• 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!

Reid says Obamacare just a step toward eventual single-payer system[W:1539]

Oh but I do. This getting them on the record manure became an artform of Reagan. We read you. Besides, your team's unprecedented use of the filibuster is already in current history books.

Reid wants to go to conference, Repuppies in the House don't. Stalemate.
Conservative said:
Again, you show how little you know. If a bill has a poison pill then the Senate under Democrat Control would remove it but Reid is preventing the bills to get to the floor for debate. That is obstructionist. Harry Reid doesn't want Democrats on the record with any of those bills he is holding up for fear they will cause greater losses in 2014. You simply don't have a clue what you are talking about again
Click to expand...
 
j-mac said:
That may have been the case in the beginning, before the raiding of these programs that congress did for their own pet projects. However, I would say that today, what we have is a promise that in the long run can not be fulfilled, therefore those generations that come up on the age where they are supposed to reap the benefit of their promise made through out their life, and all the money taken through the force of government may not come to fruition for them, I may be in that category, and I can tell ya, I won't be all too happy when they have forced me my whole life to pay for something that they spent and is now gone because they couldn't keep their hands off it.

But, in any case let me just ask you, if this program would have been based on truly voluntary involvement, would it have succeeded?
Click to expand...

Rail against the raids, and my join you. But it is false that it can't be sustained. We will have to weather the boomers. But, if we plan properly, and get smarter (UHC), we can do the job.

It'll help with your disappointment as well by making sure it continues.
 
Conservative said:
You seem to have a vision of a large central govt. providing you everything you want. That never was the purpose of the Federal Govt. and until you understand that you will always lack credibility. All this outrage over business but none over the 3.77 trillion dollar Federal Govt. and 17 trillion dollar debt. That says it all about you and other liberals.
Click to expand...

Quit trying to tell me what have when you can't even follow your own flawed logic. I'm not calling for anything that can't be paid for. And if it's paid for, it doesn't grow the debt.
 
NIMBY said:
Not even close. 3-to-1 on cuts/revenue is not getting all you want Obama. But with all Repup can-di-date loons raising their hand against 10-1, what do you expect? It takes 2 to make 3 as my Air Force Dad used to say. Repups are repulsed at the thought of compromise with RINO Obama.
Click to expand...

Obama has proposed a 3.77 trillion dollar budget. Is that what you support? The budget bill isn't what Reid is holding up and doesn't address my point. Congress doesn't shutdown the govt, the President does by not signing spending legislation
 
If the spending legislation never comes out of the House, which I give about a 40% chance, how does the President not sign it?
Conservative said:
Obama has proposed a 3.77 trillion dollar budget. Is that what you support? The budget bill isn't what Reid is holding up and doesn't address my point. Congress doesn't shutdown the govt, the President does by not signing spending legislation
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
Quit trying to tell me what have when you can't even follow your own flawed logic. I'm not calling for anything that can't be paid for. And if it's paid for, it doesn't grow the debt.
Click to expand...

So how is Obamacare paid for when you have no idea what the costs are. You buy the rhetoric and even ignore the CBO revised estimates. I am still waiting for you to tell us why you have such passion for this issue and what's in it for you? SS and Medicare were paid for too and look how underfunded they are because Congress spent the money
 
Conservative said:
So how is Obamacare paid for when you have no idea what the costs are. You buy the rhetoric and even ignore the CBO revised estimates. I am still waiting for you to tell us why you have such passion for this issue and what's in it for you? SS and Medicare were paid for too and look how underfunded they are because Congress spent the money
Click to expand...


Of course we have an idea. And I load out a plan for you. And it left you with more of your money. Remember?
 
NIMBY said:
Oh but I do. This getting them on the record manure became an artform of Reagan. We read you. Besides, your team's unprecedented use of the filibuster is already in current history books.

Reid wants to go to conference, Repuppies in the House don't. Stalemate.
Click to expand...

So tell me what legislation did Obama want that the GOP filibustered that would have prevented 22 million unemployed/under employed TODAY, the 6.3 trillion added to the debt, the stagnant economic growth, the record numbers on food stamps and dependent on the taxpayers? You people simply don't have a clue
 
Boo Radley said:
Of course we have an idea. And I load out a plan for you. And it left you with more of your money. Remember?
Click to expand...

your plan is irrelevant unless you are in this Administration, there are no defined costs of Obamacare only projections and we all have seen how accurate Obama projections have been. Still waiting for why so much passion for Federal Control of your healthcare?
 
Conservative said:
SS and Medicare were paid for too and look how underfunded they are because Congress spent the money
Click to expand...
These are good points, as with state and Veterans' pensions. All pols who shorted funds need to be rounded up. All their money needs to be taken. They are to be taken off of their government perks and pensions. There are plenty on both sides of the aisle.
 
Jack Hays said:
You'll have to be more specific.:peace
Click to expand...

We can start here:

“Rather than seeing the expansion of welfare as zero sum, where voluntary agencies were the losers, many charities viewed increasing public responsibility, particularly for maintaining a financial safety net, as a relief … They crafted a new voluntary sector based on the provision of specialized, professional services that complemented the material provision of the public sector. This, in turn, led them to become defenders of the welfare programs that helped make it possible for them to offer these new services.” (The Limits of Voluntarism: Charity and Welfare from the New Deal Through the Great Society, Andrew J.F. Morris, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2008)

Chapter 5: Depression Era Further Defines Movement (1930s) | Alliance1
 
NIMBY said:
These are good points, as with state and Veterans' pensions. All pols who shorted funds need to be rounded up. All their money needs to be taken. They are to be taken off of their government perks and pensions. There are plenty on both sides of the aisle.
Click to expand...

The problem is we never hold politicians responsible for raiding designated funds, we just reward them by giving them more money to waste.
 
Conservative said:
your plan is irrelevant unless you are in this Administration, there are no defined costs of Obamacare only projections and we all have seen how accurate Obama projections have been. Still waiting for why so much passion for Federal Control of your healthcare?
Click to expand...

Nonsense. We can discuss it. Besides, you asked for it.
 
How much of that 6.3 trillion you attribute to Obama is due only to inherited interest on budget? How much is from foreign wars he inherited? How much from Tax rates that are still too low? Is the deficit decreasing right now? How much from the Bush bust? Blaming 22 million is over-the-top.
Conservative said:
So tell me what legislation did Obama want that the GOP filibustered that would have prevented 22 million unemployed/under employed TODAY, the 6.3 trillion added to the debt, the stagnant economic growth, the record numbers on food stamps and dependent on the taxpayers? You people simply don't have a clue
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
Always have. And you no that if your merely read what I've said to you.
Click to expand...

Of course you have which just goes to show how civics challenged you are. If this isn't an act, I really do fear from you and your family. Guess that is the liberal in me.
 
Boo Radley said:
Quit trying to tell me what have when you can't even follow your own flawed logic. I'm not calling for anything that can't be paid for. And if it's paid for, it doesn't grow the debt.
Click to expand...

Then tell us just exactly how this imaginary UHC, that you seem to favor so much, would be funded. Otherwise it can be assumed that, like PPACA, it would be phased in (over ? years) and so complex that no cost estimate can last more than a few months.
 
Tell me about it. I'm in the wasteland of an Illinois pension debacle! Do I blame 26 straight years of Repup govs? Or decades of deals they made with Chicago Dem skunks? My TRS has been raided since 1973. Hard to draw interest on money not there.
Conservative said:
The problem is we never hold politicians responsible for raiding designated funds, we just reward them by giving them more money to waste.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
How much of that 6.3 trillion you attribute to Obama is due only to inherited interest on budget? How much is from foreign wars he inherited? How much from Tax rates that are still too low? Is the deficit decreasing right now? How much from the Bush bust? Blaming 22 million is over-the-top.
Click to expand...

Interest on the debt is about 225 billion a year and every President has had interest on the debt but normally much higher interest rates. Obama's deficits have added to that debt service with trillion dollar deficits. Tax rates are irrelevant as it is what the govt. collects that matters and the govt. is collecting record tax revenue.

The deficit is still going to exceed 700 billion this year after four straight years of trillion dollar deficits. Bush never had a deficit higher than 500 billion.

It is over 4 years after the end of the recession and the 22 million comes directly from the BLS. Only a true liberal would continue to blame Bush for results over 4 years after he left office. That so called Bush bust is typical leftwing rhetoric.
 
NIMBY said:
Tell me about it. I'm in the wasteland of an Illinois pension debacle! Do I blame 26 straight years of Repup govs? Or decades of deals they made with Chicago Dem skunks? My TRS has been raided since 1973. Hard to draw interest on money not there.
Click to expand...

Illinois is an absolute disaster and always has been due mostly to Chicago. Spent 14 years in Indianapolis and spent a lot of time in Chicago, what a corrupt city. Too bad it isn't more like the rest of the state. We have a Chicago corrupt politician in the WH now and liberals still love him
 
In the way you discard the words, "Bush bust is typical left wing rhetoric", I disagree. All bar graphs show the economic collapse occurring late 2008/early 2009. I sympathize with McCain pausing his campaign. These disasters take time to overcome.

As long as you sling Obama, there will be revision arguments. As long as the two parties cannot come to any agreement, we will not improve enough. As a Dem, how do I work with a Repub party that cannot form its own opinion? They play silly games arguing over the "Hastert" rule.

Conservative said:
Interest on the debt is about 225 billion a year and every President has had interest on the debt but normally much higher interest rates. Obama's deficits have added to that debt service with trillion dollar deficits. Tax rates are irrelevant as it is what the govt. collects that matters and the govt. is collecting record tax revenue.

The deficit is still going to exceed 700 billion this year after four straight years of trillion dollar deficits. Bush never had a deficit higher than 500 billion.

It is over 4 years after the end of the recession and the 22 million comes directly from the BLS. Only a true liberal would continue to blame Bush for results over 4 years after he left office. That so called Bush bust is typical leftwing rhetoric.
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
We can start here:

“Rather than seeing the expansion of welfare as zero sum, where voluntary agencies were the losers, many charities viewed increasing public responsibility, particularly for maintaining a financial safety net, as a relief … They crafted a new voluntary sector based on the provision of specialized, professional services that complemented the material provision of the public sector. This, in turn, led them to become defenders of the welfare programs that helped make it possible for them to offer these new services.” (The Limits of Voluntarism: Charity and Welfare from the New Deal Through the Great Society, Andrew J.F. Morris, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2008)

Chapter 5: Depression Era Further Defines Movement (1930s) | Alliance1
Click to expand...

Not surprising that those at the point of attack (so to speak) would welcome more resources. That was not, however, a discussion of health care. And in any case, the fact that someone wants does not oblige me to give.:peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom