• 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!

Upfront costs complicate Obama’s health care plan

C

celticlord

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
6,344
Reaction score
3,794
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, it must be time for celticlords daily complaint against Obama thread. A note for you...just because something will be hard(which we all knew, including him) and have many pitfalls in the way, does not mean you should not do it. I find it interesting you chose not to quote the actual article. Here, let me quote the first two paragraphs for you:

Costs are emerging as the biggest obstacle to President Barack Obama’s ambitious plan to provide health insurance for everybody.

The upfront tab could reach $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion over 10 years, while expected savings from wringing waste and inefficiency from the health care system may take longer to show.
Click to expand...

Now isn't that interesting, it does not say "impossible", it does not say he cannot do it, it says there is an obstacle. Maybe you give up on any project when you run into obstacles, but us democrats, we try and overcome them.

Just a side note, all these nonsensical threads started in an attempt to make president Obama look bad have actually given me a more positive opinion of him. Any one who has to put up with so much absolute nonsense is alright with me.
 
Redress said:
Well, it must be time for celticlords daily complaint against Obama thread. A note for you...just because something will be hard(which we all knew, including him) and have many pitfalls in the way, does not mean you should not do it. I find it interesting you chose not to quote the actual article. Here, let me quote the first two paragraphs for you:
Click to expand...
Yeah, I actually read the entire article. Did you? Probably not. Otherwise you would have mentioned this little gem:

Details of the health legislation have not been written, but the broad outlines of the overhaul are known. Economists and other experts say the $634 billion that Obama’s budget sets aside for health care will pay perhaps half the cost.
Click to expand...
Or this:
Obama is hoping the Senate comes up with a bipartisan compromise that would give him political cover for disagreeable decisions to raise more money, such as taxing some health insurance benefits. In the 2008 campaign, Obama went after his Republican presidential rival, Arizona Sen. John McCain, for proposing a large-scale version of that idea.
Click to expand...
(This, btw, is known as hypocritically passing the buck.)

Then there's this:
In the campaign, Obama opposed tampering with tax-free employer-based health care, saying it would undermine the system that delivers coverage to most people. Other prominent Democrats agree. Asked if he would support taxing benefits, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., the top tax-writer in the House, simply said: “No way!”
Click to expand...
Culminating in this:
Obama’s opposition to taxing employer-provided health insurance isn’t the only campaign position he might have to jettison to pay for health care.

He once criticized his chief Democratic presidential rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, for proposing that everyone in the U.S. be required to have medical insurance. Yet such a mandate probably will be in what Congress puts together because requiring individuals to pay would lower federal costs.

For Obama, there are no easy ways to pay for health care. Options include raising other taxes, cutting deeply into Medicare payments to providers, or phasing in the expansion of coverage for the uninsured — beyond his four-year term.
Click to expand...
Redress said:
Now isn't that interesting, it does not say "impossible", it does not say he cannot do it, it says there is an obstacle. Maybe you give up on any project when you run into obstacles, but us democrats, we try and overcome them.
Click to expand...
Isn't it interesting that the "overcoming" you speak of is deciding which campaign promise Dear Leader will break today, versus which campaign promise Dear Leader will break tomorrow?

Isn't it interesting that Dear Leader's "plans", such as they are today, not only move money from private citizens into the federal government (a bad thing), but do not deliver the healthcare-for-all that he has championed (also a bad thing, both his failure to deliver and the healthcare-for-all itself)?

Isn't it interesting that the "obstacles" are coming from the Democrats (who realize that they run for re-election before Dear Leader does)?

Isn't it interesting that Democrats agree that Dear Leader's "plan" is incomplete and will not work and is not at all paid for?
 
Let me see if I understand what you are throwing a fit about. Obama might, maybe, do stuff. This stuff he might do, you disagree with. Therefore Obama is bad. Here is a wildly out there idea for you. How about you wait until Obama actually formally shows his health care plan before you get all upset about the details that are just in discussion currently.

I have just about zero confidence that with the current situation in DC that a working health care plan can be made, but until a plan is actually formally proposed, I will hold off throwing a hissy about it.
 
Redress said:
Let me see if I understand what you are throwing a fit about. Obama might, maybe, do stuff. This stuff he might do, you disagree with. Therefore Obama is bad. Here is a wildly out there idea for you. How about you wait until Obama actually formally shows his health care plan before you get all upset about the details that are just in discussion currently.

I have just about zero confidence that with the current situation in DC that a working health care plan can be made, but until a plan is actually formally proposed, I will hold off throwing a hissy about it.
Click to expand...

Obama has already set aside $634 billion in the budget he's proposed, which is an action, and not a point "just in discussion". Don't you think that's worthy of discussion here?

Why not focus on the subject of the thread, rather than some personal tiff you have with celticlord.
 
Redress said:
Let me see if I understand what you are throwing a fit about. Obama might, maybe, do stuff. This stuff he might do, you disagree with. Therefore Obama is bad. Here is a wildly out there idea for you. How about you wait until Obama actually formally shows his health care plan before you get all upset about the details that are just in discussion currently.
Click to expand...
Dear Leader has done stuff. There's no "maybe" about it. The stuff he has done has been roundly criticized by more than just me. (When I find myself in the same company of critics as Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, that alone should give any liberal cause for concern about Dear Leader's actions.)

If you're going to argue that Dear Leader has not done anything these past 100 days, you're already at odds with your fellow Democrats. I'll let you debate them on that point.

Redress said:
I have just about zero confidence that with the current situation in DC that a working health care plan can be made, but until a plan is actually formally proposed, I will hold off throwing a hissy about it.
Click to expand...

In other words, you wish to wait for the horse to bolt before seeing to the lock on the barn door.

If folks wait until the Congress is deciding between raising income taxes or taxing healthcare benefits, it will be too late to get a third option on the table (such as abandoning the idiocy of universal healthcare permanently).

The time to get passionate is now. And the direction in which to get passionate is in opposition to Dear Leader.
 
celticlord said:
In other words, you wish to wait for the horse to bolt before seeing to the lock on the barn door.
Click to expand...

Actually, a better analogy would be, when you hear the horses whine, don't immediately assume that they've bolted. Get up, take the time to check it out, first.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Actually, a better analogy would be, when you hear the horses whine, don't immediately assume that they've bolted. Get up, take the time to check it out, first.
Click to expand...

Actually, an even better analogy would be to shoot the horses before they whine, because they may begin whining about health care, which means you are going crazy.
 
Moon said:
Obama has already set aside $634 billion in the budget he's proposed, which is an action, and not a point "just in discussion". Don't you think that's worthy of discussion here?

Why not focus on the subject of the thread, rather than some personal tiff you have with celticlord.
Click to expand...

That is certainly worthy of discussion. That is not the subject of the article linked though. It's hard to discuss Obama's plan for health care because, as of yet, it is unformed. I prefer to wait and see, or maybe discuss what should be done.
 
Redress said:
That is certainly worthy of discussion. That is not the subject of the article linked though. It's hard to discuss Obama's plan for health care because, as of yet, it is unformed. I prefer to wait and see, or maybe discuss what should be done.
Click to expand...

The article is about skyrocketing costs. Here's the third paragraph:
Details of the health legislation have not been written, but the broad outlines of the overhaul are known. Economists and other experts say the $634 billion that Obama’s budget sets aside for health care will pay perhaps half the cost.
Click to expand...

That alone supports the title of the article. There's plenty to discuss.
 
Redress said:
That is certainly worthy of discussion. That is not the subject of the article linked though. It's hard to discuss Obama's plan for health care because, as of yet, it is unformed. I prefer to wait and see, or maybe discuss what should be done.
Click to expand...

But wait. That's too logical. If you do that, what would the partisan-Obama haters talk about? ;)
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
But wait. That's too logical. If you do that, what would the partisan-Obama haters talk about? ;)
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure they'll find plenty to whine about, same as the partisan Bush haters did the last 8 years.
 
Moon said:
Oh, I'm sure they'll find plenty to whine about, same as the partisan Bush haters did the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

True. Let's put them all in a room...and throw away the room. :mrgreen:
 
Redress said:
That is certainly worthy of discussion. That is not the subject of the article linked though. It's hard to discuss Obama's plan for health care because, as of yet, it is unformed. I prefer to wait and see, or maybe discuss what should be done.
Click to expand...

One other point...why would the President want to set aside $634 billion dollars in his proposed budget if he hasn't even formed a health care plan yet? How could he even arrive at a number if no plan exists? See? Something else worth discussing in this thread.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
True. Let's put them all in a room...and throw away the room. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Nice in theory, but I fear that political message boards all over the internet would be slamming shut if that were to happen. Think of all the lost revenue for Google ads!! :)
 
Moon said:
Nice in theory, but I fear that political message boards all over the internet would be slamming shut if that were to happen. Think of all the lost revenue for Google ads!! :)
Click to expand...

Eh, screw Google. The tradeoff would be worth it. Partisan hacks from both sides somewhere...else. :cool:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
True. Let's put them all in a room...and throw away the room. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

What would the sanctimonious jackasses have to lord over then? Whose least partisan?

:roll:

Both "partisan" sides believe in something, strongly... what do you believe in and how does that make you any better then they?
 
MrVicchio said:
What would the sanctimonious jackasses have to lord over then? Whose least partisan?

:roll:

Both "partisan" sides believe in something, strongly... what do you believe in and how does that make you any better then they?
Click to expand...

I believe that different believe in things strongly, which is generally why people are on one side or another of an issue. The thing that bugs the crap out of me is when I see stupid stuff like the thread where Obama asked for Dijon mustard on his hamburger. The left used that episode to point out how in touch with the common man Obama is for ordering a hamburger. The right used the same event to show what an elitist Obama is for ordering a hamburger with Dijon mustard. I mean seriously, give me a ****ing break on this nonsense.

Let's talk about the real issues that the Obama administration and the Dems in Congress are likely to foist upon us, and have foisted upon us, rather than on the inane and trivial.
 
MrVicchio said:
What would the sanctimonious jackasses have to lord over then? Whose least partisan?

:roll:

Both "partisan" sides believe in something, strongly... what do you believe in and how does that make you any better then they?
Click to expand...

I never said it made me better. Try responding to what I write.

I believe in not being a closed minded partisan hack who mostly focuses on irrelevancy and cares less about America then they do about winning. There. I said it. Does that make me better than those I rail against? No. But I will continue to rail against those sanctimonious jackasses as much as possible.
 
Moon said:
I believe that different believe in things strongly, which is generally why people are on one side or another of an issue. The thing that bugs the crap out of me is when I see stupid stuff like the thread where Obama asked for Dijon mustard on his hamburger. The left used that episode to point out how in touch with the common man Obama is for ordering a hamburger. The right used the same event to show what an elitist Obama is for ordering a hamburger with Dijon mustard. I mean seriously, give me a ****ing break on this nonsense.

Let's talk about the real issues that the Obama administration and the Dems in Congress are likely to foist upon us, and have foisted upon us, rather than on the inane and trivial.
Click to expand...

Well, I won't argue there are... extremist on both sides, but on this thread I find the... comments of CC about partisans to be more about stroking his own "Im not partisan" ego then about the issue at hand. Which, let us be honest here, is just as asinine as people talking about dijon and hamburgers.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I never said it made me better. Try responding to what I write.

I believe in not being a closed minded partisan hack who mostly focuses on irrelevancy and cares less about America then they do about winning. There. I said it. Does that make me better than those I rail against? No. But I will continue to rail against those sanctimonious jackasses as much as possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, but your position is that you hold a better view, and thus are justified in your railing against them.
 
Moon said:
I believe that different believe in things strongly, which is generally why people are on one side or another of an issue. The thing that bugs the crap out of me is when I see stupid stuff like the thread where Obama asked for Dijon mustard on his hamburger. The left used that episode to point out how in touch with the common man Obama is for ordering a hamburger. The right used the same event to show what an elitist Obama is for ordering a hamburger with Dijon mustard. I mean seriously, give me a ****ing break on this nonsense.

Let's talk about the real issues that the Obama administration and the Dems in Congress are likely to foist upon us, and have foisted upon us, rather than on the inane and trivial.
Click to expand...

You get it. I may not agree with all of your positions, but you get it. :cool:
 
MrVicchio said:
Yes, but your position is that you hold a better view, and thus are justified in your railing against them.
Click to expand...

No, my position is that I am justified in railing against them because I can. Free speech and all.
 
MrVicchio said:
Well, I won't argue there are... extremist on both sides, but on this thread I find the... comments of CC about partisans to be more about stroking his own "Im not partisan" ego then about the issue at hand. Which, let us be honest here, is just as asinine as people talking about dijon and hamburgers.
Click to expand...

Pointing out hypocrisy and the foolishness of extremist views is not asinine...except to those that hold those extremist views.
 
MrVicchio said:
Well, I won't argue there are... extremist on both sides, but on this thread I find the... comments of CC about partisans to be more about stroking his own "Im not partisan" ego then about the issue at hand. Which, let us be honest here, is just as asinine as people talking about dijon and hamburgers.
Click to expand...

If you mean the proposed budget and the invisible health care plan being funded by the budget, I disagree. I think it's a very important issue to discuss. If you mean the partisan issue, frankly, I'm just tired of the nonsense and distractions from the real issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom