Page 110 of 154 FirstFirst ... 1060100108109110111112120 ... LastLast
Results 1,091 to 1,100 of 1534

Thread: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

  1. #1091
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,460

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by maxparrish View Post
    Nor can we pretend that free markets are 'not working' - no more than we can assume that every government program that is less than ideal (which is most of them) is 'not working'. To the degree that the free market is 'unfree' due to flawed government policy then most libertarians are more than happy to push for correction. There is no love of crony and subsidized corporate capitalism, or subsidized farming, among libertarians.
    I'll say this much. If Ron Paul was president (assuming he'd govern as a 'true' libertarian), then your statement about crony capitalism might be believable. The problem is in reality crony capitalists and their lackeys use libertarian concepts to justify corrupt policies. Just as an example, if you want to rely on individuals defending property rights and suing for damages, you can't make it more difficult to sue, and limit damages to some "compensatory plus nominal punitive" figure. If you do it takes the math skills of a toddler to see what that does - few people sue, fewer win a case for damages because of immense transaction costs, so profits are maximized by ignoring damages to the many.

    Finally, those who wish to disband the EPA wish to do it because a) the necessary pollution laws are better handled through other agencies and b) the EPA has shown itself to relentlessly harmful to the well being and rights of many innocent Americans. You should not confuse hostility to a particular government entity to hostility to some or many of its supposed goals. I have no use for the Intelligence czar or the department of Homeland security, but it does not mean I am against intelligence and security.
    But you say, "the laws are better handled through other agencies..." Which ones and how is it better, exactly? If you devolve it to the states, we know that states 'compete' in part with a race to the bottom. Money concentrated in a few hands means it's easier to buy off local and state officials than Federal legislators from 50 states.

    And you state with some certainty that EPA has roved itself to be "relentlessly harmful to the well being and rights of innocent Americans" but don't have any way to prove that on any kind of net basis - that the net harm is positive. And you can't compare that to the alternative. Look at a country without EPA or its equivalent and get back to me with the environmental conditions of the water and air. Sure, there are victims of EPA, but there would be victims in any other possible scheme you can imagine or describe and the task is comparing those conditions, weighing the trade off.

    If you've been to China or really any developing country, you'll skip them, or point out that its the corruption of a communist/dictatorial government. But the problem is in this country when we supposedly had property rights and all the rest, we had much of the same until we regulated pollution. There were many 'innocent victims' such as dead people and those with their property destroyed from unregulated pollution. You have to compare that era to the EPA world not some idealized perfect world with no victims.

    And "free trade" means we encourage - demand really - that companies locate in a corrupt country to take advantage of being able to offload pollution and work place safety and all the rest to 1.5 billion people, and then ship those goods back here. We make it impossible for firms operating in an actual "free market" where costs are assigned to those imposing them to "compete."

    You can't 'defend the trade-off' unless you have a normative view of what ought to be, and that, my friend, is a moral underpinning.
    But what "ought to be?" Are "free markets" a goal? Not for me. Economics is amoral and "free" markets are no more virtuous than regulated markets in my view. We weigh them based on results. And what "ought to be" depends on from whose perspective you look at the results. I don't see anything like a black and white answer to "what ought to be." Is what ought to be maximized GDP or profits? Or is what ought to be a decent living standard for the most Americans?
    Last edited by JasperL; 07-03-15 at 08:16 AM.

  2. #1092
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    10,438

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by tuhaybey View Post
    I'm a liberal. We pretty much always side with the consensus of the experts in any given area. Conservatives are driven by ideology. Ideology sometimes matches up with the facts and sometimes not. So, sometimes conservatives are on the same side of an issue as the experts and sometimes not. Liberals are pragmatists. Pragmatists decide which side of an issue to be on by looking at the facts, the practical effects on the real world, the evidence, etc. So, we pretty much side with the facts and experts. Issues where conservatives align with the experts are not politically controversial. The politically controversial issues are where conservative ideology and practical reality diverge, so on politically controversial issues, liberals always are aligned with the experts and conservatives never are. You haven't noticed that yet?
    All I can say to that is:

  3. #1093
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    10,438

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    You don't buy it because your ignorant gut tells you something else. But your gut is wrong. If you don't like my links, find your own that demonstrate a different reality. I won't wait up for that.

    If you go here you can find enrollment data. Men age 21-65 are only 10% of the Tenncare population. Kids are 55%, women (these are the pregnant and mostly single mothers) are 27%. The rest are seniors.

    And that 145,000 men are either getting SSI, aka disabled and receiving Federal benefits for their disability, or they are single dads or in a low income family with children. There just isn't a category for "poor" - if you're just "poor" you're SOL.

    I get it - when I learned this it surprised me too, but what I KNOW is almost none of the guys in our rehab center (they spend $0.00 on alcohol or rec. drugs btw) qualify for Tenncare. They work, earn low wages, get no health benefits from their jobs for the most part, and when they need medical care they go to the ER or the incredibly overburdened two free clinics in the area. I've seen it for years.

    And the state covers almost half of all children which you saw in the link, because we're a poor state. And we cover lots of poor women because we are a poor state. Wages are low, and lots of employers don't offer benefits. An employer's dream.
    \

    1.3 million on medicaid in a state with a population of 6.5 million is not enough?

  4. #1094
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    10,438

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    No, what I have is bea.gov, bls.gov, and Treasury data and they don't support your claim about either quality or cost, oh, wait, cost doesn't matter to you
    Careful....the libruls will get depressed if you tell them the DNC talking points are a line of bull.

  5. #1095
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,460

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by ObamacareFail View Post

    1.3 million on medicaid in a state with a population of 6.5 million is not enough?
    OK, so you were burned on the your proved ignorance of basic facts and so shift the goal posts... Why am I not surprised?

    And if you want to take over the Tenncare program great. You can kick out the 55% who are kids in poor families. Now how are they going to get healthcare? You don't have a clue, but know it's easier to throw random bricks at the solution in place than come up with a better one.

  6. #1096
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    59,763

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenbeard View Post
    Quality, costs, coverage, dysfunctional markets, inefficient care delivery systems, health care workforce development, prevention and chronic disease management, public health infrastructure, approval for new biologics, etc.

    It's a systematic approach to systemic problems. Your problem is that you don't read what people actually say, you read what you think your cartoonization of them should say.



    Indeed, that's a philosophy reflected in the ACA.
    Your opinion noted. You think it really matters what people say? Results matter, not rhetoric. You support another entitlement program that once created will perform like all others giving the govt. another slush fund to waste. Cannot believe you cannot see actual results of SS and Medicare, the waste, fraud, and abuse of federal tascollars. Oh, well. liberal insanity again.

  7. #1097
    Quantum sufficit


    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,814

    Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Your opinion noted. You think it really matters what people say? Results matter, not rhetoric. You support another entitlement program that once created will perform like all others giving the govt. another slush fund to waste. Cannot believe you cannot see actual results of SS and Medicare, the waste, fraud, and abuse of federal tascollars. Oh, well. liberal insanity again.
    Says the ACA has nothing to do with quality.

    Doesn't understand quality is one of the linchpins for the ACA payment reform.

    Says results matter, not rhetoric.

    Doesn't understand the results, replies with rhetoric.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  8. #1098
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    59,763

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    Says the ACA has nothing to do with quality.

    Doesn't understand quality is one of the linchpins for the ACA payment reform.

    Says results matter, not rhetoric.

    Doesn't understand the results, replies with rhetoric.
    That never was the intent as it was all about coverage. Whether or not quality was written into ACA is irrelevant for results matter. What you don't want to admit is that Federal Bureaucracies always cost more than intended and do less than intended. Results do matter but to you it is about feelings and belief in a govt that has created an 18.2 trillion dollar debt

  9. #1099
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    10,438

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    OK, so you were burned on the your proved ignorance of basic facts and so shift the goal posts... Why am I not surprised?

    And if you want to take over the Tenncare program great. You can kick out the 55% who are kids in poor families. Now how are they going to get healthcare? You don't have a clue, but know it's easier to throw random bricks at the solution in place than come up with a better one.
    Obamacare is not a solution. It's making the problem incredibly worse. That is the real point and fact. Just a side question, while I admire your acts of charity involving the group of 70, how many of them have substance abuse issues?

  10. #1100
    Quantum sufficit


    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,814

    Re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    That never was the intent as it was all about coverage. Whether or not quality was written into ACA is irrelevant for results matter. What you don't want to admit is that Federal Bureaucracies always cost more than intended and do less than intended. Results do matter but to you it is about feelings and belief in a govt that has created an 18.2 trillion dollar debt
    Thanks for confirming you have no clue about what the ACA involved.

    And thanks for the Hannity phrases #16., #128 and #34.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •