps hospitals will learn to be more efficient, like in the Checklist Manifesto, as opposed to just being satisfied with the status quo.

 

As for "worse," our current medical system allows hospitals to change 3-6X what a lab will do for the same service, in the same neighborhood. Our system isn't so great as is (in part because of insurance, in part because when the services are needed, shopping around isn't an option), and it could stand a few scares to remind it why something like Obamacare even came up in the first place.

 

And you're facing an uphill battle if you're going to try and convince me hospitals price competitively. Ignoring what other countries charge for the same services for comparable quality, just look at US hospital bill. It will list the price they charge, the negotiated price the insurance companies agreed to pay, and the co-pay you're responsible for.

 

From a logical perspective, the negotiated price is going to be closer to what the hospital needs to charge for their services (still at a profit, because otherwise the hospital would not do business). Which means the difference between the negotiated price and the insurance price is basically PURE GOUGING, often on people who have no choice about treatment. And the hospital price is terrifyingly larger than the negotiated price. 

 

Or look at medication: there is this one medicine I know of, that is fairly critical and important for people with a certain condition. On some insurance plans, it costs at least $20 a pill. On a good plan, it's $20 a month.

 

I have no sympathy or fondness for the way things currently are. 

 

While it has been said that insurance is not a right, and that not everyone deserves it. Fine. Consider the other way of stating that argument: "if you're too poor, go and die in a ditch." Fine. Except that means we start running out of people to do the menial jobs, OR, the American taxpayer is forced to pay what the hospital chooses to charge for their services (and it's NOT the lower negotiated insurance price)



#32 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 26 December 2013 - 06:48 AM

You mean being forced to get a plan that actually covers that stuff? Protecting people from themselves? The horror.... We do this everyday, in the form of age restrictions. 
 
Like I said before, I think Obamacare WILL fail. But the optimist in me hopes that something will be changed as a result. (For instance, the impending bankruptcy of Medicare) Perhaps hospitals will learn to be more efficient, like in the Checklist Manifesto, as opposed to just being satisfied with the status quo.
 
As for "worse," our current medical system allows hospitals to change 3-6X what a lab will do for the same service, in the same neighborhood. Our system isn't so great as is (in part because of insurance, in part because when the services are needed, shopping around isn't an option), and it could stand a few scares to remind it why something like Obamacare even came up in the first place.
 
And you're facing an uphill battle if you're going to try and convince me hospitals price competitively. Ignoring what other countries charge for the same services for comparable quality, just look at US hospital bill. It will list the price they charge, the negotiated price the insurance companies agreed to pay, and the co-pay you're responsible for.
 
From a logical perspective, the negotiated price is going to be closer to what the hospital needs to charge for their services (still at a profit, because otherwise the hospital would not do business). Which means the difference between the negotiated price and the insurance price is basically PURE GOUGING, often on people who have no choice about treatment. And the hospital price is terrifyingly larger than the negotiated price. 
 
Or look at medication: there is this one medicine I know of, that is fairly critical and important for people with a certain condition. On some insurance plans, it costs at least $20 a pill. On a good plan, it's $20 a month.
 
I have no sympathy or fondness for the way things currently are. 
 
While it has been said that insurance is not a right, and that not everyone deserves it. Fine. Consider the other way of stating that argument: "if you're too poor, go and die in a ditch." Fine. Except that means we start running out of people to do the menial jobs, OR, the American taxpayer is forced to pay what the hospital chooses to charge for their services (and it's NOT the lower negotiated insurance price)


All very valid points you made. Which is all the more reason why instead of jamming down a plan that doesn't work they should scrap the whole thing and start over again.

The reason this won't happen is because Obamacare was never about healthcare to begin with. It was about getting more votes and more power. This law effectively controls 1/5th of our economy now.

I want plans like this to FAIL if it is going to ruin a country. Why root for something that is clearly a power grab and not actually designed to improve the healthcare of those whom they actually want to affect.

On the surface it sounds great but the more time passes the more people will realize there are so many loopholes and hidden regulations involved in this law it is scary.

In the immortal words of Nancy Pelosi "We have to pass the healthcare law in order to find out what is in it."

That is just swell...

#33 Msut77   Occam's Shank CAGiversary!   6050 Posts   Joined 10.4 Years Ago  

Posted 26 December 2013 - 10:23 AM

In essence the healthcare law makes it harder for insurance companies to kill people for their. If it is government control for that to happen so be it.


wahhhhh noone helped me so they must not help anyone. - knoell

#34 mrsilkunderwear   Just Do It. CAGiversary!   1484 Posts   Joined 5.6 Years Ago  

mrsilkunderwear

Posted 26 December 2013 - 04:24 PM

Car insurance is too expensive for some people that they drive without it. Can we get the government involved so everyone is forced to have it? Msut what think you?



#35 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 26 December 2013 - 06:50 PM

All very valid points you made. Which is all the more reason why instead of jamming down a plan that doesn't work they should scrap the whole thing and start over again.

The reason this won't happen is because Obamacare was never about healthcare to begin with. It was about getting more votes and more power. This law effectively controls 1/5th of our economy now.

I want plans like this to FAIL if it is going to ruin a country. Why root for something that is clearly a power grab and not actually designed to improve the healthcare of those whom they actually want to affect.

On the surface it sounds great but the more time passes the more people will realize there are so many loopholes and hidden regulations involved in this law it is scary.

In the immortal words of Nancy Pelosi "We have to pass the healthcare law in order to find out what is in it."

That is just swell...

The problem with "scrapping the whole thing" is that it is doomed to failure.

 

Obamacare started out as a much more ambitious plan, with the aim of improving the system. After battles in Congress, lobbying, it's basically this hamstrung thing it is now.

 

Starting all over again would just repeat this. Whatever new thing they come up with will get tied up, battled, and hamstrung all over again.

 

Change is only going to happen incrementally. And we only get the incremental changes by proposing large changes, and then watch as most of it gets stripped away. Most likely Obamacare fails. But possibly some good practices come out of it. And the system improves gradually.

 

I am very curious as to how you can call this a power grab. If it was solely about getting votes, it would have been dropped as soon as the election was won. Instead, he continued to push it through, It's eroding the Democrat solidarity, and it's unpopular so far.

 

And while you say this is going to RUIN the country, I disagree. Not because it's good/bad, but because this country has been through a LOT worse.



#36 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 26 December 2013 - 06:54 PM

Car insurance is too expensive for some people that they drive without it. Can we get the government involved so everyone is forced to have it? Msut what think you?

 

They ARE forced to have car insurance. If you are caught driving a car without insurance, you are in for some STIFF penalties.



#37 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 27 December 2013 - 12:54 AM

And while you say this is going to RUIN the country, I disagree. Not because it's good/bad, but because this country has been through a LOT worse.


You are right the country started to really go downhill after FDR's and LBJ's social programs that they all promised would only be "temporary".

#38 mrsilkunderwear   Just Do It. CAGiversary!   1484 Posts   Joined 5.6 Years Ago  

mrsilkunderwear

Posted 27 December 2013 - 02:44 AM

They ARE forced to have car insurance. If you are caught driving a car without insurance, you are in for some STIFF penalties.

By forced I mean having it without an option of opting out like nationalized healthcare. 



#39 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 27 December 2013 - 03:49 AM

You are right the country started to really go downhill after FDR's and LBJ's social programs that they all promised would only be "temporary".

Well, then our country was already doomed long before Obama.



#40 usickenme   I'm the a-hole CAGiversary!   2495 Posts   Joined 11.3 Years Ago  

usickenme

Posted 27 December 2013 - 08:21 PM

Okay great let's say they weren't even decent or mediocre. That STILL doesn't change the fact that Obamacare is making it even worse. Why defend a crap plan like that?

Bullshit.

 

It was already bad. When I worked at a place that provided insurance we got a new plan EVERY year the 6 years I worked there... every year because cost were increasing/ we were getting less. The company tried many ways (to their credit) to still provide decent care.   

 

Its a big complicated thing for sure...made worse by the utter stupidity and short-sightedness (**ahem,**) of the average american.  But it's a step for the better.



#41 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 30 December 2013 - 12:18 AM

Bullshit.
 
It was already bad. When I worked at a place that provided insurance we got a new plan EVERY year the 6 years I worked there... every year because cost were increasing/ we were getting less. The company tried many ways (to their credit) to still provide decent care.   
 
Its a big complicated thing for sure...made worse by the utter stupidity and short-sightedness (**ahem,**) of the average american.  But it's a step for the better.


Okay great so lets use your words, it was already bad. Obamacare only made it even worse. How many times do they need to keep pushing back the deadline to make this debacle work? The fact that its had so many false starts is a joke. If Bush had rolled out something like this they would have killed it after a month and the media sure as hell wouldn't have given as many chances as it has.

#42 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 30 December 2013 - 12:20 AM

Well, then our country was already doomed long before Obama.


Correct but look who I referenced. FDR and LBJ. Both huge liberals. Just look at California and Detroit. A state and an area ruled for a majority of its years by Democrat rule and its in the dump. That is slowly what is happening to the country. There is enough blame to go around for alot of people. But the brunt of the blame goes to the liberals on the domestic front and Obama's debt is more than all of the other presidents COMBINED. On the foreign policy front, Bush screwed up big time with the Iraq War and trying to fight for daddy.

However LBJ got us into Vietnam and Nixon got us out, people always like to forget that.

#43 Jruth   No trite shit crew gamer bro CAGiversary!   270 Posts   Joined 6.9 Years Ago  

Posted 30 December 2013 - 09:33 AM

 I certainly don't like how some libs can be so resolute in their beliefs to even cast vile aspersions to those who simply disagree. There hasn't been a conservative mayor in Detroit since 1961. They bankrupted one of America's greatest cities. Such a long reign as well, you would think Detroit would resemble teenage Obama's utopia at this point. Off, waaaaaaaaaaay off. But no, there will still be poverty stricken cities run by D's. Repubs are still just grossly uncaring. And political discourse is juvenile.


Haven't you figured it out yet fanboys? Your mommy can't afford both consoles! Be grateful with what you got and shut the Fuck up.

 

 

                                                                                                                                             - starving African bro

 


#44 RedvsBlue  

RedvsBlue

Posted 30 December 2013 - 01:02 PM

I certainly don't like how some libs can be so resolute in their beliefs to even cast vile aspersions to those who simply disagree. There hasn't been a conservative mayor in Detroit since 1961. They bankrupted one of America's greatest cities. Such a long reign as well, you would think Detroit would resemble teenage Obama's utopia at this point. Off, waaaaaaaaaaay off. But no, there will still be poverty stricken cities run by D's. Repubs are still just grossly uncaring. And political discourse is juvenile.


Yeah, the collapse of Detroit was due entirely to having democratic mayors. It had nothing at all to do with the continuing decline and collapse of the American auto industry. :roll:

#45 Jruth   No trite shit crew gamer bro CAGiversary!   270 Posts   Joined 6.9 Years Ago  

Posted 30 December 2013 - 02:38 PM

Now I don't mean this sarcastically - but can we conclude the collapse of the auto industry is why Detroit's liberal public school system is abysmal, It's the crime capitol of the U.S, or why public service employees receive giveaways - outlandish salary's and benefit packages? Political corruption of the highest order. 36 percent poverty level. $28,000 median household income compared to the state median of $49,000. 18% unemployment.

 

 

 

”The city could stop doing all of its current operations today–no more police and fire, no more garbage collection, no more street lights–and the city would still have billions of dollars of debt and promises made for future payments that it would have to pay.”

 

- Eric Lupher,

director of local affairs for the Citizens Research Council of Michigan.


Haven't you figured it out yet fanboys? Your mommy can't afford both consoles! Be grateful with what you got and shut the Fuck up.

 

 

                                                                                                                                             - starving African bro

 


#46 RedvsBlue  

RedvsBlue

Posted 30 December 2013 - 08:12 PM

You're just trolling now with your one dimensional arguments. Public schools function based on property taxes, people being out of work means they aren't paying those taxes and the schools aren't being funded. You're also absolutely daft beyond belief if you don't think crime follows poverty, a poverty caused by the collapse of the only major industry in an area.

That town has never, and will likely never, recover from the American auto industry collapse. It doesn't matter who the fucking mayor is at this point.

#47 mrsilkunderwear   Just Do It. CAGiversary!   1484 Posts   Joined 5.6 Years Ago  

mrsilkunderwear

Posted 31 December 2013 - 04:14 AM

You're just trolling now with your one dimensional arguments. Public schools function based on property taxes, people being out of work means they aren't paying those taxes and the schools aren't being funded. You're also absolutely daft beyond belief if you don't think crime follows poverty, a poverty caused by the collapse of the only major industry in an area.

That town has never, and will likely never, recover from the American auto industry collapse. It doesn't matter who the fucking mayor is at this point.

Out of curiosity, do you know of any other cities that might be going bankrupt and how many of them have been run by liberals and democrats? 



#48 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 31 December 2013 - 04:29 PM

Correct but look who I referenced. FDR and LBJ. Both huge liberals. Just look at California and Detroit. A state and an area ruled for a majority of its years by Democrat rule and its in the dump. That is slowly what is happening to the country. There is enough blame to go around for alot of people. But the brunt of the blame goes to the liberals on the domestic front and Obama's debt is more than all of the other presidents COMBINED. On the foreign policy front, Bush screwed up big time with the Iraq War and trying to fight for daddy.

However LBJ got us into Vietnam and Nixon got us out, people always like to forget that.

 

You keep saying Obama's debt, and I keep asking you about Reagan, once you factor in inflation. (About equal in terms of real-purchasing power, but Reagan quadrupled the deficit, Obama did less than that) The thing I've noticed about those figures so oft-cited is that not once do they ever seem to factor in inflation. They just look at the posted numbers and say whatever they want. Y'know how your grandparents complain about how they used to be able to buy a candy bar and a comic book for 5 cents, and now it's 3 dollars? Or why everyone laughed when Dr. Evil asked for a million dollars? Prices went up too,

 

And while you criticize FDR, consider that the Great Depression started in 1929, during Herbert Hoover, a Republican.

 

Similarly, the Great Recession started in W's administration.

 

I'm NOT saying either one was caused by Republicans, I'm sure it's a much more complicated mix from laws and regulations from before, as well as risky actions taken by whoever.

 

But my point is you appear to be blaming the person who is stuck trying to clean up the mess (putting aside whether he is doing a good or bad job), instead of trying to figure out who took the massive dump in the halls to begin with.

 

Maybe they did a good job helping the country, a bad job helping the country, or the country would have recovered on its own. But in all these situations, unless they made things demonstrably WORSE (hello Federal Reserve infighting), I would be MORE angry at the people who put us INTO the crappy situation in the first place.



#49 RedvsBlue  

RedvsBlue

Posted 31 December 2013 - 10:54 PM

Out of curiosity, do you know of any other cities that might be going bankrupt and how many of them have been run by liberals and democrats?


If my hypothesis was that having a liberal mayor will bankrupt a city then I would go look for the evidence to support that claim. I'm refuting the claim and giving an alternate reason for Detroit's downfall. If you or anyone else wants to support your claim then by all means go ahead and do your research and present your findings to support your claims.

Off the top of my head though I know that Minneapolis has had Democratic mayors since the early 70s and they're not showing any signs of going bankrupt. By all means though, anyone can start presenting evidence that democratic mayors lead to economic collapse of a city, I'm all ears.

#50 Jruth   No trite shit crew gamer bro CAGiversary!   270 Posts   Joined 6.9 Years Ago  

Posted 01 January 2014 - 06:48 PM

My Research: It was a shithole no one wanted to go to long before the collapse of the auto industry. I really wanted to point to a larger trend. Every policy has been more leftist than the next over years and years. Powerful unions and inefficient working laws championed by the Dems helped kill the auto industry as well.  Libs seem to promise utopia or at least have really vivid visions, my point was I just don't feel there's enough success.

 

 

Crime follows poverty? Ok I'll go there, I'd also argue crime follows dependency. Crime follows lack of self-respect and self-worth. Teach a man to...yada yada. First these kids were brainwashed then they were failed miserably when someone should have been focusing on their economic mobility above all else.


Haven't you figured it out yet fanboys? Your mommy can't afford both consoles! Be grateful with what you got and shut the Fuck up.

 

 

                                                                                                                                             - starving African bro

 


#51 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 02 January 2014 - 10:45 PM

My Research: It was a shithole no one wanted to go to long before the collapse of the auto industry. I really wanted to point to a larger trend. Every policy has been more leftist than the next over years and years. Powerful unions and inefficient working laws championed by the Dems helped kill the auto industry as well.  Libs seem to promise utopia or at least have really vivid visions, my point was I just don't feel there's enough success.

Detroit WAS a lousy place, but when the auto-industry was big, people moved there to work. And Detroit grew as a result.

 

I would posit, based on the view of someone who worked at GM, that the real cause for the failure of Detroit has less to do with Democratic or Liberal policies, but from laziness, a sense of entitlement, and an unwillingness to compete.

 

Back in the 70s, they believed they were on top of the world. Whenever the weather was good, people took the day off. You learned never to buy a car assembled on Monday or Friday (Monday, because they were still in weekend-mode, and Friday, because they were eager to get off work. For a windshield, if they were supposed to glue it in 8 places, they would only do 3).

 

They ignored the incoming Japanese cars with their better quality and better fuel efficiency, content to tell themselves that they knew what they American public really wanted. As a result, their cars were shit too. And then everytime they lost in another area, they just retreated a little further until they basically only sold large cars like trucks.

 

They once tried to take apart a Japanese car and put it back together. They physically could not. But this did not scare them into working harder. 

 

This applies to more than just the auto-industry, but for now I'll just leave it at that.

 

Instead of just saying that it's Republican or Democratic, it's a bit of both. Liberals support unions, which lead to higher wages. Conservatives hate immigrants who are willing to work harder for less.  



#52 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 03 January 2014 - 04:49 AM

You keep saying Obama's debt, and I keep asking you about Reagan, once you factor in inflation. (About equal in terms of real-purchasing power, but Reagan quadrupled the deficit, Obama did less than that) The thing I've noticed about those figures so oft-cited is that not once do they ever seem to factor in inflation. They just look at the posted numbers and say whatever they want. Y'know how your grandparents complain about how they used to be able to buy a candy bar and a comic book for 5 cents, and now it's 3 dollars? Or why everyone laughed when Dr. Evil asked for a million dollars? Prices went up too,
 
And while you criticize FDR, consider that the Great Depression started in 1929, during Herbert Hoover, a Republican.
 
Similarly, the Great Recession started in W's administration.
 
I'm NOT saying either one was caused by Republicans, I'm sure it's a much more complicated mix from laws and regulations from before, as well as risky actions taken by whoever.
 
But my point is you appear to be blaming the person who is stuck trying to clean up the mess (putting aside whether he is doing a good or bad job), instead of trying to figure out who took the massive dump in the halls to begin with.
 
Maybe they did a good job helping the country, a bad job helping the country, or the country would have recovered on its own. But in all these situations, unless they made things demonstrably WORSE (hello Federal Reserve infighting), I would be MORE angry at the people who put us INTO the crappy situation in the first place.


Yes I am talking about Obama's DEBT.

Just from the time he has been in office till now his own personal debt responsibility is higher than all previous presidents COMBINED. That is an astronomical stat when you think about it and being in debt doesn't allow you to put up the numbers that this guy has in so little time.

That is the problem he is making NO attempt at all at trying to clean up the mess. He is just making it even worse! You people need to stop treating him with kiddie gloves and realize he was never equipped to be president to begin. Being a crappy senator for a very short time and a community organizer is hardly qualifications for being a President.

And actually in the case of Detroit there is nobody else to blame but the Democrats, they have had solid majority control since the 1960s and it is now a Ghost town. You can keep trying to shift the blame away but it is undisputed fact that they were party who put in place policies that ruined Detroit. We wouldn't even get into all the corrupt Detroit Democratic mayors because that would be too easy.

#53 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 03 January 2014 - 04:50 AM

Lol even people who supported Obamacare are now getting screwed over.

http://www.theblaze....-and-young-son/

Keep up the good work Barry!

#54 IRHari   COME ON! CAGiversary!   3812 Posts   Joined 6.8 Years Ago  

Posted 03 January 2014 - 01:21 PM

By forced I mean having it without an option of opting out like nationalized healthcare. 

Yeah the opt-out is called 'not having a car'


"People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." -Bill Clinton

#55 Rasen   CAGiversary! CAGiversary!   692 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Posted 03 January 2014 - 04:53 PM

Yes I am talking about Obama's DEBT.

Just from the time he has been in office till now his own personal debt responsibility is higher than all previous presidents COMBINED. That is an astronomical stat when you think about it and being in debt doesn't allow you to put up the numbers that this guy has in so little time.

That is the problem he is making NO attempt at all at trying to clean up the mess. He is just making it even worse! You people need to stop treating him with kiddie gloves and realize he was never equipped to be president to begin. Being a crappy senator for a very short time and a community organizer is hardly qualifications for being a President.

And actually in the case of Detroit there is nobody else to blame but the Democrats, they have had solid majority control since the 1960s and it is now a Ghost town. You can keep trying to shift the blame away but it is undisputed fact that they were party who put in place policies that ruined Detroit. We wouldn't even get into all the corrupt Detroit Democratic mayors because that would be too easy.

Debt, as in what they spent so far?

 

Obama $6 trillion

 

Reagan $3 trillion

 

Now, here's where inflation comes in, that funny concept that everyone seems to ignore. In 1980 dollars, $3 trillion = $8.49 trillion. In 1988 dollars, $3 trillion = $5.91 trillion. Since I don't believe Reagan increased it all at once, I'm taking a middle number of 1984 dollars, $3 trillion = $6.74 trillion. 

 

Before talking to me about kid gloves, take off your rosy "Reagan is fiscally responsible model for all" glasses. 

 

As for Detroit, who's really shifting the blame here? It's easy to blame politicians. But if you look at the attitudes of the car-makers and their employees, it is patently obvious they were lazy and complacent. And the unwillingness to compete(i.e., work HARD) is an attitude you still see today, every time people say "buy local," or "buy American."

 

If Democratic policies were really to blame, don't you think something like the 2008 election would have occurred, and a Republican would have won by now? I suppose you could argue that Democratic policies let people sink into a culture of dependency. That's fair, but then we're entering a chicken-egg problem. I would argue that American laziness is the reason for their voting the way they do, and you're arguing the policies made them lazy. 

 

But then I see the people who argue for higher minimum wages (liberals) and people who argue for protectionist trade and immigration policies (conservatives), so since I see BOTH sides arguing for something that lets them work LESS, I'm going to say the laziness isn't political. It's just how people are. And the only thing politics does is change HOW they argue for their laziness.

 

Don't kid yourself. Conservatives funnel money to the rich and the military. Liberals funnel money to the poor. But BOTH are lazy. Since I don't think I'll get any argument from you about the poor being lazy, here's an example of the rich: Just look at any defense contractor's project. Like the F23. Riddled with problems. Massively over-budget. There is no desire to work hard or make a quality project. It's like the car manufacturers in Detroit in the 70's, only without a foreign competitor. (And of course, even if there WAS, the military can argue: "we can't trust foreign weapons, they could have traps in them." They used that argument for Chinese computers, and while they are right about the Chinese, you can bet good money they will use the same argument no matter what, so that the military is forced to "buy American.")



#56 Jruth   No trite shit crew gamer bro CAGiversary!   270 Posts   Joined 6.9 Years Ago  

Posted 04 January 2014 - 12:52 AM

"If Democratic policies were really to blame, don't you think something like the 2008 election would have occurred, and a Republican would have won by now?" No. They voted Obama in on 73 percent of the vote at the peak of horribleness. They believe some conservative policies would be worse than what they have now. I can't begin to comprehend that.

 

 

You can pass off conservative values of working hard and self-responsibility as gibberish. It's human nature, as you say, but that thinking is reinforced by policies that support that way of life.


Haven't you figured it out yet fanboys? Your mommy can't afford both consoles! Be grateful with what you got and shut the Fuck up.

 

 

                                                                                                                                             - starving African bro

 


#57 mrsilkunderwear   Just Do It. CAGiversary!   1484 Posts   Joined 5.6 Years Ago  

mrsilkunderwear

Posted 04 January 2014 - 01:48 AM

Yeah the opt-out is called 'not having a car'

Oh so can I just opt out of the healthcare too, come the deadline of course?



#58 RPGNinja   CAG in Training CAGiversary!   378 Posts   Joined 2.2 Years Ago  

RPGNinja

Posted 04 January 2014 - 01:58 AM

Debt, as in what they spent so far?
 
Obama $6 trillion
 
Reagan $3 trillion
 
Now, here's where inflation comes in, that funny concept that everyone seems to ignore. In 1980 dollars, $3 trillion = $8.49 trillion. In 1988 dollars, $3 trillion = $5.91 trillion. Since I don't believe Reagan increased it all at once, I'm taking a middle number of 1984 dollars, $3 trillion = $6.74 trillion. 
 
Before talking to me about kid gloves, take off your rosy "Reagan is fiscally responsible model for all" glasses. 
 
As for Detroit, who's really shifting the blame here? It's easy to blame politicians. But if you look at the attitudes of the car-makers and their employees, it is patently obvious they were lazy and complacent. And the unwillingness to compete(i.e., work HARD) is an attitude you still see today, every time people say "buy local," or "buy American."
 
If Democratic policies were really to blame, don't you think something like the 2008 election would have occurred, and a Republican would have won by now? I suppose you could argue that Democratic policies let people sink into a culture of dependency. That's fair, but then we're entering a chicken-egg problem. I would argue that American laziness is the reason for their voting the way they do, and you're arguing the policies made them lazy. 
 
But then I see the people who argue for higher minimum wages (liberals) and people who argue for protectionist trade and immigration policies (conservatives), so since I see BOTH sides arguing for something that lets them work LESS, I'm going to say the laziness isn't political. It's just how people are. And the only thing politics does is change HOW they argue for their laziness.
 
Don't kid yourself. Conservatives funnel money to the rich and the military. Liberals funnel money to the poor. But BOTH are lazy. Since I don't think I'll get any argument from you about the poor being lazy, here's an example of the rich: Just look at any defense contractor's project. Like the F23. Riddled with problems. Massively over-budget. There is no desire to work hard or make a quality project. It's like the car manufacturers in Detroit in the 70's, only without a foreign competitor. (And of course, even if there WAS, the military can argue: "we can't trust foreign weapons, they could have traps in them." They used that argument for Chinese computers, and while they are right about the Chinese, you can bet good money they will use the same argument no matter what, so that the military is forced to "buy American.")


Actually what is funny is that last paragraph is not even an example of the rich. That is an example of MASSIVE government spending. Something the liberals and Neo Cons like Bush are guilty of. And we all know which party is more of a champion of big government. There are alot of Pro Military Democrats.

You can't bash the rich when it comes to taxes because they already pay the majority share of it. Just like when they tried to conjure up that class warfare BS with Occupy Wallstreet which died almost as soon as it started since it was all contrived.

Speaking of a culture of dependency that is EXACTLY what Obama's plan has been all along for Obamacare, once people get on it like a drug addict it will be hard to turn back.

#59 willardhaven   Thief of Life CAGiversary!   7073 Posts   Joined 11.0 Years Ago  

willardhaven

Posted 04 January 2014 - 06:39 AM

Actually what is funny is that last paragraph is not even an example of the rich. That is an example of MASSIVE government spending. Something the liberals and Neo Cons like Bush are guilty of. And we all know which party is more of a champion of big government. There are alot of Pro Military Democrats.

You can't bash the rich when it comes to taxes because they already pay the majority share of it. Just like when they tried to conjure up that class warfare BS with Occupy Wallstreet which died almost as soon as it started since it was all contrived.

Speaking of a culture of dependency that is EXACTLY what Obama's plan has been all along for Obamacare, once people get on it like a drug addict it will be hard to turn back.

WTF you're like a cartoon character.

 

Do you just take your criticism of the ACA from tv/radio hosts? It's a pretty weak pro-business piece of legislation. Who is getting "addicted"? The asshole with a chronic illness who can finally buy insurance?

 

I'm curious, are you a nasty rich guy or just confused?


PaulManda.png


#60 Purple Flames   MC Sucka DJ CAGiversary!   5638 Posts   Joined 9.7 Years Ago  

Purple Flames

Posted 04 January 2014 - 09:26 PM

Personally, I'm addicted to not dying and not going bankrupt thanks to my medical bills.