• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Glenn Beck Boycott Gaining Traction - FOX News Losing Money

Again, they can encourage or hinder, but not force. Is government training, or government pay the only way we can have doctors? Are you suggesting only the government trains doctors? Pays for them?

Yes, primarily. Hospitals rely on medicare, the VA, and medicaid for training of residents. The federal government pays billions of dollars each year for training of residents. They control the number of residents accepted in hospitals by the amount of reimbursement they dole out.
 
Yes, primarily. Hospitals rely on medicare, the VA, and medicaid for training of residents. The federal government pays billions of dollars each year for training of residents. They control the number of residents accepted in hospitals by the amount of reimbursement they dole out.

Boo, like far too many supported this healthcare bill that adds millions to insurance programs without adding enough doctors to support that increase in patient load. Once again so called liberal good intentions make a problem worse and yet liberals today cannot see it thus it will take the liberals of tomorrow to once again say " we need to spend more money" to solve the shortage of doctor problem we have.
 
Yes, this is a POS, no I am not wrong on this issue but have been wrong on others and have admitted it. How about you, yes or no, have you ever admitted when you were wrong?

Wrong question again. And admitting I'm wrong or not isn't the issue here.

Answer the question so we can have an intelligent, on topic debate.
 
Wrong question again. And admitting I'm wrong or not isn't the issue here.

Answer the question so we can have an intelligent, on topic debate.

Having an intelligent, on topic debate with you is impossible as you always try to define the terms of the debate and then put people down that disagree with you.

Yes or no, have you ever admitted when you are wrong?

I have provided documentation to support my statements and when wrong I have admitted it. I have proven you wrong but not once have I seen you admit it.
 
Having an intelligent, on topic debate with you is impossible as you always try to define the terms of the debate and then put people down that disagree with you.

Nope. You run away from the debate. Like now.

Yes or no, have you ever admitted when you are wrong?

Yes, when I am wrong, not that it matters now. This is about you right now.

I have provided documentation to support my statements and when wrong I have admitted it.

So admit it now.

I'm not doing this to be a jerk. I'm doing it because you make statements that are unsupported, and then when you are called on it, you simply move on to new ones. You throw crap on the wall until something sticks.
 
Yes, primarily. Hospitals rely on medicare, the VA, and medicaid for training of residents. The federal government pays billions of dollars each year for training of residents. They control the number of residents accepted in hospitals by the amount of reimbursement they dole out.

They doctors work for the government and we can't have any without the government. So, my claim that we will deal with the shortage is correct and conservative is wrong.

Again, the government can hinder or help, but not force. I'm unsure what you're arguing against in that statement.
 
Nope. You run away from the debate. Like now.



Yes, when I am wrong, not that it matters now. This is about you right now.



So admit it now.

I'm not doing this to be a jerk. I'm doing it because you make statements that are unsupported, and then when you are called on it, you simply move on to new ones. You throw crap on the wall until something sticks.

What exactly do you want me to admit that I was wrong about? Taxpayers funding insurance for those that can afford to buy insurance but do not? Not even sure why that is an issue because all taxpayers are going to fund this POS legislation to secure insurance for all Americans including those who can afford it but do not. If you believe that someone who can afford the insurance but chooses not to buy it isn't going to slip through the system and have the taxpayers fund their insurance, you really aren't nearly as smart as you want others to believe.
 
What exactly do you want me to admit that I was wrong about? Taxpayers funding insurance for those that can afford to buy insurance but do not? Not even sure why that is an issue because all taxpayers are going to fund this POS legislation to secure insurance for all Americans including those who can afford it but do not. If you believe that someone who can afford the insurance but chooses not to buy it isn't going to slip through the system and have the taxpayers fund their insurance, you really aren't nearly as smart as you want others to believe.

:confused:

No, those who can afford it must purchase it.
 
What exactly do you want me to admit that I was wrong about? Taxpayers funding insurance for those that can afford to buy insurance but do not? Not even sure why that is an issue because all taxpayers are going to fund this POS legislation to secure insurance for all Americans including those who can afford it but do not. If you believe that someone who can afford the insurance but chooses not to buy it isn't going to slip through the system and have the taxpayers fund their insurance, you really aren't nearly as smart as you want others to believe.

Oh, so now you're changing your story, and turning it into a wild claim that can't be verified for years.

Classic Conservative dodge.
 
Oh, so now you're changing your story, and turning it into a wild claim that can't be verified for years.

Classic Conservative dodge.

Classical liberal diversion, divert from the actual topic to wordsmithing. Carry on trolling
 
Classical liberal diversion, divert from the actual topic to wordsmithing. Carry on trolling

Nope, you diverted. Read the thread.

You claimed the bill required everyone to buy health insurance with their own money. You were wrong. Instead of moving on with that acknowledgement, you dodged. It's what you always do. Now it's on the record, again. You can deny and dodge all you want, but there it is. My work is done, I will say no more about this.
 
And who enforces that, what is the threshold for income, and how is that threshold determined?

Doesn't matter. The fact is we're not giving it to them. They have to purchase it. Don't change the subject just because you got it wrong.
 
Doesn't matter. The fact is we're not giving it to them. They have to purchase it. Don't change the subject just because you got it wrong.

"We" decribes the taxpayers and the taxpayers are funding this POS. There are millions and millions of people who can afford insurance who CHOOSE not to purchase it. Whether or not that is Constitutional is another issue but the fact remains, who determines who can afford insurance and who cannot?

Are you telling me that all people that can afford insurance will be paying for their own insurance or will some slip through the cracks while others CHOOSE to pay the fine and still not purchase insurance? How naive and gullible you are.
 
Nope, you diverted. Read the thread.

You claimed the bill required everyone to buy health insurance with their own money. You were wrong. Instead of moving on with that acknowledgement, you dodged. It's what you always do. Now it's on the record, again. You can deny and dodge all you want, but there it is. My work is done, I will say no more about this.


Where did I claim that the bill required EVERYONE to buy health insurance with their own money? That is a lie, no one is REQUIRED to buy health insurance as they can opt out and pay a fine. You can't even keep your own statements straight.
 
"We" decribes the taxpayers and the taxpayers are funding this POS. There are millions and millions of people who can afford insurance who CHOOSE not to purchase it. Whether or not that is Constitutional is another issue but the fact remains, who determines who can afford insurance and who cannot?

Are you telling me that all people that can afford insurance will be paying for their own insurance or will some slip through the cracks while others CHOOSE to pay the fine and still not purchase insurance? How naive and gullible you are.

We are not buying insurance for those who can afford it. That claim was simply inaccurate. And being able to afford is a mathematical formula. It cost x amount, you make x amount. We can reach a reasonable determination on this.
 
We are not buying insurance for those who can afford it. That claim was simply inaccurate. And being able to afford is a mathematical formula. It cost x amount, you make x amount. We can reach a reasonable determination on this.

What you have proven throughout this thread is how naive and gullible you are. You buy the feel good rhetoric and are incapable of thinking about the end results. The taxpayers are funding this bill with all its warts and this POS legislation is going to fund people who can afford insurance but refuse to buy it themselves. Liberal social engineering is never effecient, effective, or provides anything of quality. Over time it is bloated, does less than intended, and thus needs more of an overhaul.
 
We are not buying insurance for those who can afford it. That claim was simply inaccurate. And being able to afford is a mathematical formula. It cost x amount, you make x amount. We can reach a reasonable determination on this.

This is what you are supporting as your live for today ignore the ultimate goal.
Control of the people is what this is all about yet you continue to ignore it.

Audio: Rep. John Dingell on How Long it Took “To Control the People” | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.
 
This is what you are supporting as your live for today ignore the ultimate goal.
Control of the people is what this is all about yet you continue to ignore it.

Audio: Rep. John Dingell on How Long it Took “To Control the People” | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Oh, no, now Conservative is spewing this ridiculous thing.

Yeah, this indicates that Dingell is a secret dictator. Right. :roll:

You probably think Obama actually believes there are 57 U.S. states too.
 
Oh, no, now Conservative is spewing this ridiculous thing.

Yeah, this indicates that Dingell is a secret dictator. Right. :roll:

You probably think Obama actually believes there are 57 U.S. states too.

Interesing how we have someone living in the D.C. Area that ignores the comments made by a long term Representative which accurately states the goal of liberalism. This is the liberal agenda, folks, and misterman supports it.
 
Pssst, misterman. Last night I made a bet, based upon your claim that you have never seen Conservative admit he was wrong at DP. Despite the fact he has done so. Remember, you made the matter of having the stones to admit when you are wrong or have made an incorrect statement at DP, an issue.

For some reason I bet that if the same question was returned to you, you would neither address it nor answer it. Guess if I won the bet or not? G'head.

Tell us, where at DP have you ever admitted you were wrong, about anything.

Quick now, tell us the matter you made an issue of, does not matter!

God the predictable, but profitable, hackery.:2wave:
 
Interesing how we have someone living in the D.C. Area that ignores the comments made by a long term Representative which accurately states the goal of liberalism. This is the liberal agenda, folks, and misterman supports it.

You really are completely out of touch with reality.
 
Pssst, misterman. Last night I made a bet, based upon your claim that you have never seen Conservative admit he was wrong at DP. Despite the fact he has done so.

I didn't say he had never admitted he was wrong. He uses all kinds of tactics to avoid it, but he may have once in a while. I was speaking in hyperbole. I suggest you not insert yourself into conversations you don't understand. I give the same advice to my children.
 
This is what you are supporting as your live for today ignore the ultimate goal.
Control of the people is what this is all about yet you continue to ignore it.

Audio: Rep. John Dingell on How Long it Took “To Control the People” | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Do you seek meaning when you listen to these things are do you simply drink the kool aid? It sounds like kool aid stuff to me. In other words, you're not only side stepping your error with another rouse, but you are getting his comment all wrong. Not even a good try on your part really.
 
I didn't say he had never admitted he was wrong. He uses all kinds of tactics to avoid it, but he may have once in a while. I was speaking in hyperbole. I suggest you not insert yourself into conversations you don't understand. I give the same advice to my children.
I'd post the link to your original comment, but I know you will just obfuscate. Besides I already won the bet, guess how?:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top Bottom