• 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!

Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3

MrVicchio said:
The Good President will have to let Old People, Disabled people STARVE because of the damned dirty GOP.

Starve you hear, STARVE.
Click to expand...

Since when do you care about old people and the disabled? Oh let me guess, since it fits you to have an understanding of a well working society?
 
Hatuey said:
Since when do you care about old people and the disabled? Oh let me guess, since it fits you to have an understanding of a well working society?
Click to expand...

Of course he cares. He fought tooth and nail against death panels!
 
Hatuey said:
You mean the ones run by the insurance companies?
Click to expand...

The ones republicans used to scare old people with. The ones run by insurance companies for profit are of course good ones, so probably are actually called "life panels" by conservatives.
 
Redress said:
The ones republicans used to scare old people with. The ones run by insurance companies for profit are of course good ones, so probably are actually called "life panels" by conservatives.
Click to expand...

You mean, like scaring old people by saying they might not get their SS checks?
 
Redress said:
The ones republicans used to scare old people with. The ones run by insurance companies for profit are of course good ones, so probably are actually called "life panels" by conservatives.
Click to expand...
I have to backtrack here a bit because something just occurred to me. If insurance companies already have death panels, then why wouldn't the government also have them when/if they get into the health care business? Do you know which insurance denies more claims than any other? It's Medicare.

Redress said:
So you do see the hypocrisy I was pointing out.
Click to expand...

Well hypocrisy always cuts two ways, if the GOP is hypocritical for criticizing Obama's scare tactic (the substance of which is also patently untrue, BTW), Obama's just has hypocritical for using it in the first place. And, if the Dems are not going to criticize Obama for using a scare tactic, then they're hypocritical for criticizing only Republicans for doing it. Really, this could go on ad infinitum.
 
X Factor said:
I have to backtrack here a bit because something just occurred to me. If insurance companies already have death panels, then why wouldn't the government also have them when/if they get into the health care business? Do you know which insurance denies more claims than any other? It's Medicare.
Click to expand...

You're assuming that all government-run healthcare systems will necessarily work like Medicare. Not all government-run systems are even necessarily social insurance systems to begin with. In lieu of actually knowing the details of how a particular government-run healthcare program works, the worst you can really say about any single-payer healthcare system is that it rations care and that there will be lines and waiting lists. Of course, in this country we already have rationing by default.

Well hypocrisy always cuts two ways, if the GOP is hypocritical for criticizing Obama's scare tactic (the substance of which is also patently untrue, BTW), Obama's just has hypocritical for using it in the first place. And, if the Dems are not going to criticize Obama for using a scare tactic, then they're hypocritical for criticizing only Republicans for doing it. Really, this could go on ad infinitum.
Click to expand...

It's not. He said, he can't guarantee that if the debt ceiling isn't raised, that SS checks will go out after August 2nd. In fact, if the debt ceiling isn't raised, there's really little ANYONE can guarantee at this point.
 
Depends on the death panel. The phrase originated with Palin claiming that end of life counseling would lead to death panels. This was false.[1] In trying to justify what she said, conservatives claimed her comment was actually about deciding what was being covered by Medicare, but again, all insurance then has such death panels.

By the way, what insurance plan covers the most people in this country?

Onto this issue: It is not "patently untrue" that SS checks could be at risk[2]. No one knows for sure. It is unlikely to be the case that the first moths checks will not go out, but not 100 % impossible. I would still call Obama's comments a "scare tactic" and dislike such tactics.

However, the point being that those complaining loudest about this being a scare tactic are those who actually backed Palin's claims about "death panels".

I supplied footnotes for handy referencing. Just an experiment to see if it is easier to make posts readable while getting the most info.



[1]Palin: "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's death panel so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

[2] Source: PolitiFact | Barack Obama said Social Security and other federal checks may not go out on Aug. 3 if the debt ceiling is not increased
 
StillBallin75 said:
You're assuming that all government-run healthcare systems will necessarily work like Medicare.
Click to expand...

Not sure it matters as far too many Federal programs are filled with fraud and abuse.
 
LesGovt said:
Not sure it matters as far too many Federal programs are filled with fraud and abuse.
Click to expand...

All programs have issues with fraud and abuse. Even private programs. The problem with governmental programs is that they tend to be larger, which makes oversight harder.
 
Redress said:
The problem with governmental programs is that they tend to be larger, which makes oversight harder.
Click to expand...

no, the problem is that without competition, bloat and fraud can continue on indefinitely
 
Redress said:
Depends on the death panel. The phrase originated with Palin claiming that end of life counseling would lead to death panels. This was false.[1] In trying to justify what she said, conservatives claimed her comment was actually about deciding what was being covered by Medicare, but again, all insurance then has such death panels.

By the way, what insurance plan covers the most people in this country?

Onto this issue: It is not "patently untrue" that SS checks could be at risk[2]. No one knows for sure. It is unlikely to be the case that the first moths checks will not go out, but not 100 % impossible. I would still call Obama's comments a "scare tactic" and dislike such tactics.

However, the point being that those complaining loudest about this being a scare tactic are those who actually backed Palin's claims about "death panels".
Click to expand...
And my point is, if you're going to criticize the GOP for using scare tactics, should you also criticize the other side for doing it as well, especially if you're an especially vocal critic when the GOP does it. I know you're not saying that only the GOP is hypocritical. Didn't Obama vote, not all that long ago to not raise the debt ceiling, citing many of the same arguments that are being used in this current debate?

I supplied footnotes for handy referencing. Just an experiment to see if it is easier to make posts readable while getting the most info.



[1]Palin: "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's death panel so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

[2] Source: PolitiFact | Barack Obama said Social Security and other federal checks may not go out on Aug. 3 if the debt ceiling is not increased
Click to expand...

Interesting quote from your second source;

"The president is probably justified in saying that the possibility of an un-raised debt ceiling jeopardizes Social Security checks -- after all, it hasn't happened before, so no one knows for sure. But we also think the president probably has tools at his disposal to avoid the worst-case scenario for seniors that he expresses concern about. Acknowledging that there are a lot of uncertainties, we rate his statement Half True"

So if checks don't go out, it'll be because Obama prioritized something else over them.
 
Redress said:
All programs have issues with fraud and abuse. Even private programs. The problem with governmental programs is that they tend to be larger, which makes oversight harder.
Click to expand...

We disagree.
 
X Factor said:
And my point is, if you're going to criticize the GOP for using scare tactics, should you also criticize the other side for doing it as well, especially if you're an especially vocal critic when the GOP does it. I know you're not saying that only the GOP is hypocritical. Didn't Obama vote, not all that long ago to not raise the debt ceiling, citing many of the same arguments that are being used in this current debate?
Click to expand...

Maybe you missed this part of my post:

I would still call Obama's comments a "scare tactic" and dislike such tactics.
Click to expand...

Interesting quote from your second source;

"The president is probably justified in saying that the possibility of an un-raised debt ceiling jeopardizes Social Security checks -- after all, it hasn't happened before, so no one knows for sure. But we also think the president probably has tools at his disposal to avoid the worst-case scenario for seniors that he expresses concern about. Acknowledging that there are a lot of uncertainties, we rate his statement Half True"

So if checks don't go out, it'll be because Obama prioritized something else over them.
Click to expand...

Note the word "probably". I made it bold for you. If you can probably do something, is it safe to say you possibly cannot, which would make Obama saying he cannot "guarantee" in fact accurate. This does not make it less of a scare tactic, but it does make his statement technically correct.

If things reach that point, there will be a whole lot of scrambling and rapid decision making and reacting quickly to events, all of which leads to a likelihood of less than ideal outcomes. I personally would not bet on anything good coming out of it, and am not discounting any possibility. Hopefully it does not reach that point.
 
Boo Radley said:
I can only get two of the three up, but they were 2009. Any chance this was just temporary? Like I said, I see no evidence at the lot.
Click to expand...

in general the effects were temporary in both directions for new cars - the C4C program pulled all of the buyers into the time period it was available, and sales crashed afterwards. the price of older cars spiked during the same time period for the same reason that there was a $4,500 floor pushing prices for them up. at this point, however, the only increase in used vehicles will be because of decreased supply from the destruction and increased demand due to a continued slump of an economy (times are tough, people buy fewer new cars) thanks to an administration that thinks the solution to our ills is things like Cash For Clunkers.
 
Redress said:
All programs have issues with fraud and abuse. Even private programs. The problem with governmental programs is that they tend to be larger, which makes oversight harder.
Click to expand...

and incentives are not as strong to seek out, find, and fix them. if my coworker manages to work the system and get an extra few hundred out of the government, i slap him on the back and say hey man good job. if he gets a few extra hundred from me; I am pissed off and I'm going to get it back.
 
X Factor said:
And my point is, if you're going to criticize the GOP for using scare tactics, should you also criticize the other side for doing it as well, especially if you're an especially vocal critic when the GOP does it. I know you're not saying that only the GOP is hypocritical. Didn't Obama vote, not all that long ago to not raise the debt ceiling, citing many of the same arguments that are being used in this current debate?



Interesting quote from your second source;

"The president is probably justified in saying that the possibility of an un-raised debt ceiling jeopardizes Social Security checks -- after all, it hasn't happened before, so no one knows for sure. But we also think the president probably has tools at his disposal to avoid the worst-case scenario for seniors that he expresses concern about. Acknowledging that there are a lot of uncertainties, we rate his statement Half True"

So if checks don't go out, it'll be because Obama prioritized something else over them.
Click to expand...

precisely. there is enough money coming in to fund the debt, social security, medicare, and the pay for active duty troops.
 
MrVicchio said:
Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3 - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

images


The Good President will have to let Old People, Disabled people STARVE because of the damned dirty GOP.

Starve you hear, STARVE.
Click to expand...

Ok, how does this not qualify as holding segments of the population hostage economically, in order for Obama to continue his agenda.

To me, this is economic terrorism, perpetrated by Obama. What are the apologists saying?
 
Redress said:
We disagree with your disagreement.
Click to expand...

I said, "We disagree." If you disagree with my disagreement, doesn't that mean that you agree with me? :roll:
 
LesGovt said:
I said, "We disagree." If you disagree with my disagreement, doesn't that mean that you agree with me? :roll:
Click to expand...

If you can claim to be "we", I don't see why I can't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom